How the CIA used a former Spanish soldier to keep tabs on Julian Assange
Analysis Summary
This article highlights how Julian Assange was allegedly spied on by a private security firm, UC Global, working with the CIA, while he was in the Ecuadorian embassy. It argues that this surveillance intruded on his legal defense and violated established norms, painting him as a target of state overreach. The article uses strong, emotional language and focuses on the alleged surveillance to generate outrage and sympathy for Assange, while not detailing the content of the WikiLeaks documents that led to his legal issues.
FATE Analysis
Four dimensions of psychological manipulation: how content captures Focus, exploits Authority, triggers Tribal identity, and engineers Emotion.
Focus signals
"Morales, the main figure involved in this affair, has just died from an undisclosed illness, according to a statement posted on LinkedIn by his company, UC Global S.L."
The article uses the recent death of a key figure as a hook to re-engage reader interest in a previously reported story, manufacturing a new urgency around the narrative.
"David Morales, a former Spanish soldier who owned a small security company in Jerez de la Frontera, in southern Spain, didn’t hesitate when he sent this email to his employees on March 21, 2017: “I’ve been asked to conduct a study on the embassy staff, assistants, or guest team, and frequent visitors of the guest. We’ve been informed that the guest is suspected of working for the Russian intelligence services. We’ve been asked to determine if we can place one or more microphones in the guest’s bedroom. They will be concealed and recording in real time… This microphone must have FTP transmission capability with an output to a secure server.”"
Starting with a detailed, damning email quote immediately captures attention by presenting seemingly undeniable evidence of espionage, setting a dramatic tone from the outset.
Authority signals
"Dozens of intercepted emails from Morales and his employees demonstrate the espionage to which the Australian activist and his lawyers were subjected while they were preparing his defense against the U.S. justice system, which was seeking a 175-year prison sentence against him for revealing classified material about secret military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq."
Leverages the institutional weight of the 'US justice system' and the severity of the '175-year prison sentence' to underscore the gravity of the situation and the perceived threat Assange faced, framing the espionage as a response to this significant legal pressure.
"The author of the message was a former member of the Spanish Navy’s Special Operations Unit whose company was in charge of security at the Ecuadorian embassy in the English capital."
Highlights the military background and previous role of Morales to establish him as a credible, capable, and therefore more dangerous operative, lending weight to the claims of his involvement in espionage.
"the man whom FBI Director James B. Comey had publicly identified weeks earlier as a major focus of his attention;"
Uses the authority of the FBI Director to establish Julian Assange as a significant target for US intelligence, framing the subsequent surveillance as a direct consequence of this high-level attention.
"Then-CIA Director William J. Burns invoked the National Security Act of 1947 and the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 to withhold information about this covert operation with Spanish assistance. Burns stated that revealing it “could reasonably cause serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States.” The judge granted his request and dismissed the civil lawsuit filed by four Americans who visited Assange and whose phones were allegedly hacked. “There is a reasonable danger that disclosure of the specific facts in dispute would endanger national security,” the court concluded. The discovery request (for the declassification of the CIA operation) was rejected. The CIA requested that the privileges of state secrecy be extended to Morales and his company."
The invocation of federal acts by the CIA Director and the judge's subsequent ruling create a strong sense of unchallengeable government authority and secrecy, implying the immense power and reach of the agencies involved.
Tribe signals
"I’ve gone over to the dark side” and “we’re going to play in the big leagues now,” the euphoric director of UC Global S.L. confessed to his employees upon returning from that trip. “You shouldn’t pass information to the other side,” one of his IT specialists reproached him."
This quote explicitly establishes an 'us vs. them' dynamic, with Morales defining his new allegiance as the 'dark side' or 'big leagues' and an employee identifying a 'the other side,' implying a clear division and conflict of loyalty.
"Morales confessed to his men that “the American friends” had laser microphones outside and were able to pick up sound through vibrations."
This quote creates an 'us vs. them' dynamic by portraying the 'American friends' as a shadowy, technologically advanced, and powerful external entity engaged in covert surveillance against Assange and his allies within the embassy.
"The 'American client' was in charge. In the months leading up to the camera upgrade, everything revolved around the mysterious U.S. client. “They’re monitoring us, they’re our friends in the USA”; “Problems with the damn mail: the U.S. guys aren’t getting the emails”; “Don’t delay… I have the client waiting”; “What can we do if a U.S. agency wants to see us?” he wrote in his emails. Witness 2 states that Morales requested a laptop that was off the company server “to speak directly with the Americans.” And on this laptop, he created a folder called “CIA” in which he filed instructions in English for accessing the embassy’s cameras."
Repeatedly references the 'American client' and 'U.S. guys' as a distinct, powerful, and demanding entity, implicitly creating an 'us' (Morales's team and perhaps the reader) who are subject to the will and demands of a powerful 'them' (the US agencies).
Emotion signals
"They stole a diaper from a baby who was being carried by a friend of Assange’s to investigate whether it was the couple’s child, and produced a graphological report on the activist. And they also planned to rob her. The proof is in another email from the former soldier: “Regarding Stella, I would suggest following her on the street to locate her address and try to see if we can find any more names in her mailbox or mail from her house, or even snatch her purse on the street.”"
The acts described — stealing a baby's diaper, planning to rob a lawyer — are designed to evoke strong disgust and outrage by depicting extremely invasive and morally reprehensible behavior, especially when linked to children.
"Entry into the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to visit Assange was like stepping into an elephant trap the moment you poked your nose through security. The owner of UC Global S.L. imposed a protocol that forced visitors to hand over their mobile devices and passports. No one imagined that the IMEI and SIM codes of their cell phones were being photographed, along with visas to countries of interest to the “American client,” especially Russia and the U.S., and that the codes from cryptophones — the encrypted devices used by WikiLeaks members — were being copied. A report on the visitor’s profile was compiled after each meeting."
The description of the embassy as an 'elephant trap' and the systematic, covert collection of sensitive personal data from visitors, including passports and phone codes, is framed to generate a sense of violation, paranoia, and outrage at the extent of the surveillance.
"The plan that would have spared the WikiLeaks founder seven more years of confinement and imprisonment had failed."
This statement uses the language of 'confinement' and 'imprisonment' to evoke a sense of fear regarding Assange's fate, portraying the failure of the escape plan as a tragic outcome directly engineered by the surveillance.
"Four masked men assaulted him as he and lawyer Aitor Martínez were returning from visiting Assange and finalizing the “guest’s” departure. They were looking for the server and the diplomatic safe-conduct pass that the Australian had just received."
Describes a violent physical assault by 'masked men' targeting lawyers, explicitly linking it to the surveillance operation, which is intended to provoke anger and fear, highlighting the extreme measures taken.
Narrative Analysis (PCP)
How the article reshapes thinking: Perception (what beliefs are targeted), Context (what information is shifted or omitted), and Permission (what behavior is being encouraged).
The article aims to instill the belief that Julian Assange was subjected to illegal, extensive, and orchestrated espionage by a private security firm in coordination with US intelligence services, specifically the CIA. It wants the reader to believe that this operation was highly intrusive, involved unethical tactics, and ultimately contributed to Assange's prolonged confinement and arrest. It targets the belief that state actors, particularly the US, respect due process and international law in sensitive cases, suggesting a willingness to operate outside these norms when national security interests are perceived to be at stake. It also implicitly targets the reader's belief in the sanctity of legal defense and lawyer-client privilege, showing them to be violated.
The article shifts the context from Assange being a fugitive seeking asylum in an embassy to being the victim of an aggressive, multifaceted intelligence operation. By detailing the extreme measures taken (eavesdropping in restrooms, robbery plans, tracking lawyers), it frames the US and its allies' pursuit of Assange as a disproportionate and possibly illegal act of state power, rather than a legitimate legal process for publishing classified information. The shift makes the actions of Morales and the 'American client' appear as a gross overreach.
The article largely omits the specific content and impact of the classified documents released by WikiLeaks that led to the US charges against Assange. While it mentions 'revealing classified material about secret military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq,' it doesn't elaborate on the US government's specific claims of harm caused by these revelations. This omission helps focus the narrative on the alleged illegal surveillance against Assange, rather than potentially balancing it with the perceived national security threats that may have motivated the US actions.
The article nudges the reader to feel outrage and sympathy for Julian Assange, viewing him as a target of state overreach and illegal surveillance. It encourages a critical stance towards the methods employed by intelligence agencies and a skepticism towards state narratives regarding national security. Emotionally, it aims to foster empathy for Assange's predicament and potentially solidify the belief that powerful governments operate with impunity outside legal and ethical boundaries, particularly when pursuing individuals like Assange.
SMRP Pattern
Four manipulation maintenance tactics: Socializing the idea as normal, Minimizing concerns, Rationalizing with logic, and Projecting blame.
Red Flags
High-severity indicators: silencing dissent, coordinated messaging, or weaponizing identity to shut down debate.
"Then-CIA Director William J. Burns invoked the National Security Act of 1947 and the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 to withhold information about this covert operation... Burns stated that revealing it 'could reasonably cause serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States.' The judge granted his request and dismissed the civil lawsuit..."
Techniques Found(13)
Specific propaganda techniques identified using the SemEval-2023 academic taxonomy of 23 techniques across 6 categories.
"the man whom FBI Director James B. Comey had publicly identified weeks earlier as a major focus of his attention"
Describing Assange as a 'major focus of Comey's attention' uses emotionally charged language to suggest he is a significant threat, framing the subsequent surveillance as justified without explicitly stating it.
"sought a 175-year prison sentence against him for revealing classified material about secret military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq."
Highlighting the '175-year prison sentence' exaggerates the immediate and typical outcome of such charges, emphasizing the severity to provoke a strong emotional response about the perceived injustice or extreme threat Assange faced, rather than focusing on the legal basis.
"died from an undisclosed illness"
The term 'undisclosed illness' is intentionally vague, obscuring the specific cause of death and potentially leading readers to speculate or doubt the official narrative, especially given the context of his high-stakes legal situation.
"a generous donor to the Republican Party and a friend of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump."
Describing Sheldon Adelson in relationship to his political donations and friendship with Donald Trump uses loaded language, subtly linking him to a specific political ideology and potentially influencing the reader's perception of his involvement in the events.
"The Australian activist had become a top priority target for U.S. intelligence."
The phrase 'top priority target' is emotionally charged and suggests an extreme level of threat or importance ascribed to Assange, aiming to influence the reader's perception of why such intense surveillance was undertaken.
"“I’ve gone over to the dark side” and “we’re going to play in the big leagues now,”"
These quotes, attributed to Morales, exaggerate the perceived significance and moral implications of his new venture, portraying it in a dramatic, almost cinematic light rather than a straightforward business transaction.
"an enigmatic “American client”"
The repeated use of 'enigmatic “American client”' is vague and obscures the specific identity of the client. This vagueness leads to speculation and implies a mysterious, potentially nefarious force behind the actions, rather than clear identification.
"The payment would be made through contracts."
This statement is vague about the specific nature of the 'contracts,' making the payment method seem indirect and possibly designed to hide the true nature of the transaction between Morales and his 'American friends.'
"“American friends, in this case with the CIA,”"
The phrase 'American friends, in this case with the CIA' is a euphemism that softens the official nature of the relationship, making it sound more informal or allegiant than a direct intelligence operation, thus obfuscating the true institutional actors.
"Entering the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to visit Assange was like stepping into an elephant trap the moment you poked your nose through security."
The metaphor 'elephant trap' is loaded language, creating a vivid, negative image of deception and entrapment for anyone visiting the embassy, emphasizing the dangerous and covert nature of the surveillance.
"“Paisa,” a name he typed many times on his personal computer."
The use of the name 'Paisa' is vague, obscuring the identity of the individual and contributing to the mysterious nature of Morales's contacts, which can fuel speculation about their role and intentions.
"“X (the American client)”"
Using 'X' to refer to the American client is intentionally vague, masking the identity of the entity and contributing to the narrative of a secretive and powerful external force.
"“could reasonably cause serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States.”"
The phrase 'serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave damage to the national security' is vague and hyperbolic, used to justify withholding information without providing specific details. This level of vagueness prevents informed public scrutiny while implying dire consequences.