John Pilger Awarded, International
Journalism Prize by the Press Club of
Mexico
Video and Transcript
Julian Assange in conversation with John
Pilger
Posted March 21, 2017
This
interview was filmed in the Embassy of
Ecuador in London on 30 October 2016 -
where Julian Assange is a political
refugee - and broadcast on 5 November.
John Pilger:
What's the significance of the FBI's
intervention in these last days of the
U.S. election campaign, in the case
against Hillary Clinton?
Julian Assange:
If you look at the history of the FBI,
it has become effectively America's
political police. The FBI demonstrated
this by taking down the former head of
the CIA [General David Petraeus] over
classified information given to his
mistress. Almost no-one is untouchable.
The FBI is always trying to demonstrate
that no-one can resist us. But Hillary
Clinton very conspicuously resisted the
FBI's investigation, so there's anger
within the FBI because it made the FBI
look weak. We've published about 33,000
of Clinton's emails when she was
Secretary of State. They come from a
batch of just over 60,000 emails, [of
which] Clinton has kept about half -
30,000 -- to herself, and we've
published about half.
Then there are the Podesta emails we've
been publishing. [John] Podesta is
Hillary Clinton's primary campaign
manager, so there's a thread that runs
through all these emails; there are
quite a lot of pay-for-play, as they
call it, giving access in exchange for
money to states, individuals and
corporations. [These emails are]
combined with the cover up of the
Hillary Clinton emails when she was
Secretary of State, [which] has led to
an environment where the pressure on the
FBI increases.
John Pilger:
The Clinton campaign has said that
Russia is behind all of this, that
Russia has manipulated the campaign and
is the source for WikiLeaks and its
emails.
Julian Assange:
The Clinton camp has been able to
project that kind of neo-McCarthy
hysteria: that Russia is responsible for
everything. Hilary Clinton stated
multiple times, falsely, that seventeen
U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed
that Russia was the source of our
publications. That is false; we can say
that the Russian government is not the
source.
WikiLeaks has been publishing for ten
years, and in those ten years, we have
published ten million documents, several
thousand individual publications,
several thousand different sources, and
we have never got it wrong.
John Pilger:
The emails that give evidence of access
for money and how Hillary Clinton
herself benefited from this and how she
is benefitting politically, are quite
extraordinary. I'm thinking of when the
Qatari representative was given five
minutes with Bill Clinton for a million
dollar cheque.
Julian Assange:
And twelve million dollars from Morocco
...
John Pilger:
Twelve million from Morocco yeah.
Julian Assange:
For Hillary Clinton to attend [a party].
John Pilger:
In terms of the foreign policy of the
United States, that's where the emails
are most revealing, where they show the
direct connection between Hillary
Clinton and the foundation of jihadism,
of ISIL, in the Middle East. Can you
talk about how the emails demonstrate
the connection between those who are
meant to be fighting the jihadists of
ISIL, are actually those who have helped
create it.
Julian Assange:
There's an early 2014 email from Hillary
Clinton, not so long after she left the
State Department, to her campaign
manager John Podesta that states ISIL is
funded by the governments of Saudi
Arabia and Qatar. Now this is the most
significant email in the whole
collection, and perhaps because Saudi
and Qatari money is spread all over the
Clinton Foundation. Even the U.S.
government agrees that some Saudi
figures have been supporting ISIL, or
ISIS. But the dodge has always been
that, well it's just some rogue Princes,
using their cut of the oil money to do
whatever they like, but actually the
government disapproves.
But that email says that no, it is the
governments of Saudi and Qatar that have
been funding ISIS.
John Pilger:
The Saudis, the Qataris, the Moroccans,
the Bahrainis, particularly the Saudis
and the Qataris, are giving all this
money to the Clinton Foundation while
Hilary Clinton is Secretary of State and
the State Department is approving
massive arms sales, particularly to
Saudi Arabia.
Julian Assange:
Under Hillary Clinton, the world's
largest ever arms deal was made with
Saudi Arabia, [worth] more than $80
billion. In fact, during her tenure as
Secretary of State, total arms exports
from the United States in terms of the
dollar value, doubled.
John Pilger:
Of course the consequence of that is
that the notorious terrorist group
called ISIl or ISIS is created largely
with money from the very people who are
giving money to the Clinton Foundation.
No
Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media
I actually feel quite sorry for Hillary
Clinton as a person because I see
someone who is eaten alive by their
ambitions, tormented literally to the
point where they become sick; they faint
as a result of [the reaction] to their
ambitions. She represents a whole
network of people and a network of
relationships with particular states.
The question is how does Hilary Clinton
fit in this broader network? She's a
centralising cog. You've got a lot of
different gears in operation from the
big banks like Goldman Sachs and major
elements of Wall Street, and
Intelligence and people in the State
Department and the Saudis.
She's the centraliser that
inter-connects all these different cogs.
She's the smooth central representation
of all that, and 'all that' is more or
less what is in power now in the United
States. It's what we call the
establishment or the DC consensus. One
of the more significant Podesta emails
that we released was about how the Obama
cabinet was formed and how half the
Obama cabinet was basically nominated by
a representative from City Bank. This is
quite amazing.
John Pilger:
Didn't Citybank supply a list .... ?
Julian Assange:
Yes.
John Pilger:
... which turned out to be most of the
Obama cabinet.
.
Julian Assange:
Yes.
John Pilger:
So Wall Street decides the cabinet of
the President of the United States?
Julian Assange:
If you were following the Obama campaign
back then, closely, you could see it had
become very close to banking interests.
Julian Assange:
So I think you can't properly understand
Hillary Clinton's foreign policy without
understanding Saudi Arabia. The
connections with Saudi Arabia are so
intimate.
John Pilger:
Why was she so demonstrably enthusiastic
about the destruction of Libya? Can you
talk a little about just what the emails
have told us, told you about what
happened there, because Libya is such a
source for so much of the mayhem now in
Syria, the ISIL jihadism and so on, and
it was almost Hillary Clinton's
invasion. What do the emails tell us
about that?
Julian Assange:
Libya, more than anyone else's war, was
Hillary Clinton's war. Barak Obama
initially opposed it. Who was the person
championing it? Hillary Clinton. That's
documented throughout her emails. She
had put her favoured agent, Sidney
Blumenthal, on to that; there's more
than 1700 emails out of the thirty three
thousand Hillary Clinton emails that
we've published, just about Libya. It's
not that Libya has cheap oil. She
perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the
overthrow of the Libyan state --
something that she would use in her
run-up to the general election for
President.
So in late 2011 there is an internal
document called the Libya Tick Tock that
was produced for Hillary Clinton, and
it's the chronological description of
how she was the central figure in the
destruction of the Libyan state, which
resulted in around 40,000 deaths within
Libya; jihadists moved in, ISIS moved
in, leading to the European refugee and
migrant crisis.
Not only did you have people fleeing
Libya, people fleeing Syria, the
destabilisation of other African
countries as a result of arms flows, but
the Libyan state itself err was no
longer able to control the movement of
people through it. Libya faces along to
the Mediterranean and had been
effectively the cork in the bottle of
Africa. So all problems, economic
problems and civil war in Africa --
previously people fleeing those problems
didn't end up in Europe because Libya
policed the Mediterranean. That was said
explicitly at the time, back in early
2011 by Gaddafi: 'What do these
Europeans think they're doing, trying to
bomb and destroy the Libyan State?
There's going to be floods of migrants
out of Africa and jihadists into Europe,
and this is exactly what happened.
John Pilger:
You get complaints from people saying,
'What is WikiLeaks doing? Are they
trying to put Trump in the Whitehouse?'
Julian Assange:
My answer is that Trump would not be
permitted to win. Why do I say that?
Because he's had every establishment off
side; Trump doesn't have one
establishment, maybe with the exception
of the Evangelicals, if you can call
them an establishment, but banks,
intelligence [agencies], arms
companies... big foreign money ... are
all united behind Hillary Clinton, and
the media as well, media owners and even
journalists themselves.
John Pilger:
There is the accusation that WikiLeaks
is in league with the Russians. Some
people say, 'Well, why doesn't WikiLeaks
investigate and publish emails on
Russia?'
Julian Assange:
We have published about 800,000
documents of various kinds that relate
to Russia. Most of those are critical;
and a great many books have come out of
our publications about Russia, most of
which are critical. Our [Russia]documents
have gone on to be used in quite a
number of court cases: refugee cases of
people fleeing some kind of claimed
political persecution in Russia, which
they use our documents to back up.
John Pilger:
Do you yourself take a view of the U.S.
election? Do you have a preference for
Clinton or Trump?
Julian Assange:
[Let's talk about] Donald Trump. What
does he represent in the American mind
and in the European mind? He represents
American white trash, [which Hillary
Clinton called] 'deplorable and
irredeemable'. It means from an
establishment or educated cosmopolitan,
urbane perspective, these people are
like the red necks, and you can never
deal with them. Because he so clearly --
through his words and actions and the
type of people that turn up at his
rallies -- represents people who are not
the middle, not the upper middle
educated class, there is a fear of
seeming to be associated in any way with
them, a social fear that lowers the
class status of anyone who can be
accused of somehow assisting Trump in
any way, including any criticism of
Hillary Clinton. If you look at how the
middle class gains its economic and
social power, that makes absolute sense.
John Pilger:
I'd like to talk about Ecuador, the
small country that has given you refuge
and [political asylum] in this embassy
in London. Now Ecuador has cut off the
internet from here where we're doing
this interview, in the Embassy, for the
clearly obvious reason that they are
concerned about appearing to intervene
in the U.S. election campaign. Can you
talk about why they would take that
action and your own views on Ecuador's
support for you?
Julian Assange:
Let's let go back four years. I made an
asylum application to Ecuador in this
embassy, because of the U.S. extradition
case, and the result was that after a
month, I was successful in my asylum
application. The embassy since then has
been surrounded by police: quite an
expensive police operation which the
British government admits to spending
more than £12.6 million. They admitted
that over a year ago. Now there's
undercover police and there are robot
surveillance cameras of various kinds --
so that there has been quite a serious
conflict right here in the heart of
London between Ecuador, a country of
sixteen million people, and the United
Kingdom, and the Americans who have been
helping on the side. So that was a brave
and principled thing for Ecuador to do.
Now we have the U.S. election
[campaign], the Ecuadorian election is
in February next year, and you have the
White House feeling the political heat
as a result of the true information that
we have been publishing.
WikiLeaks does not publish from the
jurisdiction of Ecuador, from this
embassy or in the territory of Ecuador;
we publish from France, we publish from,
from Germany, we publish from The
Netherlands and from a number of other
countries, so that the attempted squeeze
on WikiLeaks is through my refugee
status; and this is, this is really
intolerable. [It means] that [they] are
trying to get at a publishing
organisation; [they] try and prevent it
from publishing true information that is
of intense interest to the American
people and others about an election.
John Pilger:
Tell us what would happen if you walked
out of this embassy.
Julian Assange:
I would be immediately arrested by the
British police and I would then be
extradited either immediately to the
United States or to Sweden. In Sweden I
am not charged, I have already been
previously cleared [by the Senior
Stockholm Prosecutor Eva Finne]. We were
not certain exactly what would happen
there, but then we know that the Swedish
government has refused to say that they
will not extradite me to the United
States we know they have extradited 100
per cent of people whom the U.S. has
requested since at least 2000. So over
the last fifteen years, every single
person the U.S. has tried to extradite
from Sweden has been extradited, and
they refuse to provide a guarantee [that
won't happen].
John Pilger:
People often ask me how you cope with
the isolation in here.
Julian Assange:
Look, one of the best attributes of
human beings is that they're adaptable;
one of the worst attributes of human
beings is they are adaptable. They adapt
and start to tolerate abuses, they adapt
to being involved themselves in abuses,
they adapt to adversity and they
continue on. So in my situation,
frankly, I'm a bit institutionalised --
this [the embassy] is the world .. it's
visually the world [for me].
John Pilger:
It's the world without sunlight, for one
thing, isn't it?
Julian Assange:
It's the world without sunlight, but I
haven't seen sunlight in so long, I
don't remember it.
John Pilger:
Yes.
Julian Assange:
So , yes, you adapt. The one real
irritant is that my young children --
they also adapt. They adapt to being
without their father. That's a hard,
hard adaption which they didn't ask for.
John Pilger:
Do you worry about them?
Julian Assange:
Yes, I worry about them; I worry about
their mother.
John Pilger:
Some people would say, 'Well, why don't
you end it and simply walk out the door
and allow yourself to be extradited to
Sweden?'
Julian Assange:
The U.N. [the United Nations Working
Group on Arbitrary Detention] has looked
into this whole situation. They spent
eighteen months in formal, adversarial
litigation. [So it's] me and the U.N.
verses Sweden and the U.K. Who's right?
The U.N. made a conclusion that I am
being arbitrarily detained illegally,
deprived of my freedom and that what has
occurred has not occurred within the
laws that the United Kingdom and Sweden,
and that [those countries] must obey. It
is an illegal abuse. It is the United
Nations formally asking, 'What's going
on here? What is your legal explanation
for this? [Assange] says that you should
recognise his asylum.' [And here is]
Sweden formally writing back to the
United Nations to say, 'No, we're not
going to [recognise the UN ruling], so
leaving open their ability to extradite.
I just find it absolutely amazing that
the narrative about this situation is
not put out publically in the press,
because it doesn't suit the Western
establishment narrative -- that yes, the
West has political prisoners, it's a
reality, it's not just me, there's a
bunch of other people as well. The West
has political prisoners. Of course, no
state accepts [that it should call] the
people it is imprisoning or detaining
for political reasons, political
prisoners. They don't call them
political prisoners in China, they don't
call them political prisoners in
Azerbaijan and they don't call them
political prisoners in the United
States, U.K. or Sweden; it is absolutely
intolerable to have that kind of
self-perception.
Julian Assange:
Here we have a case, the Swedish case,
where I have never been charged with a
crime, where I have already been cleared
[by the Stockholm prosecutor] and found
to be innocent, where the woman herself
said that the police made it up, where
the United Nations formally said the
whole thing is illegal, where the State
of Ecuador also investigated and found
that I should be given asylum. Those are
the facts, but what is the rhetoric?
John Pilger:
Yes, it's different.
Julian Assange:
The rhetoric is pretending, constantly
pretending that I have been charged with
a crime, and never mentioning that I
have been already previously cleared,
never mentioning that the woman herself
says that the police made it up.
[The rhetoric] is trying to avoid [the
truth that ] the U.N. formally found
that the whole thing is illegal, never
even mentioning that Ecuador made a
formal assessment through its formal
processes and found that yes, I am
subject to persecution by the United
States.
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)