-219 Removals
+317 Additions
1CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION1CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION
2NOT FOR PUBLICATION.2NOT FOR PUBLICATION.
3 3
4WikiLeaks and Julian Assange have published the largest, most accurate leaks in the history of the CIA, State Department, Pentagon, U.S. politics, and Saudi-Arabia, among many others. Predictably, given the nature of some of these entities, numerous falsehoods have been subsequently spread about WikiLeaks and its publisher.4Julian Assange has published the largest leaks in the history of the CIA, State Department, Pentagon, the U.S. Democratic Party, and the government of Saudi Arabia, among many others, as well as saving Edward Snowden from arrest. Predictably, numerous falsehoods have been subsequently spread about WikiLeaks and its publisher.
5 5
6Additional falsehoods have been spread by media competitors, click-bait sites, political party loyalists, and by those linked to, or paid by, the governments WikiLeaks or Julian Assange are litigating or have litigated (UK, US, Ecuador, Sweden), which seek his arrest (U.S., U.K), expulsion (Ecuador), or who have formal criminal investigations against his publishing work (U.S., Saudi Arabia, Australia), or who have banned or censored WikiLeaks (Saudi-Arabia, Turkey, China).6Falsehoods have also been spread by third parties: media competitors, click-bait sites, political party loyalists, and by those linked to the governments WikiLeaks or Julian Assange are litigating or have litigated (U.K., U.S., Ecuador, Sweden), which seek his arrest (U.S., U.K.), expulsion (Ecuador), or who have formal criminal investigations (U.S., Saudi Arabia, Australia), or who have banned or censored WikiLeaks (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, China).
7 7
8Since Mr. Assange’s isolation and gagging on March 28, 2018 the publication of false and defamatory claims about him has accelerated, perhaps because there is an incorrect view that Mr. Assange is has no means to defend his reputation from falsehoods in such grave circumstances.8Since Mr. Assange's unlawful isolation and gagging on March 28, 2018, the publication of false and defamatory claims about him has accelerated, perhaps because of an incorrect view that Mr. Assange, due to his grave personal circumstances, can no longer defend his reputation.
9This climate of falsehood reached a new nadir with a front page, intelligence-linked fabrication in the Guardian newspaper, which falsely claimed that Julian Assange had secret meetings with Paul Manafort right down to a description of his pants (“sandy coloured chinos”) [see https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-guardians-viral-blockbuster-assangemanafort-scoop-no-evidence-has-emerged-just-stonewalling/].9
10 10These defamation efforts have reached a new nadir with the recent front page fabrication by Guardian newspaper, which falsely claimed that Julian Assange had multiple secret meetings with Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, right down to a made up description of latter's pants at the fabricated meetings ("sandy coloured chinos") [see https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-guardians-viral-blockbuster-assangemanafort-scoop-no-evidence-has-emerged-just-stonewalling/].
11It is well documented that there is a pervasive climate of inaccurate claims about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, including purposeful fabrications planted in large and otherwise “reputable” media outlets.11
12 12It is clear that there is a pervasive climate of inaccurate claims about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, including purposeful fabrications planted in otherwise 'reputable' media outlets. In several instances these fabrications appear to have the intent of creating political cover for his censorship, isolation, expulsion, arrest, extradition and imprisonment.
13Consequently journalists and publishers have a clear responsibility to carefully fact-check from primary sources and to consult the following list to ensure they are not spreading, and have not spread, defamatory falsehoods about WikiLeaks or Julian Assange.13
14 14Mr. Assange's isolation, ongoing proceedings and pending extradition also increase the legal and ethical burden on journalists, publishers and others to get their facts straight.
15Defamation list 1.215
16Consequently journalists and publishers have a clear responsibility to carefully fact-check from primary sources and to consult the following list of defamations to ensure they do not spread and have not spread falsehoods about WikiLeaks or Julian Assange. The purpose of this list is to aid the honest and accurate and to put the dishonest and inaccurate on notice.
17
18Defamation List v1.3
19the absense of any claim from this list does not imply that the claim is not false or defamatory
20
16It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has ever been, charged with an offence by the United Kingdom or Sweden [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].21It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has ever been, charged with an offence by the United Kingdom or Sweden [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
22
17It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has ever been, an agent or officer of any intelligence service [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].23It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has ever been, an agent or officer of any intelligence service [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
18It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks is, or has ever been alleged by the U.S. government to be, a State “foreign intelligence service”.24
25It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks is, or has ever been alleged by the U.S. government to be, a State "foreign intelligence service".
26
19It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever been contacted by the Mueller investigation.27It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever been contacted by the Mueller investigation.
28
20It is false and defamatory to suggest that there is any evidence that the U.S. charges against Julian Assange relate to the Mueller investigation.29It is false and defamatory to suggest that there is any evidence that the U.S. charges against Julian Assange relate to the Mueller investigation.
21It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or Wikileaks is, or has ever been alleged by the U.S. government to be Russian, Russian owned, a Russian subsidiary, contracted by Russia, Russian staffed, based in Russia, “in league” with Russia, an “arm of Russia” or a “Russian cutout” [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].30
31It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or Wikileaks is, or has ever been alleged by the U.S. government to be: Russian, Russian owned, a Russian subsidiary, contracted by Russia, Russian staffed, based in Russia, "in league" with Russia, an "arm of Russia" or a "Russian cutout" [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
32
22It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government claims that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks directed, conspired, colluded or otherwise engaged in a crime, to obtain information from the Democratic National Committee or John Podesta [in fact, the government has made no such claim].33It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government claims that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks directed, conspired, colluded or otherwise engaged in a crime, to obtain information from the Democratic National Committee or John Podesta [in fact, the government has made no such claim].
34
23It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Democratic National Committee has claimed that Julian Assange directed, conspired, or colluded to hack the Democratic National Committee or John Podesta [in fact, the DNC makes no such claim: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/WikiLeaksDNC.pdf].35It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Democratic National Committee has claimed that Julian Assange directed, conspired, or colluded to hack the Democratic National Committee or John Podesta [in fact, the DNC makes no such claim: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/WikiLeaksDNC.pdf].
24It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks was alone in publishing materials alleged by U.S. intelligence services to obtained by hacking [in fact, most U.S. media organizations did so: Politico, the Hill, The Intercept, The Daily Beast, The Smoking Gun, Gawkler Facebook, WordPress and Twitter, and every press outlet, including CNN and the New York Times, republished these original reports, see https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/WikiLeaksDNC.pdf].36
37It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks was alone in publishing allegedly hacked Democratic Party materials in 2016 [in fact, most U.S. media organizations did so: Politico, the Hill, The Intercept, Facebook, Wordpress and Twitter, and every major press outlet, including CNN and the New York Times, republished, see https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/WikiLeaksDNC.pdf].
38
25It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever met or communicated with Paul Manafort [see https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-guardians-viral-blockbuster-assangemanafort-scoop-no-evidence-has-emerged-just-stonewalling/].39It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever met or communicated with Paul Manafort [see https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-guardians-viral-blockbuster-assangemanafort-scoop-no-evidence-has-emerged-just-stonewalling/].
40
26It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever met or communicated with George Cottrell [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1068475150314676225].41It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever met or communicated with George Cottrell [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1068475150314676225].
42
27It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange privately provided information about its then pending 2016 U.S. election-related publications to any outside party, including Nigel Farage, Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi, Donald Trump Jr., Michael Flynn, Michael Flynn Jr., Cambridge Analytica, or Rebecca Mercer [it is defamatory because it falsely imputes that Julian Assange acted without integrity in his role as the editor of WikiLeaks, associates with criminals, or has committed a crime].43It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange privately provided information about its then pending 2016 U.S. election-related publications to any outside party, including Nigel Farage, Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi, Donald Trump Jr., Michael Flynn, Michael Flynn Jr., Cambridge Analytica, or Rebecca Mercer [it is defamatory because it falsely imputes that Julian Assange acted without integrity in his role as the editor of WikiLeaks, associates with criminals, or has committed a crime].
44
28It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever colluded with or conspired with, or compromised the integrity of its journalism for, any political campaign or State [in fact, published communication records show WikiLeaks doing exactly the opposite: rejecting approaches by Cambridge Analytica and the Trump campaign for information on its pending publications, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].45It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever colluded with or conspired with, or compromised the integrity of its journalism for, any political campaign or State [in fact, published communication records show WikiLeaks doing exactly the opposite: rejecting approaches by Cambridge Analytica and the Trump campaign for information on its pending publications, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
29It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was in communication with Roger J. Stone during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election [in fact, the only message sent from WikiLeaks was a demand that Mr. Stone cease falsely stating that he had “communicated” with Julian Assange].46
30It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was a “back channel” between Julian Assange and Roger J. Stone during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election.47It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was in communication with Roger J. Stone during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election [in fact, the only message sent from WikiLeaks was a demand that Mr. Stone cease falsely stating that he had "communicated" with Julian Assange].
48
49It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was a "back channel" between Julian Assange and Roger J. Stone during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election.
50
31It is false and defamatory to suggest that Nigel Farage met with Julian Assange during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election.51It is false and defamatory to suggest that Nigel Farage met with Julian Assange during, or prior to, the U.S. 2016 presidential election.
32It is false and defamatory to suggest that the purpose of Nigel Farage’s meeting with Julian Assange in 2017, after the U.S. election, was in any way improper or not journalistic.52
33It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange timed the publication of its series on John Podesta to conceal the Access Hollywood “grab them by the pussy” video of Donald Trump [in fact, it is well documented that the video release was moved forward three days to be on the day of WikiLeaks’ publication, see https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/19/inside-wikileaks-working-with-the-publisher-that-changed-the-world/].53It is false and defamatory to suggest that the purpose of Nigel Farage's meeting with Julian Assange in 2017, after the U.S. election, was in any way improper or not journalistic.
34It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is “anti-American” or “anti-U.S.” [in fact, he has an abiding love for the United States, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/julian-assange-wikileaks-has-the-same-mission-as-the-post-and-the-times/2017/04/11/23f03dd8-1d4d-11e7-a0a7-8b2a45e3dc84_story.html].54
55It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange timed the publication of its series on John Podesta to conceal the Access Hollywood "grab them by the pussy" video of Donald Trump [in fact, it is well documented that the video release was moved forward three days to be on the day of WikiLeaks' publication, see https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/19/inside-wikileaks-working-with-the-publisher-that-changed-the-world/].
56
57It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is "anti-American" or "anti-U.S." [in fact, he has an abiding love for the United States, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/julian-assange-wikileaks-has-the-same-mission-as-the-post-and-the-times/2017/04/11/23f03dd8-1d4d-11e7-a0a7-8b2a45e3dc84_story.html].
58
35It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have not published critical information on Russia, Syria or Donald Trump [in fact, WikiLeaks has published hundreds of thousands of documents on Russia, millions on Syria, and thousands on Donald Trump, see https://wikileaks.org/spyfiles/russia/, https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=russia%7Cputin%7Cmoscow#results, https://wikileaks.org/syria-files/ & https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=trump#results].59It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have not published critical information on Russia, Syria or Donald Trump [in fact, WikiLeaks has published hundreds of thousands of documents on Russia, millions on Syria, and thousands on Donald Trump, see https://wikileaks.org/spyfiles/russia/, https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=russia%7Cputin%7Cmoscow#results, https://wikileaks.org/syria-files/ & https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=trump#results].
36It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever worked for, or has ever been employed by “Russia Today”, “RT” or the Russian government.60
37It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was “given a show”, “made a host”, or “hosted a show” on RT [in fact, in 2012, he and two British companies, Dartmouth Films and Journeyman Pictures conceived, produced and distributed “The World Tomorrow”, which was licensed to a dozen broadcasters and newspapers, only one of which was RT].61It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever worked for, or has ever been employed by "Russia Today", "RT" or the Russian government.
38It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks “works with RT” or “works with Russian State media” [in fact, only once, for one publication in 2012, was RT part of a consortium of nearly two dozen re-publishers of WikiLeaks’ series on the private surveillance industry, the SpyFiles].62
39It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks arranged for Edward Snowden to go to Russia [in fact, WikiLeaks gave legal assistance to Mr. Snowden to obtain asylum in Ecuador, but the U.S. government cancelled Mr. Snowden’s passport mid-flight, stranding him in a Moscow transit lounge for 40 days [see https://edwardsnowden.com/].63It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was "given a show", "made a host", or "hosted a show" on RT [in fact, in 2012, he and two British companies, Dartmouth Films and Journeyman Pictures conceived, produced and distributed "The World Tomorrow", which was licensed to a dozen broadcasters and newspapers, only one of which was RT].
40It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange applied for a Russian visa in 2010 or obtained a Russian visa in 2010 or subsequently.64
41It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was a “Russian plan” to “smuggle”, or to otherwise remove, Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy in London or that Fidel Narvaez, or anyone else, was in contact with the Russian embassy in London in relation to such a claimed plan [see https://therealnews.com/stories/ecuadorian-ex-diplomat-report-claiming-assange-met-manafort-is-false].65It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks "works with RT" or "works with Russian State media" [in fact, only once, for one publication in 2012, was RT part of a consortium of nearly two dozen re-publishers of WikiLeaks' series on the private surveillance industry, the SpyFiles].
66
67It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks arranged for Edward Snowden to go to Russia [in fact, WikiLeaks gave legal assistance to Mr. Snowden to obtain asylum in Ecuador, but the U.S. government cancelled Mr. Snowden's passport mid-flight, stranding him in a Moscow transit lounge for 40 days [see https://edwardsnowden.com/].
68
69It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange applied for a Russian visa in 2010 or obtained a Russian visa in the year 2010 or subsequently.
70
71It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was a "Russian plan" to "smuggle", or to otherwise remove, Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy in London or that Fidel Narvaez, or anyone else, was in contact with the Russian embassy in London in relation to such a claimed plan [see https://therealnews.com/stories/ecuadorian-ex-diplomat-report-claiming-assange-met-manafort-is-false].
72
42It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was made an Ecuadorian diplomat to Russia [in fact, his diplomatic credentials were lodged to the government of the United Kingdom and he was appointed as an Ecuadorian diplomat to the United Kingdom; at no point were they lodged with Russia].73It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was made an Ecuadorian diplomat to Russia [in fact, his diplomatic credentials were lodged to the government of the United Kingdom and he was appointed as an Ecuadorian diplomat to the United Kingdom; at no point were they lodged with Russia].
43It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange claimed that any person or entity was their source for WikiLeaks’ 2016 U.S. election publications [it is defamatory because Julian Assange’s professional reputation is substantially based on source protection].74
75It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange claimed that any person or entity was their source for WikiLeaks' 2016 U.S. election publications [it is defamatory because Julian Assange's professional reputation is substantially based on source protection].
76
44It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks does not have a perfect record of accurately verifying its publications.77It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks does not have a perfect record of accurately verifying its publications.
78
45It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government has ever denied the authenticity of a WikiLeaks publication.79It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government has ever denied the authenticity of a WikiLeaks publication.
46It is false and defamatory to deny that DNC Chair Donna Brazile and Senator Elizabeth Warren admitted that Julian Assange was, in fact, correct and that the DNC had indeed “rigged” the 2016 primary election in favour of Hillary Clinton [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/926250463594516480 and https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/926094515261378561].80
81It is false and defamatory to deny that DNC Chair Donna Brazile and Senator Elizabeth Warren admitted that Julian Assange was, in fact, correct and that the DNC had indeed "rigged" the 2016 primary election in favour of Hillary Clinton [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/926250463594516480 and https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/926094515261378561].
82
47It is false and defamatory to suggest that John Podesta or Donna Brazile deny the authenticity of emails about them published by WikiLeaks [in fact, Brazile confessed that WikiLeaks was correct and she had indeed shared debate questions with the Hillary Clinton campaign https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/843216277225308161].83It is false and defamatory to suggest that John Podesta or Donna Brazile deny the authenticity of emails about them published by WikiLeaks [in fact, Brazile confessed that WikiLeaks was correct and she had indeed shared debate questions with the Hillary Clinton campaign https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/843216277225308161].
48It is false and defamatory to suggest that the French government found that “MacronLeaks” were hacked by Russia [in fact, the head of the French cyber-security agency, ANSSI, said that they did not have evidence connecting the hack with Russia, see https://wikileaks.org/macron-emails/].84
49It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks “targetted” the French presidential election of 2017 and published “MacronLeaks” during that election [in fact, WikiLeaks published MacronLeaks after the election].85It is false and defamatory to suggest that the French government found that "MacronLeaks" were hacked by Russia [in fact, the head of the French cyber-security agency, ANSSI, said that they did not have evidence connecting the hack with Russia, see https://wikileaks.org/macron-emails/].
86
87It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks "targetted" the French presidential election of 2017 and published "MacronLeaks" during that election [in fact, WikiLeaks published MacronLeaks after the election].
88
50It is false and defamatory to suggest any of the MacronLeaks published by WikiLeaks are inauthentic or that President Macron attempted to make such a claim after the publication by WikiLeaks.89It is false and defamatory to suggest any of the MacronLeaks published by WikiLeaks are inauthentic or that President Macron attempted to make such a claim after the publication by WikiLeaks.
51It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever stated that Russia was not behind the attempted murder of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal [in fact, Julian Assange stated that it was “reasonable” to view Russia as “the leading suspect”].90
91It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever stated that Russia was not behind the attempted murder of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal [in fact, Julian Assange stated that it was "reasonable" to view Russia as "the leading suspect"].
92
52It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever stated it was not appropriate to expel Russian diplomats and spies over the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal.93It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever stated it was not appropriate to expel Russian diplomats and spies over the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal.
94
53It is false and defamatory to suggest that Ecuador isolated and gagged Mr. Assange due to his comments on Sergei Skripal [in fact, he was isolated over his refusal to delete a factually accurate tweet about the arrest of the president of Catalonia by Spain in Germany, along with U.S. debt pressure on Ecuador. The president of Ecuador Lenin Moreno admitted that these two countries were the issue, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].95It is false and defamatory to suggest that Ecuador isolated and gagged Mr. Assange due to his comments on Sergei Skripal [in fact, he was isolated over his refusal to delete a factually accurate tweet about the arrest of the president of Catalonia by Spain in Germany, along with U.S. debt pressure on Ecuador. The president of Ecuador Lenin Moreno admitted that these two countries were the issue, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
54————————————————————————————————–96
55It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange does not have political asylum or is merely “seeking asylum” [in fact, he won his asylum case in relation to U.S. government moves to prosecute him on August 16, 2012 and was granted formal refugee status under the 1951 Refugee Convention, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].97--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
56It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange “fled” to the Embassy of Ecuador [in fact, he walked into the embassy and lodged an asylum claim; it was not until 10 days later that the UK government issued a warrant for his arrest. see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].98
57It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has been, “hiding” in the embassy [in fact, his location is well known and his formal legal status is “political refugee”; it is incorrect to suggest that refugees, by virtue of being in the jurisdiction of refuge, are “hiding”].99
58It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange has been formally investigated since 2010 and charged by the U.S. federal government over his publishing work [it is defamatory because such a claim falsely imputes that Mr. Assange’s asylum is a sham and that he is a liar, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].100It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange does not have political asylum or is merely "seeking asylum" [in fact, he won his asylum case in relation to U.S. government moves to prosecute him on August 16, 2012 and was granted formal refugee status under the 1951 Refugee Convention, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
59It is false and defamatory to suggest that such U.S. charges have not been confirmed [in fact, they have, most recently by Associated Press (AP) and the Washington Post in November 2018].101
60It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government denies the existence of such charges. 102It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange "fled" to the Embassy of Ecuador [in fact, he walked into the embassy and lodged an asylum claim; it was not until 10 days later that the UK government issued a warrant for his arrest. see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
61It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is not wanted for extradition by the U.S. government [in fact, public records from the Department of Justice show that the U.S. government says it had been intentionally concealing its charges against Mr. Assange from the public specifically to decrease his ability to “avoid arrest and extradition”].103
62It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government has not publicly confirmed that it has an active grand jury, or pending or prospective proceedings, against Julian Assange or WikiLeaks, each year since 2010.104It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has been, "hiding" in the embassy [in fact, his location is well known and his formal legal status is "political refugee"; it is incorrect to suggest that refugees, by virtue of being in the jurisdiction of refuge, are "hiding"].
63It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange’s asylum is “self-imposed” or that he is “free to walk out any time he likes” [in fact, the UK government states that he will be immediately arrested, the U.S. government seeks his extradition and the exits to the embassy are under 24-hour surveillance; it is self-evident that refugees, having been compelled by the risk of persecution to seek asylum are not “free” to return to the area of risk, any more than one is free to leave a house with a bear on the porch, see https://defend.wikileaks.org].105
64It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange applied for political asylum over “sex allegations” or “extradition to Sweden” or to “avoid questioning” [in fact, he formally applied for and received political asylum over the U.S. grand jury proceedings against him; the UN and the Swedish courts found that Sweden was improperly refusing to question him, not the other way around, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].106It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange has been formally investigated since 2010 and charged by the U.S. federal government over his publishing work [it is defamatory because such a claim falsely imputes that Mr. Assange's asylum is a sham and that he is a liar, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
65It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is merely a “guest” of the embassy and does not have refugee status, including under the 1951 Refugee Convention, or that the UK is not a party to the Convention, or that Julian Assange received only “diplomatic asylum” or that his refugee status is, in any sense, improper or incomplete [it is defamatory because it suggests that Julian Assange committed a crime by applying for asylum, which is false, see https://defned.wikileaks.org/].107- It is false and defamatory to suggest that such U.S. charges have not been confirmed [in fact, they have, most recently by Associated Press (AP) and the Washington Post in November 2018].
66It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange, as a political refugee, does not have the right to voice his political opinions or a right to communicate them [it is defamatory because it falsely suggests Mr. Assange is a liar when he states he has never agreed to be gagged and when he asserts that it is a fact that refugees have the legal right to express political opinions and because his reputation is to a significant degree based on the accuracy of his statements and in being the world’s best-known free speech proponent and practitioner].108- It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government denies the existence of such charges.
67It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange did not have the right to apply for asylum or committed an offence in doing so [in fact, he has not been charged with an offence in the UK at any time and a “reasonable excuse” is a complete defence against any hypothetical future charge of “failing to surrender” under UK law and there has been no legal finding that his defence is invalid, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].109- It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is not wanted for extradition by the U.S. government [in fact, public records from the Department of Justice show that the U.S. government says it had been intentionally concealing its charges against Mr. Assange from the public specifically to decrease his ability to "avoid arrest and extradition"].
110- It is false and defamatory to suggest that the U.S. government has not publicly confirmed that it has an active grand jury, or pending or prospective proceedings, against Julian Assange or WikiLeaks, each year since 2010.
111
112It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange's asylum is "self-imposed" or that he is "free to walk out any time he likes" [in fact, the UK government states that he will be immediately arrested, the U.S. government seeks his extradition and the exits to the embassy are under 24-hour surveillance; it is self-evident that refugees, having been compelled by the risk of persecution to seek asylum are not "free" to return to the area of risk, any more than one is free to leave a house with a bear on the porch, see https://defend.wikileaks.org].
113
114It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange applied for political asylum over "sex allegations" or "extradition to Sweden" or to "avoid questioning" [in fact, he formally applied for and received political asylum over the U.S. grand jury proceedings against him; the UN and the Swedish courts found that Sweden was improperly refusing to question him, not the other way around, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
115
116It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is merely a "guest" of the embassy and does not have refugee status, including under the 1951 Refugee Convention, or that the UK is not a party to the Convention, or that Julian Assange received only "diplomatic asylum" or that his refugee status is, in any sense, improper or incomplete [it is defamatory because it suggests that Julian Assange committed a crime by applying for asylum, which is false, see https://defned.wikileaks.org/].
117
118It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange, as a political refugee, does not have the right to voice his political opinions or a right to communicate them [it is defamatory because it falsely suggests Mr. Assange is a liar when he states he has never agreed to be gagged and when he asserts that it is a fact that refugees have the legal right to express political opinions and because his reputation is to a significant degree based on the accuracy of his statements and in being the world's best-known free speech proponent and practitioner].
119
120It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange did not have the right to apply for asylum or committed an offence in doing so [in fact, he has not been charged with an offence in the UK at any time and a "reasonable excuse" is a complete defence against any hypothetical future charge of "failing to surrender" under UK law and there has been no legal finding that his defence is invalid, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
121
68It is false and defamatory to suggest that the terminated Swedish preliminary investigation started prior to the U.S. grand jury proceedings [in fact, the U.S. grand jury proceedings started in June 2010, three months before the Swedish preliminary investigation].122It is false and defamatory to suggest that the terminated Swedish preliminary investigation started prior to the U.S. grand jury proceedings [in fact, the U.S. grand jury proceedings started in June 2010, three months before the Swedish preliminary investigation].
69It is false and defmatory to suggest that the dropped Swedish preliminary investigation against Julian Assange ever had any legitimacy whatsoever [in fact, already by August 2010, the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm found that “no crime at all” had been committed, and SMS messages from the alleged complainant showed that she “did not want to accuse Assange of anything”, that she felt “railroaded by police and others around her”, and that “police made up the charges”; documents from the UK government prove serious impropriety by the state, and the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UN WGAD)found Sweden’s conduct to be illegal, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].123
70It is false and potentially defamatory to suggest that the UN WGAD decision finding Julian Assange to be unlawfully detained in the UK is not legally binding [in fact, the UN has released two statements in response to such false reporting, stating that the decision is “legally binding” https://twitter.com/UN_SPExperts/status/1076107846629158914].124It is false and defmatory to suggest that the dropped Swedish preliminary investigation against Julian Assange ever had any legitimacy whatsoever [in fact, already by August 2010, the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm found that "no crime at all" had been committed, and SMS messages from the alleged complainant showed that she "did not want to accuse Assange of anything", that she felt "railroaded by police and others around her", and that "police made up the charges"; documents from the UK government prove serious impropriety by the State, and the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UN WGAD)found Sweden's conduct to be illegal, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
125
126It is false and potentially defamatory to suggest that the UN WGAD decision finding Julian Assange to be unlawfully detained in the UK is not legally binding [in fact, the UN has released two statements in response to such false reporting, stating that the decision is "legally binding" https://twitter.com/UN_SPExperts/status/1076107846629158914].
127
71It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever been charged with, or committed, an offence in the United Kingdom.128It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever been charged with, or committed, an offence in the United Kingdom.
72It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever “breached his bail”, “jumped bail”, absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever been charged with such at any time.129
130It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever "breached his bail", "jumped bail", absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever been charged with such at any time.
131
73It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has a sentence to serve or has ever avoided serving a sentence.132It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has a sentence to serve or has ever avoided serving a sentence.
74It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange fled Sweden [in fact, the state prosecutor granted him permission to leave, he was not wanted for arrest or charged with an offence at the time he left Sweden, and he left for a publicly scheduled talk in Geneva, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].133
75It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has been accused by any person of raping them [in fact, both so-called Swedish “complainants”, who were falsely reported to have made such an accusation, denied that they had been raped, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].134It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange fled Sweden [in fact, the State prosecutor granted him permission to leave, he was not wanted for arrest or charged with an offence at the time he left Sweden, and he left for a publicly scheduled talk in Geneva, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
135
136It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has been accused by any person of raping them [in fact, both so-called Swedish "complainants", who were falsely reported to have made such an accusation, denied that they had been raped, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
137
76It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Swedish preliminary investigation was closed due to an inability to proceed caused by Mr. Assange or a statute of limitations [in fact, the prosecution abandoned the entire preliminary investigation, the arrest warrant was dropped, and the file closed and destroyed as the direct result of Julian Assange filing a case against the government of Sweden for its abuse of legal due process; the UN WGAD also twice found that Sweden had acted unlawfully, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].138It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Swedish preliminary investigation was closed due to an inability to proceed caused by Mr. Assange or a statute of limitations [in fact, the prosecution abandoned the entire preliminary investigation, the arrest warrant was dropped, and the file closed and destroyed as the direct result of Julian Assange filing a case against the government of Sweden for its abuse of legal due process; the UN WGAD also twice found that Sweden had acted unlawfully, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
139
77It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was never interviewed by Swedish officials or has ever attempted to avoid being interviewed by Swedish officials [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].140It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was never interviewed by Swedish officials or has ever attempted to avoid being interviewed by Swedish officials [see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
78It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was ever a charge, case or prosecution against Julian Assange in Sweden [in fact, the matter never reached beyond the “preliminary investigation” stage].141
79——————————————————————————————–142It is false and defamatory to suggest that there was ever a charge, case or prosecution against Julian Assange in Sweden [in fact, the matter never reached beyond the "preliminary investigation" stage].
80It is false and defamatory to deny that WikiLeaks is a media organization [in fact, WikiLeaks has won many media awards, is registered as a media organization, has been repeatedly found to be a “media organization” by the UK courts, and employs top journalists who (including Julian Assange) are members of their respective media unions, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].143
81It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange is an award-winning editor, journalist, publisher, author and producer who has won the highest journalism award in his country, the Walkley, among many others. [https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/]144--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
82It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever, through intent or negligence, revealed a source [in fact, in the case of alleged source Chelsea Manning, the allegation by the State is that Manning spoke, in a knowing breach of WikiLeaks’ security rules, to a reseacher for Wired magazine, Adrian Lamo, who promised him journalistic confidentiality, only to then inform on him to the FBI. Lamo subsequently died in March 2018, aged 37].145
83It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks is a “group”, that it has “members” or that Julian Assange is a “member” of WikiLeaks [in fact, WikiLeaks is a publication and a publishing organization; it has a highly accomplished salaried staff, not members; it is not al-Qaeda].146It is false and defamatory to deny that WikiLeaks is a media organization [in fact, WikiLeaks has won many media awards, is registered as a media organization, has been repeatedly found to be a "media organization" by the UK courts, and employs top journalists who (including Julian Assange) are members of their respective media unions, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
147
148It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange is an award-winning editor, journalist, publisher, author and documentary maker who has won the highest journalism award in his country, among many others. [https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/]
149
150It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever, through intent or negligence, revealed a source [in fact, in the case of alleged source Chelsea Manning, the allegation by the State is that Manning spoke, in a knowing breach of WikiLeaks' security rules, to a reseacher for Wired magazine, Adrian Lamo, who promised him journalistic confidentiality, only to then inform on him to the FBI].
151
152It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks is a "group", that it has "members" or that Julian Assange is a "member" of WikiLeaks [in fact, WikiLeaks is a publication and a publishing organization; it has a highly accomplished salaried staff, not members; it is not al-Qaeda].
153
84It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever directed, conspired, or colluded in a criminal manner with its sources.154It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks has ever directed, conspired, or colluded in a criminal manner with its sources.
85It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange claimed “informants deserve to die” [in fact, Der Spiegel signed a statement refuting a false claim that he did, see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/762711823216996352].155
86It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has asserted that the Syrian government did not conduct chemical attacks during the war in Syria [in fact, WikiLeaks has published millions of documents from the Syrian government, including Bashar al-Assad’s personal emails https://wikileaks.org/syria-files/].156It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange claimed "informants deserve to die" [in fact, Der Spiegel signed a statement refuting a false claim that he did, see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/762711823216996352].
87It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks publications have caused deaths [in fact, the Pentagon’s General Robert Carr, who was assigned to look at their impact, admitted under oath in the trial of Chelsea Manning that the U.S. government had not been able to find any such incidents].157
158It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has asserted that the Syrian government did not conduct chemical attacks during the war in Syria [in fact, WikiLeaks has published millions of documents from the Syrian government, including Bashar al-Assad's personal emails https://wikileaks.org/syria-files/].
159
160It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks publications have caused deaths [in fact, the Pentagon's General Robert Carr, who was assigned to look at their impact, admitted under oath in the trial of Chelsea Manning that the U.S. government had not been able to find any such incidents].
161
88It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks recklessly published unredacted U.S. diplomatic cables [see https://wikileaks.org/Guardian-journalist-negligently.html].162It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks recklessly published unredacted U.S. diplomatic cables [see https://wikileaks.org/Guardian-journalist-negligently.html].
89——————————————————————————————-163
164It is false and defamatory to suggest that any of WikiLeaks' claims about its 2017 CIA leak, Vault 7, "were later retracted" [the series had no retractions].
165
166It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange ever published millions of records about female voters in Turkey [see https://wikileaks.org/10years/distorted-facts.html].
167
168-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
169
170
90It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is not an Australian citizen.171It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is not an Australian citizen.
91It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange is the sole founder of WikiLeaks.172
92It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is not the sole first inventor of cryptographically secure “drop boxes” to protect whistleblowers and journalistic sources.173It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a "hacker".
93It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange co-founded the Freedom of the Press Foundation with John Perry Barlow.174
94It is false and defamatory to deny that Julian Assange was the founder of the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative.
95It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange’s profession is “computer programmer”.
96It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange is, or has ever been, close to the Russian state, the Kremlin or Vladimir Putin.
97It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was charged with an offence at any time by Bermuda.175It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange was charged with an offence at any time by Bermuda.
98It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks promoted or invented the “pizzagate” conspiracy theory.
99It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange “sued” Ecuador [in fact, he filed a legal “protection measure”, or injunction, to force it to cease gagging and isolating him and threatening to violate his asylum in breach of international and domestic law].
100It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange filed a lawsuit or any other measure against Ecuador over his pet cat, laundry or cleaning [in fact, his cat is not at the embassy since before the protection case was even filed, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/about-julian/].
101It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks tried to have the Trump administration appoint Julian Assange as an ambassador or to have any other person or state appoint him as an ambassador.
102It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever extorted the United States government.176It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever extorted the United States government.
177
178It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange filed a lawsuit against Ecuador over trivialities [in fact, he filed an injunction to force the state to cease illegally gagging and isolating him since March 28, 2018 and moving to void his asylum after his publication of the largest leak in CIA history. Contrary to false reports, his cat hasn't even been at embassy since well before the inunction was filed, see https://justice4assange.com/Protection-Action.html and https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
179
180It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever neglected an animal or has ever been asked by a state to take "better care" of an animal [see https://justice4assange.com/Protection-Action.html].
181
103It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever called to overthrow the Spanish state by calling for the independence of Catalonia [in fact, he never called for the independence of Catalonia].182It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever called to overthrow the Spanish state by calling for the independence of Catalonia [in fact, he never called for the independence of Catalonia].
104It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange’s reporting on the violence and censorship inflicted against Catalans in any way connected to Russia [in fact, the managing editor of El Pais David Alandete was fired for spreading this false claim].183
105It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Catalan government, or any other entity, paid Julian Assange to report on the violence and censorship inflicted against Spain’s Catalan minority, or to otherwise support their right to self-determination [in fact, Spanish prosecutors stated that there were no records of Mr. Assange receiving such payments].184It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange's reporting on the violence and censorship inflicted against Catalans in any way connected to Russia [in fact, the managing editor of El Pais, David Alandete, was fired for spreading this false claim].
106It is false and defamatory to suggest that “Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange [told] Russia-Aligned Media…” anything about his Protective Action filing in Ecuador [in fact, he testified, via video link, to a panel of three judges in an appeals court and did not speak to media].185
107It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange, or his mother, or his father, is, or was ever, a member of a cult.186It is false and defamatory to suggest that the Catalan government, or any other entity, paid Julian Assange to report on the violence and censorship inflicted against Spain's Catalan minority, or to otherwise support their right to self-determination [in fact, Spanish prosecutors confirmed that there were no records of Mr. Assange receiving such payments contrary to what had been falsely reported].
108It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange bleaches his hair.187
109It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange’s mother is, or ever was, a “hippie”.188It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is "far right".
110It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a “hacker”.189
111It is false and defamatory to suggest that Ecuador’s threats to terminate Julian Assange’s asylum have anything whatsoever to do with his conduct in the embassy [in fact, a new government was elected in 2017 and the U.S. government made support for loans to Ecuador conditional on handing over Assange, see https://defend.wikileaks.org/].
112It is false and defamatory to suggest that “Tommy Robinson” ever took a photo on the steps of the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
113It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever walked into embassy meeting rooms in his underwear.
114It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange drinks to excess.
115It is false and defamatory to suggest that Ecuador suggested that Julian Assange did not look after his cat or asked him to improve his care of it.
116It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever neglected an animal.
117It is false and defamatory to suggest that Ecuador asked Julian Assange to improve his hygiene.
118It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is “far left’ or “far right”.
119It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is “an anarchist”.
120It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a racist.190It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a racist.
121It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is an anti-semite.
122It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a mysogynist or sexist.
123It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a paedophile.191It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a paedophile.
192
124It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a rapist.193It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a rapist.
194
125It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a murderer.195It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a murderer.
126It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a communist.
127It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.196It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
128It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange stinks.
129It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever tortured a cat or dog.
130It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange does not use cutlery or does not wash his hands.
131It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange lives, or has ever lived, in a basement, cupboard or under the stairs.
132It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever proposed that he not publish, censor or delay a publication in exchange for any thing.197It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever proposed that he not publish, censor or delay a publication in exchange for any thing.
198
133It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever agreed to do anything or to not do anything as a condition of his asylum.199It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever agreed to do anything or to not do anything as a condition of his asylum.
134It is false and defamatory to suggest that the administration of President Rafael Correa imposed any conditions or exchange for his refugee status or asylum.200
201It is false and defamatory to suggest that the administration of President Rafael Correa imposed any conditions in exchange for his refugee status or asylum.
202
135It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a criminal or has a criminal record [in fact, his convictions for offences as a teenager in Australia have been expunged].203It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is a criminal or has a criminal record [in fact, his convictions for offences as a teenager in Australia have been expunged].
136It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has committed a criminal offence since his teenage convictions were expunged.204
137It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever revealed a source intentionally or through negligence.205It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange called the Panama Papers "a Soros-funded attack against Putin" [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/717810984673484800].
138It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever hacked the state of Ecuador.206
139It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever attacked a member of staff at the embassy.207It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever published, uttered or tried to promote a "conspiracy theory".
140It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever played soccer or used a skateboard during week days or office hours at the embassy.208
141It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange is tied to, or is close to, the Kremlin.
142It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange shared documents with a dictator.
143It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange or WikiLeaks ever employed, or contracted, a holocaust denier.
144It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever attempted to pass information on opposition figures or dissidents to any government.
145It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever insisted on Russian bodyguards.
146It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange called the Panama Papers “a Soros-funded attack against Putin” [see https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/717810984673484800].
147It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever diverted any supporters’ donations intended for WikiLeaks to fund his own legal case.
148It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever published, uttered or tried to promote a “conspiracy theory”.
149It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever published, uttered or tried to promote alleged conspiracy theories claiming “John Podesta engaged in satanic rituals”, the “Democratic Party had Seth Rich Killed”, “Clinton wore earpieces to the 2016 US election debates”, on “Clinton’s health” or “Clinton kidnapping children”.
150It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever stated or suggested that any particular person was their source for any publication, including Seth Rich.
151It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has been “presenting its disclosures in misleading and conspiratorial ways to harm”.
152It is false and defamatory to suggest that any of WikiLeaks’ claims about its 2017 CIA leak, Vault 7, “were later retracted”.
153It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks’ publication about the ruling Turkish political party AKP was “nothing but mundane mailing lists of tens of thousands of ordinary people who discussed politics online”.
154It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange harmed homosexuals in Saudi Arabia [see https://wikileaks.org/10years/distorted-facts.html].
155It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever suppressed materials critical of Israel, Russia or any other State.209It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange has ever suppressed materials critical of Israel, Russia or any other State.
210
156It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks possessed unpublished leaked material on the Trump campaign or the GOP or Russia and surpressed it.211It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks possessed unpublished leaked material on the Trump campaign or the GOP or Russia and surpressed it.
157It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is “anti-military”.212
158It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange wants to harm the United States or any other State or people.213It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever hacked the state of Ecuador.
159Other important facts and corrections to false reporting can be found at https://defend.wikileaks.org/, https://justice4assange.com/, https://wikileaks.org/, https://twitter.com/wikileaks, https://twitter.com/assangedefence/, https://twitter.com/assangelegal and https://twitter.com/khrafnsson/214
215
216Other important facts and corrections to false reporting can be found at https://defend.wikileaks.org/, https://justice4assange.com/, https://wikileaks.org/, https://twitter.com/wikileaks, https://twitter.com/assangedefence/, https://twitter.com/assangelegal and https://twitter.com/khrafnsson/
Editor
Original Text
Changed Text
Recommended videos