A Swedish Court Injects Some Sense 445


When, eight years late, the European Arrest Warrant request for Assange was finally put before a Swedish court, the court refused to issue it.

Readers of this blog are amongst the very few people who have had the chance to learn the information that the original European Arrest Warrant for Julian Assange from Sweden was not issued by any court but by a prosecutor; that this was upheld in the UK Supreme Court despite the Court’s open acknowledgement that this was not what the UK Parliament had intended by the phrase that the warrant must come from a “judicial authority”; and that the law had been changed immediately thereafter so it could not be done again.

Consequently in seeking a new European Arrest Warrant against Assange, Swedish prosecutors had finally, eight years on, to ask a court for the warrant. And the court looked at the case and declined, saying that the move would be disproportionate. It therefore remains the case that there is no Swedish extradition warrant for Assange. This is a desperate disappointment to the false left in the UK, the Blairites and their ilk, who desperately want Assange to be a rapist in order to avoid the moral decision about prosecuting him for publishing truths about the neo-con illegal wars which they support.

The problem is that the evidence of sexual crimes was always extremely, extremely weak to anybody who took the trouble to examine it – which is why the same false left were desperate to convince us that it was wrong to examine the evidence as the “victim” must always be believed, a strange abandonment of the entire principle of justice.

In the lesser charge which fell through the statute of limitations, Anna Ardin claimed that during the act of sex Julian Assange had deliberately torn the condom with his fingers. But the torn condom she produced to police had none of Assange’s DNA on it, a physical impossibility.

In the remaining charge of “rape, less serious”, Sofie Wilen alleges the following. She had consensual sex with Assange in her bed. She then dozed and was “half asleep” when Assange started having sex with her again. He states that she was fully awake and responsive through a series of sexual acts.

I have looked Julian Assange in the eye when he explained what happened, and believed him. I have not had the same opportunity with Sofie Wilen, and quite possibly she is equally honest in her account of events and I would believe her too. They had both been drinking. The difficulty is that this scenario is incapable of proof. A private sexual act that everybody agrees started and was consummated as fully consensual, but then continues or resumes as one partner is drifting off or has drifted off, but the other partner says they were still awake, absent a recording is quite simply incapable of proof either way.

What is beyond doubt true is that Sofie Wilen had no thought she had been raped when she met police to ask if Assange could be compelled to take an HIV test – a visit to the police which had been encouraged by Anna Ardin (she of the faked condom evidence). Ardin was present during Wilen’s police interview.

At the police station on 20 August, Wilen texted a friend at 14.25 “did not want to put any charges against JA but the police wanted to get a grip on him.”

At 17.26 she texted that she was “shocked when they arrested JA because I only wanted him to take a test”.

The next evening at 22.22 she texted “it was the police who fabricated the charges”.

Despite this, Ms Wilen’s lawyer is adamant that she now does wish a prosecution to proceed. The problem is that question of proof. As the court has seen, there is none.

Julian Assange was interviewed in detail in Sweden before he was given permission to leave Sweden when the case was dropped by the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm. When it was reopened by another prosecutor (possible in Sweden), who issued the European Arrest Warrant, Assange at all times during his detention in the UK declared his willingness to be interviewed again, and eventually was interviewed over two days in the Ecuadorean Embassy in November 2016.

Julian Assange has never tried to avoid the investigation in Sweden. His concern was always that the whole thing was cooked up as a ruse to get him into custody for extradition to the USA. Events have proved this to be true.

To return to Sweden, the remaining question at issue is a very simple one. Was Sofie Wilen awake and responsive when sex was resumed, as Julian Assange insists, or was she “half-asleep” as Sofie says? Exhaustive questioning both in Stockholm and London has failed to produce an answer which could convince a court to issue a warrant. Prosecutor Eva-Marie Persson is now going to apply to interview Assange again. I genuinely cannot see what she feels this is going to achieve, unless she hopes to harass an ill man into a false confession.

The Swedish courts have finally injected a note of realism. The evidence Assange broke any law in Sweden has never stacked up. At some point, this poisonous farrago of prosecutorial grandstanding and Swedish sexual politics needs to be brought to a close.


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on July 3, 2019.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

445 thoughts on “A Swedish Court Injects Some Sense

1 2 3
  • giyane

    A weird thing happened yesterday which is very relevant to much of the vilification of Corbyn and Assange. I had just got back at midnight from a long car journey which took in Exeter and Bath. As I unloaded my car in a back street in Birmingham a police car stopped and looked at me, which never ever happens,then he drove round the corner and nodded to the local Asian spy in my street who was sitting in his car , and the drove off.

    Do the people who are now tormenting Assange ever wonder why people dedicate their lives to exposing the crimes of the ruling class? Does it ever occur to themthat their harrassment of their critics might have started their critics on their life journey of journalism and whistleblowing?

    Donald Trump used a once in a lifetime UK press conference to publicly slag off Jeremy Corbyn . Is the Potus really so narcissistic and emotionally insecure that he doesn’t understand why Jeremy Corbyn is decrying his racist, sexist and xenophobic U.S. platform?

    Last night I made a mental note to push back against these bullies. Which I have now delivered.

      • giyane

        N_

        This is not the stone age .
        No signs of the boulder in front of my entrance having been moved.

        The only thing I did wrong was when I brought my bommyknocker crashing down on my victim’s head – as you do when you want a quick shag – was say ‘ please’.

        Oh she says ‘ you must be one of those homo sappy chappies. If you were a proper man you’d bommyknock first and ask questions later.’ The druids nearly buried me alive in a reed bog .

        N_,I made the mistake of belonging to a religion called Islam, at time when it dead considered normal to get your neck chewed off by a pit bull dog.

    • Jo Dominich

      Giyane, I blog on a lot of sites and am a severe critic of the Israeli Government’s subjugation, cruel, inhumane and barbaric, yes, barbaric treatment of the Palestinians. In the past 8 weeks it is noticeable that strange things are happening on my computer i.e it often has a lot of difficulty in restarting, it closes itself half way through a blog I am writing, tripping out of sites like these whilst I am blogging and so on and so forth. Of course, in the world of computers there might well be rational explanations for all of this but I do find it rather alarming. I, like you, however, will push back even harder at the establishment and in particular, this current, extremely corrupt, dishonest, ignorant, incompetent Tory Government who really are abusing power in the true sense of the word backed and supported by their very own propaganda machine, the MSM. I know one thing, that had a Labour Government presided even over 1% of what this Government has done and its corruption, the MSM would have crucified them.

  • mark golding

    Julian Assange – Jacob Applebaum – Trevor Fitzgibbon

    These three men relentlessly championed WikiLeaks.

    These three men built the original campaign to save Chelsea Manning.

    These three men helped to save Edward Snowden.

    These three men all had their public reputations destroyed.

    Victims Of Their Success

    You don’t have to look hard on social media or the web to see how often Julian Assange is described as a serial rapist.

    Nor to discover that Jacob Appelbaum is described as a serial rapist too.

    And Trevor Fitzgibbon? Yup, also called a serial rapist.

    • joel

      It’s something Craig has been pointing out for a good while now: sexual allegations are the spooks’ settled means of obliterating liberal support for dissidents and whistleblowers. Allegations being all that’s required in the #MeToo era.

  • Stonky

    WMDs in Iraq have nothing to do with the allegations that he raped someone… Moreover, if he’s innocent then I’m sure he has nothing to worry about…

    You’re absolutely spot on Hatuey. Ched Evans spent two and a half years in jail for a rape he didn’t commit with absolutely nothing to worry about, because he was innocent.

    If someone in Sweden accused me of rape, I would be over there on the first flight to prove I was innocent….

    Then you’re a fool. Because you cannot “prove you’re innocent” either legally, or logically, or philosophically. All you can do is stand up in court and tell your version of events, and then lay yourself at the mercy of the court or the jury and hope that your version is believed rather than the versions of your accusers. And it doesn’t matter how innocent you are, if either of the following two conditions apply, then you’re going down:
    1. the authorities have your card marked
    2. you find yourself up in front of a jury of virtue-signalling Guardian readers, just itching to burnish their right-on credentials by sending some guy to jail for rape in order to punish him for being a white British footballer from a working-class background.

      • Hatuey

        It wasn’t well said. He’s selectively quoting. The basis of the accusations made against Assange in Sweden seem quite flimsy. Unless there’s more to them than we know, he could clear that up once and for all in a few weeks.

        I’m not ready to dismiss Sweden as another corrupt puppet of the US just yet. We have enough enemies. He will be treated fairly in Sweden, a country famed for its liberal and progressive culture.

        It puzzles me that this issue has been allowed by assange to hang over him for so long.

        • Tony

          Then you haven’t followed this story properly Hatuey. Assange always stated that he was prepared to return to Sweden to deal with this, so long as he was given assurances that he wouldn’t be extradited on to the USA.

          • Hatuey

            It’s clear that many on here agree with you on that, they’ve told me 100 times that he said he was prepared to go to Sweden and many other things too, so, maybe it’s about time that you or someone else explained the alternative.

            If the alternative involves hiding in an embassy and watching his health deteriorate, with this hanging over him forever, I’m not impressed.

          • pretzelattack

            hatuey, it’s been explained to you 100 times that the original prosecutor dropped the case, and that assange was in sweden and offered to be questioned before she did so. you always manage to leave that out in what seem like your hundreds of posts on the subject. it’s almost like it’s inconvenient to the narrative you’re pushing.

    • Jo1

      “….virtue-signalling Guardian readers, just itching to burnish their right-on credentials by sending some guy to jail for rape…..”

      You omitted the rabidly feminist Guardian columnists plus certain female MPs for whom the truth is irrelevant.

          • vin_ot

            Did you read the blog above? It shows that in Anna Ardin’s case the allegations lack substance while in Sophe Wilen’s case they were fabricated by the police. If you have any counterevidence I suggest you spell it out.

          • Ian

            I was referring to the link to the Ched Evans case which was attempted to be put in the same category of conspiracy theory, but has since been, rightly, deleted.

          • vin_ot

            My mistake, sorry. Yes I know the details of the Evans case, very unsavoury indeed.

          • Stonky

            I was referring to the link to the Ched Evans case which was attempted to be put in the same category of conspiracy theory, but has since been, rightly, deleted…

            It hasn’t been deleted, and neither should it be, however much that might annoy the professional offendees of political correctitude. It shouldn’t be deleted because it is specifically relevant to the Assange case in general, and to Hatuey’s comments in particular, in three salient aspects:

            1. Concerning both the Ched Evans ‘victim’ and Sophie Wilen, it was the police who concocted the rape accusation, not the alleged victim.
            2. Like Assange, Ched Evans cooperated fully with the police enquiry (even though there was no DNA evidence to link him to the ‘victim’). He gave a full and frank account of events and did not deny or attempt to deny anything that happened. He did this in the belief that he was innocent, and therefore had nothing to fear.
            3. He spent two and a half years in jail learning different. Should Assange ever go to trial in Sweden I suspect he will be lucky to get off so lightly.

          • Stonky

            Yes I know the details of the Evans case, very unsavoury indeed.

            vin_ot, I notice that both you and Ian are too delicate to document the ‘unsavoury’ aspects you refer to. I’m curious as to what these might be.

            Was it the combination of young people, drink and sex? Millions of young people are getting drunk and having sex every weekend. Not being a Victorian prude myself, I don’t find that ‘unsavoury’. Was it the fact of two men with a woman? Again, not being a Victorian prude myself, I don’t find that ‘unsavoury’. Was it the fact of somebody cheating on their partner? Well, welcome to the 21st century guys. More than half of the population have done that.

            Was it the fact that the woman in question regularly went out, got drunk, hooked up with a guy she didn’t know, had sex, and then woke up the next day unable to remember what happened? Well, being an actual feminist as opposed to a fake one, as far as I’m concerned it’s her body and her life, and if that’s what she wants to do I’ll no more judge her as ‘unsavoury’ than I would judge a man who does likewise.

            Was it the legal aspects of the case you found ‘unsavoury’? If so, then I fully agree with you. There were a couple of aspects of the first case that I find very unsavoury indeed.

            The first was the jury’s finding that the victim was sober enough and conscious enough while accused A was having sex with her to justify his belief that her earlier implied consent was still valid. Seconds later, she had lapsed into such a state of drunkenness and unconsciousness that Evans belief that he had her consent was not only wrong, it was totally unjustifiable and amounted to rape. That’s a pretty impressive piece of logical gymnastics.

            So is this: All the evidence that accused A gave up to the point where Evans arrived in the hotel room was 100% true. Even though none of it was corroborated, it was all true, so accused A was justified in believing that all along he had valid consent. All the evidence accused A gave from that point on was 100% lies. All the evidence he gave that the girl was still conscious and consenting while Evans had sex with her was lies, even though it was all corroborated by Evans.

            I find these two pieces of warped logic deeply unsavoury, but hey. They led to the desired result. Accused A is innocent – Huzzah! Evans is guilty – Huzzah!

            There is one further aspect of the case that is deeply unsavoury. A guy hooked up with a drunk girl he didn’t know in a kebab shop. He took the drunk girl he didn’t know back to a hotel. He texted to his mate “Hey. I’ve got a bird. You want some?” However much of a Victorian prude you might not be, that is pretty unsavoury. But Evans didn’t do any of that. It was accused A who did it.

            The Guardian published approx. 180 articles on the case (yes, you read that right – one hundred and eighty). All of their opprobrium was exclusively reserved for Ched Evans. They did not publish one single article addressing the behaviour of the other guy. The Guardian have two entirely different sets of standards they apply to the exploitation, abuse, grooming, threatening, physical assault, rape, impregnation, and forced abortion of girls. And these standards are applied entirely based on the skin colour of the perpetrators. They are a bunch of odious skanking rancid racist bigots.

            And that is the most ‘unsavoury’ aspect of the Ched Evans case.

    • Hatuey

      Stonky: “Ched Evans spent two and a half years in jail for a rape he didn’t commit with absolutely nothing to worry about, because he was innocent.”

      In the next paragraph: “you cannot “prove you’re innocent” either legally, or logically, or philosophically”

      Seems okay for some to describe some people as innocent but not others. Would you say that was hypocritical or just s big standard contradiction? I’m obviously not capable of calling it…

      It gets more like Animal Farm in here every day.

      • Tony

        There is no contradiction between the two statements from Stonky that you quote. The fact that they both contain the word “innocent” is irrelevant, because each statement makes a different point.

        • Hatuey

          Stonky described someone as innocent and then told me it was impossible to be innocent. He is using the word in the exact sense I used it in when I said Assange so go to Sweden and establish his innocence.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Hatuey June 8, 2019 at 21:20
            How is it you cannot seem to grasp the fact JA has no probs with going to Sweden to face a court, he won’t go because he is fully aware that the whole objective is to get him in the country, and then ship him off to the US.

          • Stonky

            “Stonky described someone as innocent and then told me it was impossible to be innocent…

            That’s just a silly lie Hatuey You know it, I know it, and everyone else following this thread knows it. I didn’t tell you “it was impossible to be innocent”. I told you it was impossible to prove yourself innocent. The two are completely different things.

            If you really can’t do a better job than that of presenting your argument, then give up and go home.

          • Hatuey

            Stonky, I’m afraid you described someone as innocent. I’ll paste the quote again below. You might think this tedious wordplay, I do too, but it’s the sort of tedious wordplay I’m the target of all the time and the only reason I mention it here is because you directed the tedious wordplay at me;

            Stonky: “Ched Evans spent two and a half years in jail for a rape he didn’t commit with absolutely nothing to worry about, because he was innocent.”

            I don’t see anything wrong with describing someone as innocent or the possibility of someone establishing their innocence. You raised petty semantic objections to that, god knows why, and then you contradicted yourself by telling us “he was innocent”.

          • pretzelattack

            but he didn’t tell you it was impossible to be innocent, which you again evade.

          • Hatuey

            More tedious wordplay, pretzel. One minute Assange doesn’t need to go to Sweden because he already offered to, next minute he can’t prove his innocence, and blah, blah, blah.

            Whatever is hanging over Assange in Sweden and whatever may or may not happen in Sweden, I believe Assange needs to address it. Contrary to the junk being posted on here, I believe he can establish his innocence.

            I’m aware of the philosophy of scepticism and other games that suggest you can’t prove anything as a matter of fact. It’s all crap. And I doubt if there are many in Sweden who read the Guardian or care about Ched Evans.

            As for the Swedish allegations being a ploy and the possibility of sending him to the US. I’m not avoiding that possibility. I’m against avoiding things.

  • nevermind

    O/t todays nrws is eager to defend and normalise Conservative Party candidates ‘past’ drug taking.

    They say that its good that they have been honest and have come out.
    The hypocrisy of it all when none of them want to talk of gradual discrimination, when two Tory Mp’s virtually run a cartel/monopoly and have cornered the global cannabis market, the production and sale abroad what they steadfastly outlaw in this.country.
    Time to come clean before the past.bites you in the bum…hahaha
    Alexander B. de Peffel Johnson has also admitted past cocaine use, but he did not use that fact to lie about his abilities.
    When he says.that ‘ he is the only guy who can put Farrage back into his box’, he was counting sheep, extolling wishful thinking. It is the issues that concerned voters in Peterborough, not blind civil obedience that is putting this sharlatan with a German passport into his box.

    Not one civil obedient servant journo has made this point, what a surprise.

  • Lorine Brice

    the Prosecutor needs to be re trained or do a refresher course in order to do her job properly. She has involved 3 people to extreme stress by being self absorbed in some political witch hunt. If I was this prosecutor I would take an extended leave and get to what the truth is and have the guts to say sorry I got it wrong.

  • Sharp Ears

    Something you would never see on the UK ‘news channels’ – a conversation between Nils Melzer and Chris Hedges.

    8 Jun 2019
    Chris Hedges discusses with UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer the conditions of Julian Assange’s detention, his psychological and physical health as well as the judicial proceedings against the WikiLeaks founder.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq_P9Nj6N58&feature=youtu.be 28mins plus over 200 supportive comments btl.

  • michael norton

    Julian Assange moved to hospital wing of Belmarsh prison after losing dangerous amount of weight.
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9253350/julian-assange-moved-to-hospital-wing-of-belmarsh-prison-after-losing-dangerous-amount-of-weight/
    By Michael Hamilton
    9 Jun 2019, 3:49Updated: 9 Jun 2019, 3:53
    “Assange is unwell generally but has recently been struggling to eat which has made it worse.

    “He looked near to collapse, gaunt and frail so they have got him in as a precaution.

    “He will be looked after in the healthcare wing and given supplements and plenty of liquid if he is struggling with food.

    “Some staff feared he was on hunger strike although that is not the case.

    “Some of his health problems seem to stem from being cooped up in the embassy for so long.

    It would be interesting to learn if Julian is still being held incommunicado?

  • Greg Park

    I see several commenters here still implying Trump is a covert admirer of Julian Assange’s work exposing US war crimes and elite corruption. Even some confident predictions of a presidential pardon were Assange to be convicted in the US.
    For some, Trump’s maverick campaign posturing of 2016 seems to have cemented an unbreakable impression of a valiant warrior against the US deep state. One that is resilient to all his actions since then: the handpicking of figures like Bolton, Pompeo, Haskell and Abrams for high office; the rattling of sabres of war at Iran and Venezuela; the stooping to new lows of ingratiation with Israel and Saudi; the displays of deep resentment at any suggestion the empire should be held to account for its crimes. (Just last month, for example, Trump personally pardoned a US soldier convicted of murdering an Iraqi detainee and tried to portray him as a victim. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/us/trump-pardon-michael-behenna.html .) Similarly ignored is the fact Assange himself has never shared the conviction he has a sympathetic ally in Donald Trump.
    It is now clear that the Trump loves Assange narrative will be nurtured in certain quarters to the very end.

    • Hatuey

      And here again, another variation of The US is Evil on a G-string.

      Nobody has gone so far as to suggest Trump might pardon Assange on here, to my knowledge. Assange hasn’t been charged and found guilty and so there’s nothing to pardon.

      We know that the complexion of the Whitehouse can make a difference in cases like this. John Kiriakou is living proof — he was acquitted of all charges when Bush was in the Whitehouse and Obama decided to re-open the case against him. Do your homework.

      In the US, first amendment issues and civil rights on freedom of speech, etc., are central to both the right and left of the political spectrum. That’s important. The left-right spectrum in the US is more circular then and there’s a sort of convergence on issues that are central to the Assange case and Assange’s defence.

      I wish I believed everything in the world could be so simply reduced to Trump is a crackpot and the US is evil. It’s just lazy self-aggrandising crap, though, and it’s boring. Most importantly, it achieves and serves nothing, outside of a few fleeting moments of someone feeling superior.

      • Greg Park

        You have been the main one on here suggesting Trump might pardon Assange were he convicted in the US. Btw, my comment did not say or imply Trump is a crackpot. Nor did it offer an opinion on the US per se, just the current president’s actions since he has been in office. But if you believe there is a bipartisan political environment in the US that is sympathetic to Juian Assange and Wikileaks I can only suggest more research and less bluffing and bloviating.

        • Hatuey

          Greg, if you find me ever using the word “pardon” on this website and can paste it, I will donate £1000 to a charity of your choice today. It should be easy for you to do that, based on what you are alleging here.

          I didn’t say that there was a bipartisan political environment in the US that is sympathetic to Assange. But I believe there could be on the basis that on the right and left of the US political spectrum there is strong allegiance to first amendment rights, freedom of speech, press freedoms, etc.

          I’ve never discussed what the prevailing view of Assange is in the US. I think it’s an interesting question.

      • Jo Dominich

        Hatuey, Trump is a dangerous megalomaniac who, if re-elected, will inevitably lead us into a hot war with China and Russia. The USA is a rogue state and yes, it is evil, it funds Israel to the tune of billions of dollars a year; it deliberately has walked away from the Iran Nuclear Treaty in order to start a war with Iran on the most flimsiest of excuses; it has committee serious, and I mean serious and gross war crimes against detainees, innocent civilians, Guantanamo Bay and so on and so forth. Its current aggressive and irrational foreign policy is in order solely to prevent the petro dollar going into steep decline which would then sound a very serious death knell to the USA economy. It has the harshest and most irrational criminal justice system in the world; it operates an Apartheid system of justice where, if you are black you suffer far greater sentences and death penalty sentences than if you are white. You only have to look at the fact their Police Force is out of control, killing I believe something in the region of 38-45 unarmed black civilians who were running away not towards the police. You only have to look at evidence such as that young black girl at school who was texting on her phone, when she failed to put it away, the teacher called the police who then promptly slammed her head into the desk and pushed her on to the floor I could go on and on and on with examples such as these. The way it treats its prisoners should be cause for very serious concern on the part of Amnesty International but the latter stand back and do nothing. Worst of all, the Police who murdered these unarmed individuals who posed no threat to them at all are reinstated into their jobs, never charged with a criminal offence and supported to the hilt. This is a country alongside the UK whose Armed Forces perpetrated such horrific degredation, psychological and physical torture and enslavement of its detainees in Abu Graid Camp that an International Tribunal were so repulsed by the photos and so traumatised by them said they should never be released to the public. The USA is not evil? My Goodness, think again, think again.

  • Hatuey

    And finally, here is the end of the Assange debate; John Kiriakou expounding a view almost identical to mine, that Assange can go to trial in the US and achieve a positive result https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_C92BT8Fzk

    Too many people on here jumped at the opportunity to tell us the US is evil. That isn’t a defence.

    There are facets of the case that have been neglected on here too, such was the rush to establish moral righteousness, and that’s a pity;

    1) extradition to the US became a certainty when Assange left the embassy.

    2) Trump has expressed positivity towards Wikileaks.

    3) no journalist/publisher has ever been charged in court by the US government.

    There’s work to be done here, positive and meaningful work, towards helping Assange. Attacking and hating the US on this occasion isn’t going to help and may even have negative consequences.

    If you want to help Assange in the US, get out there and argue that this is a civil rights and first amendment issue, that Assange is a journalist, Wikileaks a publisher, and that the US isn’t a communist state that locks up journalists and publishers.

    I’ve done my bit.

    • Goose

      Nobody here thinks the ‘US is evil’ afaik.

      At worst take, some think it’s got a corrupt greedy elite(as we have in the UK) and a corrupt political system where groups can “buy their own politicians” – Trump’s words to Jewish Republicans in 2016(as we have in the UK) and quite a few hyper-aggressive people who don’t give a flying fcuk for the sanctity of human life and who are willing to play fast and loose about getting caught. But that isn’t a criticism of the US per se. The US people are a great people. Polls in the US show dissatisfaction with the two-party system and continued military interventions, just like in the UK. If John Bolton presses for war against Iran I’d expect it to be a hugely unpopular move, as would be military intervention in Venezuela.

    • David

      I personally really like the USA and its people, find the trillion dollar MIC does distort reality quite a bit tho’

      here’s an Australian news view Hatuey that does echo your Kiriakou YTub,

      What we really don’t want in the world is reporters and publishers subject to criminal sanctions when they’re publishing the truth about what’s going on in the world.

      https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/north-america/you-don-t-stand-a-chance-how-the-press-freedom-argument-will-go-for-assange-20190607-p51vfi.html

      Virginia will screw him, as the jury are de-facto ‘nobbled’, but he’s threatening the $1000Billion budget for all stuff “.mil”

      at least Brisbane remembers Julian!

      • Hatuey

        That was an excellent article. Thanks for that. It suggests extradition from the U.K. is less likely that I assumed. I think his extradition from the U.K. would be straightforward but it’s likely he will be In Swedish hands first anyway and they will send him to the US.

  • Parenti

    That Kiriakou interview was 7th April 2019, before the USA unsealed its numerous indictments on 11th April. Indeed in it Kiriakou seemed to show some optimism in ‘public pressure’ influencing the legal proceedings in the USA to encourage jury nullification. That is the same man who said ‘Assange will never get a fair trial in the US’ in mid-November last year
    https://www.opednews.com/articles/Assange-Will-Never-Get-a-F-by-John-Kiriakou-Fair-Trial_Julian-Assange_Jury_Wikileaks-181118-390.html
    and in the video Kiriakou interview says ” Lenin Moreno is “supposed to be a communist.,a liberator”. – Really
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len%C3%ADn_Moreno#Internal_politics

    • Hatuey

      Everything he says is on the basis that Assange will end up in court in the US. Nothing that has happened since that interview would have changed his mind.

      The stuff he has said about a fair trial isn’t contradictory if you understand what Jury Nullification Defense means.

      • Rod

        Hatuey, without looking it up I don’t know exactly what a jury nullification means, I should educate myself further in due course.

        The Off-Guardian are running a piece regarding Julian Assange dated June 9th under the heading : The Force that is Ending Freedom by Eric Zuesse and in that piece he quotes from washingtonsblog on April 14th, 2019 ‘4 Myths About Julian Assange DEBUNKED’ with Myth no 2 – Assange Will Get a Fair Trial in the US.

        It quotes 14-year CIA officer John Kiriakou notes ‘Assange has been charged in the Eastern District of Virginia – the so-called “Espionage Court”. That is just what many of us have feared. Remember, no national security defendant has ever been found not guilty in the Eastern District of Virginia. The Eastern District is also known as the “rocket docket” for the swiftness with which cases are heard and decided. Not ready to mount a defence ? Need more time ? Haven’t received all of your discovery ? Tough luck. See you in Court.

        … I have long predicted that Assange would face Judge Leonie Brinkma were he to be charged in the Eastern District. Brinkma handled my case, as well as CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling’s. She also has reserved the Ed Snowden case for herself. Brinkma is a hanging judge.

        If readers and contributors to this blog haven’t seen it yet, it’s well worth a read.

        • Hatuey

          All of what you say about the so-called espionage court is well understood here. I’ll gladly read the article but you omit a few central points.

          1) nobody is arguing that Assange should go on trial.. this isn’t a choice. I myself think he most certainly will though. The question follows, then, how does he respond.

          2) Kiriakou was acquitted under the Bush presidency of espionage charges. When Obama was elected he re-opened the case against Kiriakou. This is important.

          3) Trump has expressed positivity towards Wikileaks.

          4) it’s clear, based on 2 and 3 above, that’s there’s a degree of bipartisanship meddling in these things. Brinkma was a Clinton appointee and I don’t doubt that she like most Democrats hate Assange and Wikileaks after their release of Hillary’s emails etc.

          5) a jury nullification Defense is possible for Assange. Kiriakou himself has argued that.

        • Jo Dominich

          Rod, well, now British Justice really is on trial isn’t it? Savid Javid the snivellilng little creep, signed the Extradition Warrant without so much as a second thought, any serious consideration of the facts, without any moral compunction or analysis in fact. At the first hurdle, the British Justice system has been shown to be corrupt in this case and just an enforcement arm of the Government (never have I ever heard about anyone being given 50 weeks in Jail for a Breach of Bail). The Appeal against Extradition will either show we have a truly independent judiciary that operates outside of Government direction or it will show they are complicit in upholding the actions of an already corrupt Government. I suspect it will be the latter. The information in your blog has alarmed me to the extent that I will look up some of the references to better acquaint myself with the Eastern Virginia Court. As far as I can tell, Assange never lived in the USA, he isn’t a USA citizen so wonder how he can be extradited there on a compilation of totally faked crimes. Thanks for your information.

  • Doghouse

    Fair trial?!

    In the last US election the people asked themselves the question Clinton or Trump when really they should have been asking themselves “how has it ever come to this?”. Similarly the facile question of fair trial befogs that exact same question that people should be asking themselves in relation to JA – “how has it ever come to this?”

    The man, a journalist publisher released information about war atrocities being committed in the name of the *free world*, the democratic world* which were beyond question in the interests of every man and woman on this planet to be aware of – everyone save those driving forces behind such atrocities. And people ask “will he get a fair trial”. Ya think? When we see the perverse injustice of whistle-blowers across the globe being demonised and persecuted against the judgement of international lawyers and groups such as the UN then we should be asking loud and powerfully “how has it ever come to this?” When we see the over arcing machinations of those whom he exposed to get their hands on him, blatant disregard for international law devoid of even a dusting of morality or human decency, then we should be asking “why on earth?”.

    A fair trial. Just get right outa here now……

    • Hatuey

      Yeah, great speech. I feel thoroughly inspired.

      Nobody is arguing that he should go on trial. Everything I say is based on the expectation that he will, though.

      Also, if you’d be willing to put in the time above, you’d see that everybody here knows that his chance of a fair trial in the Eastern District of Virginia is highly unlikely.

    • Rhys Jaggar

      I guess it depends on whether a jury presides or not.

      Clive Ponting was fitted up by the UK State in the 1980s and ‘a suitably severe member of the judiciary’ was appointed to oversee his conviction on OSS 2 charges, namely that he sent Tam Dalyell documents that proved that Ministers were lying to Parliament AGAIN after agreeing to fess up in minuted meetings.

      The DPP and the judge behaved so outrageously in pre-trial and trial that a jury voted 12-0 in favour of Not Guilty within a few hours of being sent out to find him guilty, based on the judge’s corrupt direction after final statements from Counsel. Bascally, a 24 finger salute to the entire corrupt Establishment…and accompanied by gasps, cheering and clapping in court. Not MiLud’s finest hour…

      The question to be answered is whether Assange will be tried by ’12 good Americans and true’……if so, he may have a chance. If not, the USA justice system is not fit for purpose and resembles Stalinist show trial proceedings…

  • Doghouse

    As for asking the same facile question about Sweden, that’s really not going to happen, fair or otherwise for the very simple reason that even if they appointed the most biased of Judge-mental overseers, I nor they, can see the good people of Sweden convicting a man on sexual crime charges without any evidence whatsoever. A trial would serve to highlight to the world this very point whilst then freeing him victorious from one set of trumped up charges to face another. He would automatically stand the high ground, as he does already to any right minded person. It’s not going to happen.

    In this country, Britain, the law states quite clearly that when there is sufficient evidence to charge someone with a criminal offence then they should be immediately charged or caused to be charged, the very reason of such rules to prevent this sword of unproven Damocles debacle enduring for indefinitely. There is no doubt a democratic (on the face of it) country like Sweden will have similar rules and laws.

    Does anyone seriously think that after nigh a decade, if they had evidence to charge him they would have done just that? You can bet they would, this high profile target, they would have charged him quicker than a hiccup. He has answered questions in Sweden, was free to leave afterwards. Case was closed. It was reopened, eventually, in defiance of all such above rules the prosecutor dragged legal time out to a level leaving even the quantum realm ably impressed.. Finally interviewed him, case closed. Again. This latest charade is just that. A charade.

    Not going to happen is it? He’ll be legally kidnapped to the US and then everyone will be asking the facile question…..

    • Andyoldlabour

      Doghouse

      I totally agree with both your posts, and would add that anyone who believes that JA will get a fair trial in the US, obviously has had their eyes and ears closed for the past seventy years.
      Illegal wars, coups, regime change, corruption, torture, rendition, Guantanamo Bay etc ……..
      The US is “exceptional” because it breaks all the rules and laws which it holds others accountable to.
      The murderers and war criminals walk free, whilst the people who shine a light on their evil deeds are sent to prison.
      The US is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the World.

      • michael norton

        Could it be possible that there was never any intention to charge Julian Assage with any crime in Sweden.
        Could it be that Sweden and the U.S.A. and the U.K. and Ecuador hatched a plan to suggest Julian would be charged, without actually charging him, but frightening him, so he would attempt to take refuge in the Embassy of Ecuador, thereby self-incarcerating,
        a holding plan, untill one day they could trump up some American charges?

      • Hatuey

        That’s all great, but there’s just one small problem — you are talking as if Assange or any of us have a choice as to whether he will face charges in the US.

        Are people here under the impression that shouting a pile of stuff about US foreign policy is going to help Assange in some way?

        • Tony

          Ok Hatuey. We’ll all stop voicing our dissention of the persecution of Julian Assange because, according to you, it’s not going to make any difference. Fucking troll.

          • Hatuey

            Whilst I’m not sure being realistic about Assange’s prospects makes me a troll, it’s worth pointing out that if I thought it would make any difference I would voice my dissention too.

            Of course, it goes without saying that nobody who values the truth and justice can support Assange being put up in front of a judge for Wikileaks publications. When I say it goes without saying, I mean there’s really no point in saying it.

  • Sadly not Ramon Zarate

    Sadly just because your right doesn’t stop you being cast as as a nutter. Ask around about who else went along with the Savile affair to keep their careers on track.

    best wishes.,don’t give up,

    SNRZ

  • Sharp Ears

    Now the US has formally requested the extradition of Julian Assange from the UK. There seems to be some connection to the recent visit to the US by the so called FBI informant Thordarson.

    ‘The media organisation reported that Icelandic FBI informant Sigurdur Thordarson, who has previously been convicted of fraud and embezzlement, had travelled to Washington DC late last month to answer questions, potentially leading to additional concocted charges against Assange. Thordarson was also interviewed in Iceland in early May by the FBI team that has led the investigation into Assange.’

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/06/11/assa-j11.html

    Which part of the failing Tory ‘government’ will respond?

  • michael norton

    Assange’s lawyer Jennifer Robinson told the ABC the certifying of the order was a normal part of the process and the extradition challenge now begins.

  • Sharp Ears

    Ref James Ball, a one time Wikileaks employee for three weeks in 2010 when he was fired
    https://contraspin.co.nz/another-day-another-two-bit-smear-on-julian-assange/

    He continues to tweet. He replies to Gordon Dimmack.

    ‘ @GordonDimmack
    The prostitutes at GCHQ’s mouthpiece @guardian are most responsible for this.
    @OwenJones84 @GeorgeMonbiot @Freedland @lukeharding1968 @carolecadwalla @jamesrbuk have done this.
    We will never forgive you for this. You are all spineless.
    #NoExtradition #ProtectJulian #Pitchforks
    2:21 am – 13 Jun 2019
    https://twitter.com/GordonDimmack/status/1139100554293129216

    James Ball
    ‏@jamesrbuk
    Replying to @GordonDimmack
    (1) You spelled “presstitutes” wrong. (2) The Guardian opposes extraditing Assange. (3) We literally published the Snowden files. (4) I haven’t worked there since 2015.
    Otherwise a+ polemic tweet.’

    What a creep.
    .
    .

  • Jo Dominich

    This is sobering food for thought Craig. I will say one thing though, I think Trump making an attack on Corbyn has somewhat backfired and this continued anti-Semitism rubbish has also. IN my local pub (in a Tory council and MP) people are, at last, starting to verbally show their sick and tiredness of these continued attacks on Corbyn.

    I would say Trump’s ringing endorsement of Nigel Farage and his orange twin Bojo the Buffoon, probably is a significant nail in both their coffins. I take my hands off to the British public for the demonstrations they held against Trump’s visit; I didn’t know we had it in us.

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘Another whistleblower bites the dust’:
    https://www.mintpressnews.com/daniel-hale-another-whistleblower-bites- the-dust-as-the-intercept-adds-a-third-notch-to-its-burn-belt/258386/
    Inetrcept owned by a USG cooperator:
    ‘Billionaire Pierre Omidyar’s double dealing’:
    https://www.voltairenet.org/article182455.html
    End of the line for the ‘Intercept’, if people have any sense.
    I believe they have now ‘sabotaged’ most of Snowden’s unpublished leaks.
    Buying out the Intercept is like the US bought out Ecuador via their traitorous puppet Moreno so they could grab Julian Assange.

  • Sharp Ears

    What news of Julian who has been in prison for 54 days now. The revolting shill Javid signed the extradition paper on 13th June.

    Assange lawyer reveals Pentagon behind pursuit of WikiLeaks publisher
    21 Jun, 2019
    ‘After asking officials at the Obama administration if they “really wanted” the publisher for whistleblowers and warning that “there are dangerous precedents here,” Assange lawyer Geoffrey Robertson said they responded: ‘We don’t want him, but the Pentagon does, and the Pentagon may eventually get its way.’

    The RT piece says that Robertson has access to Obama’s crowd. What did Obama ever do to get justice for Julian Assange.

1 2 3