The 52-year-old Australian has spent five years in a London prison following a long and dramatic period of asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy. The British High Court ruled on Tuesday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can mount a final UK challenge against extradition to the US to face trial for publishing secret diplomatic and military files. The publisher stands accused of espionage and is facing up to 175 years in jail. The hearing at the High Court could have been the last opportunity for Assange’s defense team to seek recourse within the British legal system‚ if the judges had decided against his bid. His attorneys have argued that the American case against him is political in nature – a retaliation for exposing alleged war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq – and that extraditing him to the US would put his life and well-being at risk. Two British justices reviewing the situation decided that there was an arguable case against extradition and ruled that he should be granted a full appeal hearing again. Assange has been held in the top-security Belmarsh prison since 2019‚ when Ecuador revoked his political asylum and allowed British police to arrest him at its embassy in London. At the time‚ he was jumping bail in a separate extradition request‚ which the Australian citizen claimed to be a ploy by the US to get him into Swedish jurisdiction‚ where he claimed an attempt to extradite him to the US would have been easiest. A US court indicted Assange under the Espionage Act of 2017 a month after his arrest in the UK. Read more Assange’s wife issues ‘fair trial’ warning ahead of UK extradition decisionSurvival Shield X-3 is BACK at the Infowars Store! Get 40% OFF on the next evolution in activated nascent iodine HERE A British judge in January 2021 ruled against handing Assange over to the Americans‚ saying that he may take his own life due to harsh prison conditions in the US. Washington’s lawyers appealed the decision and offered assurances of good treatment‚ which Britain decided were sufficient for extradition. Then-Home Secretary Priti Patel authorized it in June 2022. Assange has since lost one appeal against the pending transfer. Supporters of the jailed publisher say he is being persecuted by the US and its allies for revealing secrets that were embarrassing for Western countries. “We have to be clear about who the criminals are. Just because they are using the justice system to imprison him‚ it doesn’t mean that justice or the law – international law – is on their side‚” his wife Stella said on Monday. Speaking after the ruling‚ she called the decision “astounding” and reiterated that her husband is a political prisoner. She expressed regret that the court did not take into account claims in the Western press that the CIA had considered kidnapping or assassinating Assange during the presidency of Donald Trump. READ MORE: Assange in plea deal talks with US – WSJ The US alleges that Assange has committed crimes in aiding and abetting whistleblower Chelsea Manning‚ who leaked classified US files to WikiLeaks in 2010. Officials claimed that the pro-transparency NGO endangered unspecified US assets through its publications. That narrative‚ however‚ was denied by a senior US counter-intelligence officer during Manning’s tribunal in 2013. Investigative Journalist Reports Live From Palestinian Genocide In Gaza

Man made climate change is insignificant in the scheme of Earth's timescales. Scholars have decided against updating our planet’s historical timeline — reasoning that the impact of human activity on Earth is insignificant compared to its 4.6 billion-year history. The International Union of Geological Sciences has rejected the disputed designation of the current epoch of Earth’s history as the Anthropocene or human age. The decision was made by a vote by the global geology body’s committee of some twenty-four academics in February. That settled the 15-year-old dispute concerning whether human activity since the 1950s have changed Earth’s climate and other systems enough to warrant declaring a new era in its geological evolution. But the committee’s chair Dr. Jan A. Zalasiewicz and vice-chair Dr. Martin J. Head demanded the vote be invalidated‚ claiming that not all evidence had been assessed.Survival Shield X-3 is BACK at the Infowars Store! Get 40% OFF on the next evolution in activated nascent iodine HERE They also alleged that that some members of the committee where ineligible to vote as they had passed their term limits. However‚ the union’s executive committee confirmed the vote in a statement released on Wednesday. The decision means the current epoch remains the Holocene‚ which began around 11‚700 years ago. “The scientific decision is clear‚ and the specialists do not see any value in adding a new epoch in the geological record‚” John Ludden‚ International Union of Geological Sciences president‚ told the New York Times. The Holocene era marks a period of swift expansion‚ development‚ and influence of humanity across the globe. It encompasses the entirety of human history‚ from the time of written records to technological advancements‚ the rise of civilizations‚ and the widespread shift towards urbanisation that we see today. Dr. Head lamented the missed opportunity to formally acknowledge human impact on the planet since the mid-20th century — a concept central to the theory of of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) or man-made climate change. But he said the proposed Anthropocene designation would continue to be used in scientific and social circles to describe humanity’s impact on Earth. The Anthropocene era is a suggested geological epoch that dates from the start of human impact on Earth’s landscape‚ water bodies and ecosystems. The rejection of the Anthropocene for now reflects the caution of many geologists over the proposed age’s infancy when compared to the planet’s 4.6 billion-year age. The results are “a sign that the system is not equipped to deal with looking at the present‚ nor with the rate of change currently occurring on our planet‚” remarked Dr. Brad E. Rosenheim‚ chair of the Geological Society of America’s Geochronology Division##. Investigative Journalist Reports Live From Palestinian Genocide In Gaza

Biden’s recent change of attitude toward Israel is too little‚ too late. State Department insiders have long been frustrated with President Joe Biden’s support for Israel and its actions in Gaza following the Hamas massacre last October‚ and although the commander-in-chief has recently started to be more critical of Israel‚ a new report shows that Biden has known for a long time that they were bombing indiscriminately in Gaza. According to a report from the Washington Post‚ the White House has known since the end of October that Israel was regularly conducting bombing campaigns against civilian targets in Gaza‚ even as he publicly and quite steadfastly defended the Jewish state’s military actions. Multiple sources confirmed to the outlet that top foreign policy officials told the White House that “Israel was regularly bombing buildings without solid intelligence that they were legitimate military targets” in an Oct. 27 meeting. The day of the meeting‚ White House National Security Council Spokesman John Kirby said the United States was not going to draw any “red lines” on Israel’s military response. Just two weeks earlier‚ Biden had visited Israel and said that they would not be alone “as long as the United States stands”. In the meeting‚ officials also cautioned that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not have a clear plan for eradicating Hamas. One source told the Washington Post that they couldn’t see how the Israelis would be able to pull off what they said they planned to do.Introducing Next Level Foundational Energy from Dr. Jones Naturals starting at 30% off! This cutting-edge dietary supplement is designed to elevate your energy levels and support your overall well-being. Now that this meeting has come to light‚ it is even more difficult to understand why Biden was so eager to offer his unwavering support for Israel for so long. He has defended Israel at every opportunity‚ even as Netanyahu went against America’s wishes on issues ranging from letting aid into Gaza for civilians to accepting the possibility of a Palestinian state in the future. (Related: Netanyahu REJECTS call for creation of a Palestinian state‚ says Israel must control EVERYTHING “from the river to the sea.”) When Israel repeatedly bombed a Gaza refugee camp in November‚ the president did not criticize them‚ and their decision to bomb the biggest hospital in Gaza‚ Al Shifa‚ received public backing from the White House. At the time‚ Kirby told reporters: “We have information that confirms that Hamas is using that particular hospital for a command-and-control mode. That is a war crime.” The IDF raided Al Shifa a few hours later‚ causing the hospital’s operations to collapse and leading to the death of more than 40 patients‚ including four premature babies. This drew condemnation from numerous human rights groups and the World Health Organization. On Jan. 14‚ Biden made himself look even worse by issuing a statement expressing his sorrow and sympathy on the 100th day of captivity for the remaining Israeli hostages in Gaza while failing to mention the Palestinian death toll‚ which was upwards of 20‚000 at the time. Biden’s recent change of attitude toward Israel is too little‚ too late It is only recently that Biden has started to backtrack to some degree. One recent issue that is a big sticking point is Netanyahu’s declaration that Israel is planning to invade the city of Rafah in southern Gaza. With 1.5 million displaced Palestinians currently sheltering there‚ the stakes are extremely high. On Monday‚ March 18‚ Biden told Netanyahu over the phone that surging into Rafah would be a big mistake‚ while National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters that Biden insisted that Israel send a team to Washington for consultations on more acceptable strategies. The Washington Post reported that many Biden allies have privately admitted the president’s stance on Israel has caused considerable harm to his reputation on a national and international scale and may prove to be one of the biggest foreign policy mistakes of his presidency. Investigative Journalist Reports Live From Palestinian Genocide In Gaza

Legislation has its true sites on the tip of the spear in the fight against the New World Order. Conservative lawmakers are utterly embarrassing themselves by trying to ban TikTok while also claiming to support free speech and the First Amendment. Republicans’ goal is to simply put a stop to TikTok‚ and no other social media platform‚ because the social media app is Chinese (fact check: TikTok’s CEO is Shou Zi Chew‚ a Singaporean). However‚ it is not that simple‚ and the right is learning this in real-time while also making a complete fool of itself. Legislation called the RESTRICT Act‚ short for the “Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act” – yikes that’s a mouthful – would allow the Secretary of Commerce to blacklist any tech product‚ service‚ or company linked to a “national adversary‚” in this case China‚ as decided by the secretary. So‚ what exactly is a “foreign threat?” That is a good question. And how would the secretary mitigate it in the context of a platform like TikTok? That is another good question. The answer to both of these questions is the same: whatever the Secretary of Commerce arbitrarily decides. The RESTRICT act‚ which is ostensibly being put in place to ban TikTok‚ is actually a Trojan horse for full government surveillance—and a total end to your right to privacy. pic.twitter.com/07wogYzQ1HIntroducing Next Level Foundational Energy from Dr. Jones Naturals starting at 30% off! This cutting-edge dietary supplement is designed to elevate your energy levels and support your overall well-being.— Catch Up (@CatchUpFeed) March 28‚ 2023 RESTRICT Act‚ the PATRIOT Act for the internet The obvious problem with the RESTRICT Act is its subjectively broad-reaching definitions for things like “foreign threat” and “mitigation.” Just about anything could‚ in some stretch of the imagination‚ be dubbed a foreign threat and targeted as such for elimination. This means that not just TikTok but all sorts of other platforms‚ including Infowars and Brighteon‚ could find themselves being targeted for elimination based on the “foreign threat” concept. As Greg Price explained on X‚ the RESTRICT Act is basically just the PATRIOT Act‚ for those who lived through 9/11‚ but for the internet. “It gives the government the ability to go after anyone they deem as a national security risk at which point they can access everything from their computer to video games to their Ring light‚” Price warns. “Believe it or not‚ it gets even worse: If you [sic] find you in violation‚ they can put you in jail for 20 years‚ fine you $1M‚ and seize your property … They can also deem any foreign government an adversary without informing congress [sic] and everything they do is not subjected to FOIA.” In other words‚ Republicans in Congress are trying to pass what amounts to a Stasi Act right here in the United States because they simply cannot stand the fact that TikTok is allowed to exist and be used in this country. What is worse‚ the Biden regime is in full agreement with the proposition of a RESTRICT Act‚ stating that it is “very in favor” of its passage. This just goes to show that right and left are just two wings on the same bird. “Republicans‚ mindlessly seeking a big win against China and tech‚ now that both are popular punching bags‚ nearly sleepwalked into passing a disastrous law‚” warns Revolver. “The RESTRICT Act is a classic D.C. ploy. Savvy operators‚ exploiting the right’s well-intentioned desire to combat China‚ offered them a temporary victory to lure them into a permanent long-term calamity.” Neither side of the political aisle can be trusted anymore to protect our free speech rights. Find out more at FirstAmendment.news. Investigative Journalist Reports Live From Palestinian Genocide In Gaza

This is the second such case in Baden-Württemberg. A doctor in the German state of Baden-Württemberg refuses to treat one of his patients because he is a local politician in the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.  The doctor’s decision was reportedly sparked when he saw a photo in the local newspaper of the politician‚ Heiko Nüßner‚ at an event for his party’s city association in Lahr. Based on this photo‚ the doctor told him to find a new practice due to their “clearly different political views.”  Nüßner‚ who previously served as a Christian Democrat (CDU) politician for 26 years‚ told Bild newspaper that he was “very surprised by this reaction‚ as he had never spoken to the doctor about his politics. He described the interaction with the general practitioner as “very undemocratic.” The AfD politician said‚ “I was disappointed with the CDU because of its euro and migration policy as well as its exit from nuclear energy. For me‚ the AfD is the ‘new CDU’ and by no means right-wing extremist.” The AfD politician suffered an accident three years ago that he left him confined to a wheelchair. When he asked the doctor for a prescription at the beginning of March‚ he was denied treatment. Nüßner shared a copy of the email exchange shared between him and the doctor‚ whose name was not disclosed by Nüßner or Bild.Survival Shield X-3 is BACK at the Infowars Store! Get 40% OFF on the next evolution in activated nascent iodine HERE The doctor has responded to Bild‚ saying that the photo of the politician was only the “icing on the cake.” “I had already found the patient very unpleasant beforehand‚ with his demanding and pushy nature‚” he said. According to medical ethicists‚ denying treatment based on “unpleasant” attitudes or because you do not agree with the politics of your patient does not meet medical standards. However‚ for patients who represent a threat or a major disturbance to a medical practice‚ doctors are permitted to deny care‚ but only if there is no immediate medical threat.  The doctor claimed however that the medication requested by Nüßner was “not vital.”  According to the Bild interview with the doctor‚ he did want to support any “undemocratic tendencies‚” as the AfD is being monitored for extremism by the Office of the Protection of the Constitution (BfV)‚ a powerful domestic spy agency.  He said if the AfD politician needed acute care‚ he would treat him and anyone else “regardless of their ideology.” In 2021‚ AfD candidate Andrea Zürcher also had her general practicioner cancel her care‚ also in the state of Baden-Württemberg. In Zürcher’s case‚ the doctor also learned about her political activity from a photo in a local newspaper.  “He said that the relationship of trust had been destroyed as a result and that he could no longer give 100 percent in my treatment‚” the woman said‚ who suffer from a chronic illness. A third of Germans say they would consider voting for the Alternative for Germany‚ and a majority of Germans — at least in some polls — say they could support a government coalition that includes the AfD. However‚ there is still a sizeable share of the population adamantly opposed to the party. In the case of doctors‚ refusal of treatment is considered a serious ethical quandary. Such cases may increase political polarization in Germany. Investigative Journalist Reports Live From Palestinian Genocide In Gaza

SWIFT planning launch of new central bank digital currency platform in 12-24 months

by Tom Renz‚ Tom Renz Substack: As of March 21‚ 2024‚ the NIH National Human Genome Research Institute lists the definition of gene therapy as a ‘technique that uses a gene(s) to treat‚ prevent or cure a disease or medical disorder’. The FDA has a similar definition and currently lists gene therapy as a ‘technique that modifies a person’s […]

by Sean Adl-Tabatabai‚ The Peoples Voice: Toddlers and young children are at risk of suffering from deadly seizures shortly after COVID-19 vaccination‚ according to an urgent warning issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The occurrence of febrile seizures was 2.5 times higher among children within 24 hours of receiving a Moderna shot […]