36C3 - The Case Against WikiLeaks: a direct threat to our community

36c3 preroll music

Herald Angel: OK. So our next speakers are
going to talk about the charges against

Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, which is a
topic that's very close to our hearts. I

guess, most our hearts at least. And it's
also something that's incredibly important

for us as a community and it's a threat
against the entire tech community,

minorities, human rights advocates,
activists. So a lot of people you

should really care about. And the speakers
are Renata Avila, who's the executive

director of Fundación Ciudadanía
Inteligente. Yay!

applause

Renata Avila: Well done.
Herald Angel: Naomi Colvin, who is the UK

program director at Blueprint for Free
Speech - which is much easier to

pronounce, thank you so much -
supporting applause and speakers laughing

Herald Angel: And Angel Richter, who's a
director and writer and artist and a lot

of things, and she specializes on
whistleblowing and digital dissidents, and

one of the plays, which is transmedia
play. You might know, it's called Super

Nerds. So a round of applause for our
amazing speakers. And let's begin the talk.

applause and cheering

Angela Richter: Thank you very much. Good
evening, everyone, and thank you for

coming here tonight. And thank you also
for our introduction by the moderator, a

very charming guy, as I thought. And also
good to give a little bit lightness to

this - for me very serious issue actually
- that we are here. Like you said, I am

an artist. And for me, WikiLeaks was very
important. And also Julian Assange,

because somehow they were the entrance for
me as an artist to this community that

became very dear to me in the last 10
years. And I attended some of the

Congresses in the last 10 years and
learned a lot about things that I never

knew before. So I owe a lot, actually, to
WikiLeaks and also to this community,

because it opened so many things for me
up. So, yeah, this I wanted to say first

and then I will also show a little piece
of a recent play I did in Zagreb. It's by

Slavoj Žižek, who is also supported by
Julian. And it is not so much... It is

related to our topic. It's a little bit
like a mood board that we want to show

before we start.

Richter: And like he said, this will be
about how we can support WikiLeaks. And of

course, Julian Assange, which is also a
very personal matter for me, because he

became a very close friend in the last 10
years who I also owe a lot. And on the

other hand, I think it's not only about
him and his life, which is serious enough,

but I think that this thing that is
happening to him, that he's being charged

with the Espionage Act - this is the first
time that something like this happens to a

publisher - is a threat to free speech to
all of our freedom. And it means that

actually everyone who speaks truth to
power can be kidnapped, extradited to the

US and then end up in prison for the rest
of his life. And I think that this is -

for this community also - a threat,
especially because we all know that we are

trying to be secure. Secure free speech is
very important issue here. So, yeah. We

will go into the details in the course of
this week. Thank you very much.

video with soft, slow,
but deep orchestra music

music gets more,
dramatic and continues

voices of the speakers are not heard,
music continues

applause followed by short
silence

Renata Avila: We will try to be brief to
leave enough time for questions, because

we think that you have a lot of questions
on this case and so we will alternate and

discuss different issues, starting with:
What are we at now?

Richter: Yes. On the left side, you see
Belmarsh Prison. This is the high security

prison that Julian is housed at the
moment. And what I find very chilling

about it,is that it's actually a place
where usually you find terrorists,

murderers and mafia people and so on. So,
high criminals. And he is only at the

moment being held there for extradition
reasons, which is also extreme, because he

is 23 hours a day alone in his cell, which
is actually isolation. And then the next

picture shows a typical room in a prison
in Virginia, where Chelsea Manning is held

at the moment, again. And I think, it must
be something like 10 months in the

meantime, that she is again in prison,
because she is not willing to testify

against Julian Assange in front of a grand
jury.

Avila: So raise your hand if you have less
than 30 years. So -

Richter: OK. Thank you.
Avila: - that says a lot, because it means

that probably your first encounter with
WikiLeaks was just only 5 years ago. And

you were a teen, when many things were
happening. And we know that today is Young

Hackers Day, so it was important for us to
quickly go through the important

publications that WikiLeaks published in
the last decade. Why? Because there are

many misconceptions since 2016 and a lot
of misinformation followed the election of

Donald Trump. And so we want to show here
and it is, of course, not a detailed list.

You can find a detailed list on WikiLeaks,
on Wikipedia - two concepts at the

beginning were all of them mixed,
actually. And the same principles followed,

I would say. But what I want to show here
is the most impactful publications by

WikiLeaks, that changed the course of
history in many places and also -

highlighted in green - their political
persecution moments. Not only against

Julian Assange, but against other people
that were closely connected to these

developments in the last decade. So 2008
was a very exciting year for WikiLeaks

because I think that - even if it was
created before - was the year that it got

mainstream. Why? Because it changed
elections in Kenya by exposing

extrajudicial killings. And it really
changed the outcome of the election. Like

people realized that one of the candidates
was involved in these extrajudicial

killings of young people. And that really
impacted deeply the African nation. Not

only that, you may have forgotten about
that, but he was the first publication of

the batch of emails from Sarah Palin. And
also, there were lots of publications in

Latin America. That's how I became
familiar with WikiLeaks and very excited

about that. Petrol Gate, the biggest
scandal of corruption in Peru. And so,

publications involving Guerillas and False
Positives in the Colombian war. It has

started, like, from the places from
Africa, from Latin America and also the

US. On 2009, I will say that the highlight
and why WikiLeaks became very busy, well,

it exposed a lot of the censorship lists
out of China and Iran and other countries.

The Internet was not what it used ... it
is not what it is today. Censorship was

tangible. You will see a blocked website.
And now, as we will discuss later, now

it's a different form of censorship. And
so WikiLeaks at the moment was the

guardian of this free internet and also it
was their big moment in Iceland. And the

big opportunity for WikiLeaks as well. In
a jurisdiction to become not only a

publisher, but a designer of a new
ecosystem of freedom of information. So it

exposed the corrupt involving the
financial scandal there. And it got

really, really exciting there. Things,
like the EME initiative and all the things

that are now part of our history. Then
2010 and then 2010 was the year when

things started to get really complicated.
Why? Because instead of torching countries

in the periphery or torching developing
countries. So it's OK. It's always cool to

expose there by human rights violations of
an African or Latin American person in

power. But when you torch the center of
power, when you torch the most powerful

military in the world, you get into
trouble. So on 2010, Collateral Murder

video was published, The Afghan War
Diaries, Iraq War Logs and cable gate. And

that was the moment when Julian Assange
was arrested. It was not arrested because

of the publications. It was just a few
days after the publication started that he

was arrested on behalf of Sweden. And no
charges, it was not because of charges. It

was because of ongoing investigation.
2011, the Gitmo files, spy files, the spy

files. The first batch of publication, 160
companies involved in mass surveillance,

private mass surveillance. That was Pre-
Snowden, remember that. And that, at that

moment Julian only spent a little in the
same prison that he is now, only a few days.

Then he was released on bail. But from
that moment, from the moment that he put,

he presented himself - he surrendered
himself to the police, he never hide -

he voluntarily went there when he was
requested. From that moment, his life

became a hell of surveillance. He was, not
only, had a tag on his ankle following him

everywhere, but he had the most strict
bail conditions that you can imagine. He

could not even give a talk in London
because he will have to go back. He had

ridiculous hours to report himself to the
police. He was watched all the time. He

had to report to the police on a daily
basis. Someone suspected of terrorism was

enjoying more relaxed conditions than
someone who wasn't charged. And that's a

constant. In this case and other
politically motivated cases, you are not

the rule, you are the exception. And
exceptionally harsh the system treats you.

In 2012 struck for e-mails and also the
Syria files. Syria files is a publication

that is not often mentioned, but it was
very relevant. Exposing all the dealings

of the Syrian elites. And Julian is
granted political asylum in Ecuador. He

could have requested political asylum much
earlier, but he wanted to go through all

the legal process in the UK and all their
appeals. And it was his last chance to

exercise that right. Then 2013, the TPP
text and Spy Files 2. And that was the

moment when Manning was sentenced to 35
years in prison. As Snowden is granted

asylum in Moscow as well. And Jeremy
Hammond is convicted and sentenced to 10

years in prison. Jeremy Hammond is the
alleged source of the Stratford, the

Global Intelligence Files. Then 2014 TISA,
Spy Files 3 and the updated TPP text, then

2015, the Sony archives, the Saudi cables.
Actually, that Saudi cable publication was

one of the most dangerous ones. You
saw what happened to journalist Jamal

Khashoggi. I mean, it is very, very
dangerous publication and hacking team

searchable database and the TPP final
texts. This is very important because it

really changed the life for better of
loads of people. I personally work on

global trade issues and the negotiators of
developing countries or representing

under-represented communities, like, they
are so thankful to WikiLeaks for releasing

and publishing the TPP/IP chapter because
it means better access to medicine. It got

the people with better conditions for
negotiations in key issues such as access

to medicines. Then 2016, I would say that
I will compare to 2010. And then you,

again, torch the center of power.
WikiLeaks torch again the center of power

by publishing the Clinton, Podesta and DNC
emails. And that change allowed the

narrative and changed a lot the narrative
in a very different world because it was

not any more tangible censorship on deck
or the clear publication. But our

information ecosystem, as we know, had
been modified by social networks, by

different forms of distributing and
accessing content. 2017, Obama leaves the

administration by commuting Chelsea
Manning sentence and she's later release

that year. And WikiLeaks publishes NSA
spying on French Election. Vault 7, which

is their tool kit of spying of the CIA and
the spy files of Russia. 2018, Amazon

Atlas, US embassy shopping list and their
weapon dealers details. Here is very

important that the conditions of Julian
changed radically after 2016 at the

Ecuadorian embassy and the pressure of the
US increased terribly. And he was not

allowed anymore to do his job as a
journalist. He spent most of the year

gagged, and he could not participate
activel, directly on his role

as editor. And 2019, you saw in the video.
Assange is arrested. Manning is arrested

again. But in spite of that, in spite of
all the pressure, WikiLeaks refuses to

shut down and continues publishing. The
Pope orders, the Douma Chemical Attack and

Fishrot. So as you can see, Julian has
upset and WikiLeaks has upset enough

people from the most powerful army in the
world to the most powerful governments to

the most powerful corporations. And so
their plans, frustrated with the TPP

collapse, and the TTAP collapse, and TISA
collapse to even the Pope. So if you

upset, if you expose so many people, you
have very few allies left. You have

basically the people as your allies. So
that's why this talk is really, really,

really important. And you have also the
media, because over the 10 years WikiLeaks

has worked closely with most of the news
outlets all over the world. If you checked

your newspaper tomorrow morning, it's
highly likely that it was one of the

WikiLeaks media partners. This is just a
small sample of over 125

media organizations all over the
world that had collaborated closely with

WikiLeaks.
Richter: And I just want to add a very

interesting little detail that John Goetz
told me, who was at that time - He's a

journalist. He now works for Süddeutsche
and ARD - and at that time, he was working

for Der Spiegel, who also worked closely
with WikiLeaks at that time, 2010. And

they published Cable Gate. And it's
interesting to know that due to a

technical glitch, because the deal was
that WikiLeaks publishes first and after

that, the newspapers follow. Spiegel, New
York Times, Guardian and so on. And due to

this glitch, WikiLeaks was not able to
publish in time. So they were too late

with the publishing and all the newspapers
came out already. So technically they

published first, which is very important
for the case in a way, because he's

charged because he published it first, the
Cable Gate. And it would be interesting

because what does it mean? It means that
actually the journalists from Spiegel and

New York Times and Guardian could face the
same penalties. And when you imagin that,

then I think the impact it has on
publishing becomes even more chilling and

clear, you know. So I thought to tell you
this little detail about the publishing of

Cable Gate.
Avila: So what happened on

April 11 when he was expelled from the
embassy and dragged out is something that

goes beyond just Julian Assange. As a
human rights lawyer, do you know when I

see political unrest, when I see people,
dissidents at risk, I always tell them

have a good relationship with a friendly
embassy, that defends human rights and in

case of trouble, get there, get inside an

embassy. It is happening now with
dissidents in Bolivia, for example, who

are like right now at the embassy, in the
embassy in Mexico. And we advise any of

you do that. But now with caution, because
now, since the violation and since this

really brutal way that asylum was taken
away from an illegal way, that asylum was

taken away from Julian and the way that
police from a different country enters an

embassy, asylum has been weakened forever
until we reverse this. That's why this is

yet another reason why this case is very
important. Right now, you know, even the

government of Bolivia is threatening the
Mexican embassy to get inside and take out

the dissidents seeking asylum inside the
embassy. It is really upsetting to see how

an institution has over 400 years that was
designed to protect dissidents is being

dismantled by this scandalous case. And
well, when he was out, it happened what we

had predicted for years. For years we have
been saying at the moment when his arrest

that they will unseal an indictment for
espionage. And everyone will look at us

like back in 2010 and 2011, say, look,
you're paranoid. There is no way that the

US is going to prosecute Julian. He's just
hiding from Swedish charges that were

saying. Always charges, even there were
never charges. And he is a coward and he's

a paranoid. And this is not going to
happen. It happened immediately, and it

happened immediately. And just as
predicted, it was so upsetting to see the

result of the Swedish investigation,
because not only, over there, I mean,

there was a good journalist doing her job
and she discovered over the years

different irregularities. Sweden wanted to
shut down the case back in 2013, after the

asylum was granted. An obstacle... it was
a collusion. And it's really good... if

you like documents and you like deep
research, get into the documents that are

already available and see how the UK
system put a lot of pressure on Sweden,

not to prosecute this case as they usually
prosecute any case. Things as simple as a

videoconference could have been taking
place back in 2010, back on August,

September 2010. And it didn't happen
because of a lot of political pressure.

So, now the charges. There are 18 charges
against Julian Assange and they might be

charges against more people who were
mentioned in the indictment. The charges,

that he's facing for publishing, amount
to 175 years in prison. And to make your

life simpler, basically the charges
are: online publishing, protecting

sources and doing journalism. If you read
what it is about, it's really chilling and

is especially chilling because look at
who's in charge now. Right now all over

the world. And it is the first time that
the Justice Department gets away with it.

It is using that very anachronic law to
obtain an indictment from a grand jury,

that is from a group of people who thinks
that it is okay to prosecute under

Espionage Act charges, online publication.
If you get a takeaway from tonight: This

is the takeaway. This is the serious thing
that we are discussing right now. And the

thing is, this is important, because at
the center of this is our right to know.

The right to publish it on our site, is
our right to know. Three relevant aspects

of the charges. You will read a lot of:
"Oooh, but WikiLeaks and Julian had blood

on his hands." "It risked informants and
put at risk." These charges have

nothing to do with this risk assessment.
That will not be even known by the court.

These redactions and these measures of
protection, that, over another in media,

not relevant for their espionage charges.
And it is also important to notice, that

it mentions constantly over the indictment,
WikiLeaks as an intelligence agency of the

people. And that mirrors the language of
Pompeo, the current secretary of state,

who is trying to frame WikiLeaks as a non-
state terrorist actor. Like the equivalent

of al-Qaeda. And that has huge, horrible
implications, not only on the core

WikiLeaks organization, but on supporters
even wearing a T-shirt, reading a book

about it. It can place you in a not so
nice place. The important thing, that is

very worrying is, that more people may be
detained and charged, before or after the

extradition takes place.
Colvin: And we don't have to speculate

about this dragnet, of course, because it
is already here. Already here in its

pattern of intimidation and petty and
vindictiveness. Chelsea Manning, one of

the great heroes of our time, one month
before Julian was expelled from the

Ecuadorian embassy and arrested on U.S.
charges, just like it always said would

happen. One month before, Chelsea Manning
received a subpoena to testify before a

grand jury in the Eastern District of
Virginia. She refused to testify and was

imprisoned for contempt. She is
currently... she's served 10 months. Back

in prison, she is currently being fined a
thousand dollars for every day she spends

in prison, not testifying. This is what
Chelsea said about what is happening, in a

statement in May: "I believe this grand
jury seeks to undermine the integrity of

public discourse with the aim of punishing
those who expose any serious, ongoing and

systematic abuses of power. The idea I
hold the keys to my own cell is an absurd

one. As I face the prospect of suffering
either way, due to this unnecessary and

punitive subpoena: I can either go to jail
or betray my principles. The latter exists

as a much worse prison than the government
can construct." In September, Jeremy

Hammond, coming to the end of a long
prison sentence for his role in the

publication of the Go Global intelligence
files. He received a, he was called,

against his will, to testify before a
grand jury, again, in the Eastern District

of Virginia. Again, he refused to testify.
Again, he's been jailed for a possible 18

months on contempt. Because this is what
he had to say about it in October: "After

seven and a half years of paying my debt
to society, the government seeks to punish

me further with its vindictive,
politically motivated legal maneuver to

delay my release. I am opposed to all
grand juries, but I am opposed to this one

in particular because it is a part of the
government's ongoing war on free speech

journalists and whistleblowers." If this
hadn't happened to Jeremy, he would be in

a halfway house by now. He would've been
released from prison. He might have been

participating in this Congress. On the
11th of April this year, the same day that

Julian was expelled from the Ecuadorian
embassy and arrested and indicted by the

United States, just like he always said
would happen, his friend Ola Bini was

arrested in Ecuador. Ola spent two months
in an Ecuadorian prison in absolutely

disgusting conditions, until he was
released by a writ of habeas corpus. Ola

has now been charged with charges that
suggest that the prosecutors in Ecuador

don't really understand what it is, that
security researchers do every day. Senior

Ecuadorian politicians, the most senior
Ecuadorian politicians, have been on

television in Ecuador, saying that Ola is
guilty before any trial date has been set.

Organizations like Amnesty and EFF have
said, that Ola's prosecution is political.

And of course, they are quite correct.
It's all political. Extradition is

political. Don't let anyone tell you
differently. Extradition is an

institution, developed as a deal behind
closed doors, done between sovereign

powers. It's only in the past hundred
years or so, the parts that have been

transferred into courtrooms. But
politicians still have an active role in

extradition proceedings, and sometimes
extradition is used for political

purposes. Extradition in the UK is also
very political. What is it that every taxi

driver in London could tell you about
extradition? if you don't believe me,

you're welcome to test this out
empirically, next time you're in town.

What is it they'll tell you? They will
tell you that the UK has an unfair,

unequal, unbalanced, inequitable extradition
treaty with the United States. This treaty

dates from 2002, when Tony Blair was keen
to give the United States everything it

could possibly want and more. One of the
gentlemen pictured in this slide is Gary

McKinnon. Very shortly after the 2002
extradition treaty came into force, Gary

McKinnon started a 10 year battle not to
be extradited to the United States on

hacking charges. He prevailed, in the end,
but only after he'd been through the

entire legal process twice. And he was
rescued, eventually, by the say so of a UK

home secretary. The other gentleman on
that slide is Lowry Love. In February last

year, Larry won his battle against
extradition to the United States, again on

hacking charges, at appeal in the high
court. I was involved in that campaign.

I'm glad he won. I'm glad he won, because
it means we have a hope of saving Julian.

He'd be in trouble if he hadn't. Larry won
on two different bases. One of them is

very relevant. One of the reasons why
Lowry won his battle against extradition

is, because judges in the high court,
including the most senior judge in England

and Wales, ruled that U.S. prisons are so
bad, the conditions are so barbaric, so

medieval, that somebody with preexisting
health conditions like Lowry, there was no

guarantee he'd stay alive in a US prison.
You might be hearing more about that in

February next year. But there are other
big, big issues involved in Julian

Assange's extradition case. Big, big
issues that don't necessarily involve him

that much at all. The first clip on that
slide is a part of Jon Stewart Mill's

autobiography. John Stuart Mill, liberal
philosopher, and also a British politician,

for a bit. And in this extract, he's
talking about how he battled to change an

earlier incarnation of a UK extradition
treaty because he didn't want the British

government to become, quote, "an
accomplice in the vengeance of foreign

despotisms". Extradition should not be
used as a political tool for foreign

governments to pursue and punish people it
doesn't like. People who are guilty of

political offenses. It's a fundamental
question of sovereignty. If you were at

Andy Müller-Maguhn's excellent talk
yesterday morning, you will have heard

about the pervasive, thoroughgoing and
quite frightening surveillance that was

happening at the at Ecuadorian embassy for
the seven years that Julian Assange was

living there. This raises a fundamental
issue: If your every legal conference, all

of your discussions with your lawyers are
being surveilled and allegedly passed

straight to the power that's trying to
prosecute you, if all of your legal

documents are handed over, allegedly -
well, actually, we know that - to the

power that's trying to prosecute you. What
does that mean for your chances of a fair

trial? If you care about surveillance at
all, we're going to have to make a stand

in this very extreme case, because if we
don't, how are we ever going to stand up

for fair trial rights for anyone?
Richter: Yes. And before I go further in

our topic, I just want to say that I have
personal experience with the surveillance

happening in the embassy, because I used
to visit Julian many, many times, maybe 30

times from the moment he entered the
embassy till the last time I saw him is

nearly exactly a year ago. It was around
Christmas last year. And at that point, I

mean, I really could see the eroding
conditions that he lived in. I mean, just

to see a person that didn't see the
sunlight for 7 years or something was

terrible enough. But then the last year
when he lived quasi in isolation, had no

access to phone or to internet, nothing,
because that was the way that he had

contact with the world and had no visitors
anymore for nearly a year, I think,

because we the people that visited him, we
were kind of his door to the world. And it

was for me, very, very, very weird to be
surveilled all the time when I was there.

Sometimes I spend five hours at least
there. And after a while, you just feel

very uncomfortable. I was so happy when I
could leave that building, actually.

Especially in the last two years. And then
I could not imagine staying there like him

having no private moment. I mean, in the
end, they even put cameras in the

bathrooms and and the toilets and so on. I
know there was this tiny kitchen,

sometimes we used to hide from the cameras
to just have a moment of just talking

without feeling surveilled. And then he
had also this little apparatus, I think

Andy was talking about it yesterday in his
talk, that was causing white noise. And I

was really annoyed, to be honest, by this
little thing. And I was always, I was also

thinking about, my God, maybe he is too
paranoid, you know. Because the weird

thing is you get used to everything, and
somehow, like us now being surveilled all

the time through our phones and laptops
and so on, and we get used to it. But he

always insisted, even when we were talking
like banal stuff about, I don't know, a

soccer game or something, the little sound
machine was on causing white noise. And

not only it caused disturbance for the
surveillors, it also caused headaches in

my head. And so, yeah, it's actually a
very sad story. And for me, it was to see

the process, when especially after the
government, the conservative government

came into power in Ecuador, his status
very much changed. And so he became more

and more something I would describe as a
prisoner and not someone who has asylum.

Okay. This is on my personal note, how I
experienced it. And the other thing is, on

this picture you see one of the first
protests that we did in Berlin, it was

this year in May. It was a little after he
was dragged out of the embassy. And we

were there with some people, including
Srećko Horvat, Croatian philosopher. And

as you see on the picture also Ai Weiwei,
the Chinese artist and human rights

advocate, who also openly supported
Assange always, and also not afraid of

consequences, actually. And he
also visited him in prison. And what is

also an interesting fact, that Ai Weiwei
also made the connection between the

protests against the extradition law in
Hong Kong. And he connected with this very

controversial extradition case of Julian
in the UK at the moment. So for me, it's

sometimes something I could never believe
in, former times that I will be in a

situation where we in the West, who are
the good ones and the free West, the so-

called free West is somehow actually in
the top 10 of having dissidents in

prisons, including the ones that we just
named, and that no human rights seem to be

valuable anymore. And I find this very
concerning, I must say, also on a private

level. Yes. And I was there, too, as you
see in the photograph. And before I went

to the protest I was in Moscow, and I
visited Edward Snowden, because I also

worked with him together. He helped me a
lot on the place I did. And this was the

third time, actually, that I visited him.
And we also talked about Julian's case,

and he gave me a letter of support that I
was reading out loud on this protest. And

I will just read a little bit of it, that
you can see now: "By the government's own

admission, Assange has been charged for
his role in bringing to light true

information. Information that exposed war
crimes and wrongdoing perpetrated by the

most powerful military in the history of
the world. It is not just a man who stands

in jeopardy, but the future of the free
press." Yes, and I think that he is very

much right in this case, because what does
it mean? I mean, for me, I'm also in the

meantime, working as a journalist for Der
Freitag, I published a few of the articles

about him and Snowden, and basically about
whistleblowing and these things. And if he

can - if publishing becomes a crime,
telling the truth becomes a crime. And if

you are not able to work with sources, to
protect sources and to actively also try

to obtain material about truth. And
because we live in a democracy where the

powers have to be shared and to have a
balance of power, because as we know, when

power gets into a monopoly, it will always
be abused. And so...

mumbling
I will cut it short. It has bad

implications for journalists. And if this
happens to Julian, it is a threat not only

to journalism, but to democracy itself.
Avila: So we will accelerate, because all

the what comes next is very, very
important. And yes, we saw immediately

after the arrest of Julian the situation
going really badly in Australia. But what

I wanted to discuss, we wanted to discuss
with you tonight, this is about you, about

someone just like you. You can see, I
mean, I guess I can see you there. I can

see you in these pictures and I can see
lots of similarities. You belong to the

same species, basically. He was a single
father. He was prosecuted at a very, very

young age. Spent five years of his 20s
fighting a legal process. But he was all

the time with his computer. I cannot, I
really cannot imagine how his life was

since April, away from his computer. Can
you imagine your life away from your

computer even for one day? Imagine since
April, he has been away from his computer

and only having one hour a day outside a
prison cell. And so while he was raising

up a kid as a single parent, and while he
was dealing with a hacking legal process,

he also was actively working for our
communities. He was co-running one of the

first public access Internet providers in
Australia. He was always involved and

dedicated thousands of hours to the free
software movement. His code was even used

by Apple and other operating system. So
chances are that today, even today, our

computers, our Apple devices - for the bad
people who uses Apple like me - Ironic

part of his code. He was also from very
early time trying to find ways for

vulnerable groups such as human rights
defenders, ways to encrypt their devices.

And so he was very active before
WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks just was an upgrade,

kind of, on his plans. And I also want
to mention that the CCC is mentioned,

expressly mentioned, in that part of the
indictment against Julian. So what happens

here, you know, it matters there. I think
that the sole fact that the community is

mentioned on an indictment against a
journalist is enough reason to stand up

and say something about it and organize
around it. But it is not only the

community name on the indictment, and the
criminal complaint is also our

communication practices. Raise your hand
if you have a Jabber account. So, yes, the

Jabber server, the CCC server, is
mentioned in the criminal complaint

against Julian.
Colvin: Well, yeah, I mean, but what's

even more worrying is - oh, the microphone
- What's there is worrying, but what's

even more worrying is that it's a moving
target. Things are still continuing. This

is part of a submission the US government
made in Chelsea Manning's ongoing

procedures talk about an ongoing
investigation. There's more to come. And

it's even more bad omens. microphone noise Like that one.
Even more bad omens from from across the

water in unrelated cases and will
prosecutorial series that are being put

together, which are very disturbing and
augur for very bad things to come. I can't

talk about that now, but it's an excellent
issue for the Q and A. What happens next?

Well, immediately what's going to happen
next is that on the 24th of February, for

three or four weeks, Julian Assange will
have his extradition hearing. To give you

an indication of the size and scale of
this case, Larry loves extradition

hearing, which was quite a big deal and
quite big. Took two and a half days.

Julian's is going to be three or four
weeks. It will take place in Belmarsh

Magistrates Court in a horrible part of
south east London, near the prison. It

will probably take place in the courthouse
next door. They've got bigger courts, but

it will be in that place in London.
Richter: So what can you do? OK. Do not be

afraid to speak up, speak with people and
so on. And don't be afraid. We still live

in a free country. Immunize yourself
against propaganda, which is really

something that you should be beware. That
happened massively in the case of Julian.

I think you know what I mean. And
understand what is at stake. This is a

political persecution and it's about
everyone. And I want to quote Nils Melzer,

the U.N. special rapporteur on torture,
who I met recently and this is a very

famous quote of him, that he was
continuously actually saying to people in

power. "Assange has been systematically
slandered to divert attention, attention

from the crimes, crimes he exposed once he
had been dehumanized through isolation,

ridicule and shame. Just like the witches
we used to burn at the stake. It was easy

to deprive him of his most fundamental
rights and without provoking public

outrage worldwide." And I think this is
exactly what happened to him.

Avila: And this is a picture of really
courageous journalists from all over the

world who stand up and say, like, stop
this prosecution. And they are a community

Julian belongs to. But I have seen very
few real statements from this community.

So our request tonight will be like,
please try to organize and try to do a

similar effort that matters a lot. Now, we
will explain why.

Colvin: It's really important, because no
man is an island and the UK is not an

island. Even after Brexit, right? The UK
government does care about its

international reputation, maybe unlike the
US. And the UK government needs to know

that the world is watching. The world is
watching, they are hosting entirely

unnecessarily, the most ridiculous, the
most important press freedom truck case of

a generation, completely unnecessarily.
They need to know that we're keeping a

careful eye on it. Over the past few
months, we've been putting a lot of effort

into ensuring that the extradition
hearing, the trial, if you like, in

February is properly monitored. We have 25
elected parliamentarians and 12 European

countries who have committed to be being
part of those monitoring efforts.

Reporters sans Frontières are going to are
going to monitor. We have a whole group of

medics who are going to monitor the
extradition proceedings. And I think it

would be good to have a similar effort
from this community, too, frankly.

Avila: Especially because there are many
technical issues being discussed. Your

opinion really matters for this trial, you
know. And he can't do it. He cannot do it

from prison. He counts on you to help
lawyers, to help the press, to help

everyone understand what is and what
isn't online publishing and online

journalism. 21st Century journalism is at
stake on this case.

Colvin: And your voice really matters
here. It really does. Yes.

Avila: And, you know, he's our friend. And
it's not only someone we support, but he's

our friend. And he likes to have the final
word, always. So we can now bring,

bringing him back from the - eleven years
ago from a Congress like this one, to have

the final word.
video sound fails

Voice from the off: Oh, oh, oh. Hey, CIA?
Yeah. No, it's only a glitch. He's going

to be frustrated, really angry. laughs
Richter: Try again?

Avila: Is it ok?
Richter: Should we try?

Avila: If not, we can... In the meantime,
we can read it out, we can read it out,

so...
Colvin: "Justice doesn't just happen.

Justice is forced by people coming
together and exercising strength, unity

and intelligence." That's Julian at 25C3.

applause

Avila: Shall we try?
Richter: Should we try?

Avila: Let's try one last time. No. Oh, my
God, silence.

Colvin: He'll be annoyed by that. He would
be very annoyed. He's going to be really

angry about that. All right.
Avila: Please do not tell him.

Colvin: Yeah. Yeah, don't tell him. If you
don't tell him, he won't know.

Avila: Yeah. So we are ready for some
questions. I think that we have very

little time, but if we don't have enough
time, we will be hanging out that the

teahouse and you can come to us and ask
questions and how to help.

Herald Angel: Thank you so much.

applause

It was very insightful, moving and
incredibly important. So I remind everyone

that we have six microphones. If you have
questions, line up behind them. And also

our wonderful signal angels are going to
take some questions from the internet, one

of which we're going to answer right now.
Signal Angel: Ok, there was the question

that: Which reasons could there be to
explain the lack of fair and well balanced

media reports in the Assange case?
Colvin: What are the reasons for the lack

of support of media coverage? OK.
Avila: You want to answer that?

Richter: You start and I will also help.
Mumbling

Avila: Very quickly I will say that,
going back to this slide on who he

exposed: the most powerful people. If
you have the most powerful people, like,

in the world, private sector, public
sector, even hidden sector against you and

with unlimited resources to take you down,
it's quite easy to kill positive stories. It

is really hard in times that journalism is
on the resource and that the courageous

journalists are not, like, really
rewarded. It is really difficult

to navigate that ecosystem.
Richter: Yes. And I want to add that also

there is a reason. I think if journalism
today would be - do a proper job of

investigating and exposing the powerful,
that it would not be necessary that

WikiLeaks even exists. I think if they
would do their job as the fourth, so-

called fourth estate in democracy, then
something like WikiLeaks wouldn't even be

there. And I think that might be a reason
that I think that the - he not only

exposed the powerful, but he also a
little bit exposed, of course, his

colleagues at the so-called established
press. And I think that every

reason that he gave, and there were some
because he's not perfect, Julian Assange

is only human, and he did make mistakes
like everybody of us. And I could say, OK,

take the first stone and throw it. But I
think that, of course, bad news is always

good news. And let's say many people who
knew him said, let's say, negative things

that the press picked up. But, like, when
I would say to press - or I also know

him, I think he's a decent guy. Nobody
wants to report that because it's boring

and not interesting. So, yeah. There are
many reasons for that, I think.

Colvin: I'm going to add that, I mean, the
fact that there are 10 years of history

here definitely makes a difference. But
look, I speak to a lot of journalists and

I speak to a lot of journalists about this
case in the UK and particularly as it's

become more obvious that Julian is not
doing very well, that he's very unwell. I

think people are shocked. And I can you
know. People are frightened about it. They

might not be talking about it very much at
the moment, but they will. It is what is

changing around for sure.
Richter: Yes. And then, speaking of being

frightened, also, don't underestimate that
people might be afraid.

Avila: And also, I know that there are
many journalists here tonight. This is

your opportunity to change the narrative
because you are next if you stay silent.

Herald: Thank you. We're going to take the
next question from a man who's wearing a

Julian Assange mask. Gathering worth the
effort and microphone 2 please.

M2: Oh, hi. I want to thank you so
much for your talk. When we are all facing

this situation of asking ourselves what we
can do, we should take inspiration from

what you just said and what you just did.
It is not just about Julian. It is about

every one of us here.
Herald: This is wonderful, but that is not

a question.
M2: No, but I'm getting there.

Herald: Can you get there faster?
M2: It's about historical perspective on

all these aspects about war, about power,
about what we can do, about what the

internet is about to question power. It is
about also maybe admitting -

Herald: Maybe much faster?
M2: much faster. It is not perfect. You may

have said stupid things on Twitter like we
all did. And like anyone would do after

seven years in detention.
Yet he's one of us. So when asking

ourselves what to do. It's a modest
contribution from the internet. There is a

wiki that is online for a few days now on
these stickers that you

Herald: okay. We're going to take an
actual question. I am really sorry, but.

Microphone 1, please. applause
Richter: Okay, still thank you.

M1: I thank you for the inspiring talk, so
I am a Pakistani journalist I now live in

exile in Berlin. But what the story of
Assange and what we just saw this. You

know, everything that happened and the
perpetrators that even put the

authoritarian regimes and their leaders in
shame, especially how the system of asylum

has been breached. That also scares me. I
have actually called because I'm scared.

But my question is, could you as
journalists maybe shed some light on the

on the chilling effect for journalists? I
mean, I can only imagine that there might

be more leaks in line that would have
happened, but maybe has not happened

because the journalists are also now self
censoring. So what would you advise to

such journalists? Thank you.
Richter: Well, that is is really exactly a

very tough question. And this is exactly
one of the dangers that we are pointing to

you know, that people might just not
expose it. And like I said, people are

starting to get afraid. What can we say to
them? Well, ...

Avila: I have something

and I think that Julian has something to
say, this is endless with justice, with as

a community, with strength, unity and
indulgence. I mean, look at the talent in

this room. Look, it's not necessarily just
the brilliance of one whistleblower or one

person. It's the ecosystem that we need to
create to create resilient media. And we

need a resilient media for democracy to
work. And if it cannot happen, even here

in Germany, with all the resources and
with all the brilliant minds, where is it

going to happen? So I think that we cannot
stop innovating and we need to push for

the next wave of innovations for the
journalism that we've served these needs

in our times. And that's why this case
matters a lot, because it's punishing

these innovations that these two
redistributed power among people. Yeah.

There also needs to be a recognition. A
bit of solidarity is necessary here,

because this isn't just about Julian. As
Renata mentioned briefly, things in

Australia have gone to pop since Julian
was arrested. And more than that, one of

the slides I flicked over was the
indictment of a drone with alleged drone

whistleblower, Daniel Hale. In Daniel Hale
the count - one of Daniel Hale's

indictment accuses him of unlawfully
releasing information. About unlawfully

releasing information to a journalist who
he knew would have used it unlawfully. So

this is like the second time in a US
indictment we have an accusation of a

publisher, a journalist acting unlawfully
by publishing true information in the

public interest. We need to be aware and
we need to raise the alarm, because this

isn't just about Julian. The threat is
very real and it's very broad.

Herald: Thank you. We have time for one
last question and we're going to ask our

signal angels again.
Signal Angel: So there was the question

how can we help and support Manning,
Assange and Snowden?

Richter: Well, like we just said also, I think
it's very important to show solidarity in

different ways by raising your voice.
Well, even supporting with donation, it's

always good. It's good for Manning. It's
good for everyone. I think Courage

Foundation is someone who's supporting
everyone, including Jeremy Hammond and

Chelsea Manning, who are not so much in
the focus maybe like Julian, but also for

Julian. I think that his trial will cost -
- my God - hundreds of thousands of

pounds. Let's hope that the pound
goes down after Brexit. But, OK. No. I

mean, and I think speaking up and like
Renata also said, to have the feeling that

we are many and I think exactly this thing
that he said. People coming together and

sharing and kind of be brave like "Courage
is contagious." is one of my favorite quotes

of him. And so I think I take a stand.
Have an attitude and do as much as you can

in your possibilities, which which are
not so little, I think. And I think it is

for the good of everyone, not only the
names, people who are in danger now, but

for all of our freedom. Colvin: Resist
practically. There's a lot to do and

there's a lot of work to go round or as
we've mentioned in the talk, organizing in

the communities you're part of. His work
is very important here in Germany. To take

an example, we've had parliamentarians
coming forward. We've also had the

journalists' union. We've also had
collections of lawyers. All of this is

really important. And it makes a
difference to the work that's being done

in the U.K. There are lots of different
organizations and groups doing work on

this case and it's all really valuable.
Contribute as you will, find a group that

you think is doing is doing good work.
Either work that you think will make a

difference or that accords with your own
ideological perspective and support them.

There's a lot of people doing good work
here. I know one of the saving graces of

what has been quite a depressing year is
meeting so many people who were doing

important work on this most dire of
issues. Avila: And we have a lot of faith on you

as a community, to be honest. We count on
you and this community do not leave behind

people belonging here. And I think that if
we can see - I think that Julian will be

like incredibly thrilled and Chelsea will
be like super happy to know that there's

organized efforts to follow this case
closely and to have delegations present

during the hearings. And if they know that
you are there, even symbolically there,

they will feel so much better because more
and more to any community, Snowden,

Chelsea, Julian really love this. Love,
admire and count on this community. So

please be there, and find us later, we
will explain the more detailed ways to

help. And thank you so much for attending
this talk. Like, really, it means a lot.

It means a lot to have a full room. And I
know that there's many people watching as

well and will watch this again. Please
continue following this case. We will

prepare all the information that you need.
But what you - we need you to activate

it and to translate it into action. Thank
you so much. Thank you. Thank you.

applause

Herald: Thank you for this.

postroll music

Subtitles created by c3subtitles.de
in the year 2020. Join, and help us!