Dedicated to David Allen Green, Joshua Rosenberg, Joan Smith, Hadley Freeman, Jess Phillips, David Aaronovitch and the entire staff of the Guardian/Observer 326


As of today Julian Assange has finished his jail sentence for missing police bail. There is no Swedish charge or request for his extradition, those risibly flimsy sexual allegations no longer being needed by the state.

As of today, Julian Assange is in prison purely and simply for publishing secrets of the US state, revealing war crimes and the dirtiest of diplomacy. I should like to dedicate this post to all of those in the title and dozens of their colleagues in the British “liberal” establishment, all of whom claimed that Julian’s fears of being incarcerated in the UK or Europe facing extradition for publishing US secrets were entirely bogus and a mere pretext for hiding, and that this would never happen. Those of us who said this was a real fear and a real danger were, myself most definitely included, derided as fantasist, deluded, paranoid and conspiracy theorist.

So now Julian is a political prisoner, a journalist in a maximum security prison, probably for years, waiting for his case to be heard and extradition faced for the grievous crime of doing his job and publishing. While the British liberal establishment simply buries its nose in its perfumed handkerchief and pretends that the fear it derided as imaginary, has not come true.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 

IF YOU LIVE IN THE UK, PLEASE SIGN MY PETITION FOR OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL OSCE OBSERVERS FOR THE NEXT SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

326 thoughts on “Dedicated to David Allen Green, Joshua Rosenberg, Joan Smith, Hadley Freeman, Jess Phillips, David Aaronovitch and the entire staff of the Guardian/Observer

1 2 3
  • SA

    What is the position in law for someone awaiting extradition? Presumably it is related to the nature of the extraditable offence and what sentence it may carry. Could some legal expert enlighten us. Surely in this case incarceration in a high security jail is a little bit over the top?

    • John2o2o

      “Surely in this case incarceration in a high security jail is a little bit over the top?”

      More that just a little, but surely his legal team are doing all they can to free him.

  • SA

    Assange was set up with a honey trap as a first case. At the time of his arrest it became shameful to be seen to defend him in polite society. The character assassination then continued relentlessly starting with the Guardian that turned against him at the behest of the authorities and extending to alleged personal habits in his Ecuador embassy stay.
    This very careful conspiracy to demonise him was the prerequisite for what was to come and resulting in manufactured public distaste. The public is no longer interested in Assange and the original revelation of state misconduct has been forgotten.

    • John2o2o

      “Assange was set up with a honey trap as a first case.”

      Maybe SA.

      My personal view is to stick to what is certain in this case. I am not sure that it has been established with certainty that the Swedish allegations were a “honey trap” as you call it. I’m not saying they are not, just that it is not certain that they are.

      The Guardian is now heavily influenced by the UK security services following the Snowden revelations which led to their offices being raided. So I think they do as they are told for the most part. This was exposed by Kennard and Curtis recently:
      https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/

      However, George Monbiot of the Guardian has recently spoken up – in part – in Julian’s defence.

      • Squeeth

        I tend to the view that the Swedish babes were fortuitous and that Assange was a dickhead to risk compromising himself. He must have known that American Caesar would do him for riding a bike without lights or an overdue library book. That said, if people were imprisoned for being dickheads, there would be no-one to guard them.

      • John A

        One of the Swedish women was heavily involved in anti-Cuba american organisations and had form in trying to create honeytraps.

    • Bramble

      This character assassination was so successful that when I raise his predicament in conversation, most denounce Mr Assange as a “rapist” and think: “the creep got what he deserved”. This was a calculated campaign of disinformation playing on themes which the public can be guaranteed to accept without question because to challenge them either exposes you as an “activist” or associates you with perverse practices. It’s disgraceful. The power of rumour, gossip and bias exercised by the infotainment industry is overwhelming. It’s how “liberal” states get away with being totalitarian: they have taken control of the centres of communication and dictate what can be thought and said with impunity.

    • nevermind

      All those newspapers who benefited from Julian’s publications of facts had to be made to turn turtle, they had to be publicly seen to grovel and Kowtow to the neocon agenda and their false narrative, or heads would have rolled over editors desk and mortgages would not be paid and journalists be blacklisted, oh what calamity.
      The falsely generated public support for incarcerating Julian was achieved by multiple thumbscrews, very likely threatening journalists who DARE NOT SPEAK OUT.
      Thanks for this long overdue broadside, Craig, never thought you get a 12 gauge.

  • Peter

    So, if I understand correctly, Julian is being criminally imprisonned for revealing criminality.

    Is that where we are?

    What does the Labour Party have to say about this?

    • John2o2o

      He’s now in prison – as I understand it – solely because the US wants to extradite him.

      The maximum security excuse is presumably that he is deemed a flight risk, though that is frankly crass in the extreme. He need not be incarcerated in Belmarsh!

    • Robyn

      Peter, you ask ‘What does the Labour Party have to say about [Julian’s imprisonment]?’ I can tell you what the Australian Labor Party says about it – SFA. They ignore the whole matter. They don’t even answer correspondence about Julian – not so much as a standard acknowledgement of communication.

  • M.J.

    It is right that you commend excellent newspapers like the Observer. I read it myself. The column by Andrew Rawnsley is particularly good. 🙂

    • Anthony

      Rawnsley’s column got something right once a very long time ago. But nobody can remember what it was and it’s not what he’s there for.

  • djm

    “Assange is a political prisoner” …….. I must have missed your post in support Tommy Robinson (NHRN) a real political prisoner……

    • nevermind

      NHRN? National Ham Radio Network? djm
      Tommy Robinson was known to ask for payment fro his political comments and managed to buy a 500K villa from all his so called political badmouthing of immigrants, his generalisations of other religions and for his networking with a rogue entity in the ME.
      He is not a political prisoner, he’s a fake and he is supported by the Brexiteers, go interview them, ask them, a one trick pony whose salutations to other right wing racists in Europe appeals to their mindset.
      What has Tommy Robinson ever done for workers? Did he ever hold down a job?

    • SA

      djm
      Tell me exactly why you think Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is a political prisoner? This is a genuine question.

    • Deb O'Nair

      Why would Craig Murray support a drug abusing, violent, convicted fraudster and Islamophobic racist?

      • Loony

        It seems that your implied argument is that a “drug abusing, violent, convicted fraudster and Islamophobic racist” should not be entitled to due process.

        Hopefully you realize that people guilty of the most horrendous crimes nonetheless benefited from due process. Take for example the cases of Myra Hindley and Ian Brady – both committed stomach churning crimes and yet remained entitled to due process. It is disturbing to note that you consider your list of “qualities” to be far worse than the sadistic torture and murder of wholly innocent children.

        The latest crime for which Tommy Robinson was imprisoned was Contempt of Court. Here is what happens to other organizations guilty of an analogous contempt

        https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20031173

        Given that it is undisputed that in the past the Daily Mail was sympathetic to the Nazi’s then why do you believe that a publication with a history of supporting Nazi’s deserves a £10,000 fine whilst an individual that you do not like deserves to be denied due process and then subsequently to be imprisoned?

        Finally both Robinson and Assange were imprisoned in HMP Belmarsh and both were held in isolation from the general prison population. Both made requests to the prison authorities that they be allowed to associate with each other and both had their requests denied by the prison authorities.

        I trust the foregoing answers your question. Perhaps if you had any morality at all it would never have been necessary for you to ask the question in the first place.

        • Squeeth

          Due process is what makes convictions safe(-ish); without it you wouldn’t be able to write that “people guilty of the most horrendous crimes” and ignore the fact that Stefan Kiszko and the Birmingham Six etc were convicted because of a lack of due process.

          • Loony

            Due process does not guarantee that there will be no miscarriages of justice. Rather it is the best system that exists in order to minimize instances of miscarriages of justice.

            It really is most remarkable that your ideological possession is so great that you will go to any lengths to argue i favor of abuse of power when that power is being abused in order to harm those with who you disagree.

        • SA

          Loony
          ROS did not say that justice should be given the benefit of due process which he did, but questioned why Craig should support him. You then go on to find some spurious parallels between Yaxley and assange and then go on to talk about the Daily Mail. These are typical diversions and straw man tactics.

          • Loony

            What you write is a toxic combination of the flat out false intertwined with misdirection.

            The exact parallel is between the Contempt of Court charges faced by Robinson and the Contempt of Court charges faced by The Daily Mail and The Daily Mirror. The interesting thing is the differing punishments meted out to Robinson and the newspapers.

            HMP Belmarsh s a Category A prison and houses some of the most dangerous criminals in the UK. Examples of such criminals include those who beheaded an off duty British soldier on the streets of London.

            Neither Robinson nor Assange have ben convicted of any egregiously violent crime, and neither are there any reasonable grounds to suppose that either man represents a threat either to other inmates or to the wider public. Yet both men were held separate from the general prison population and both were denied usual rights of association either with other inmates or with each other.

            The treatment endured by Assange is widely understood to have contributed to a decline in his mental wellbeing. Why is it wrong for Assange to endure a form of psychological torture and right that Robinson endures the same form o psychological torture.

            You are either arguing in favor of deranged and inane double standards based simply on who you do or do not like or you believe Robinson to be some kind of Nietzschean Superman. Neither answer would appear to enhance your credibility.

          • SA

            “The exact parallel is between the Contempt of Court charges faced by Robinson and the Contempt of Court charges faced by The Daily Mail and The Daily Mirror. The interesting thing is the differing punishments meted out to Robinson and the newspapers.”
            First diversion: neither of the convictions meant that those convicted were political prisoners. OK there may be a difference of sentencing but the sentencing is often on the discretion of the judge and whereas it would be appropriate to imprison an individual, it is less likely to be a sentence of choice for a newspaper. Whatever this is it has nothing to do with treatment of Yaxely as a political prisoner. There has been a lot of incitement to racial hatred on behalf of Robinson and many of his followers and that may have been why he was treated the way he was. No suggestions whatsoever that Assange has been or likely to be violent or incite hatred.
            Second diversion: Assange has not been convicted of anything as far as I know. His crime was that of being a whistleblower acting and his revelations were a matter of public interest. I am not sure you can say the same in the case of Robinson.

        • Deb O'Nair

          “It seems that your implied argument is that…”

          It seems that you are talking codswallop (as usual).

          • Loony

            Maybe – but at least I do not hide behind an ad-hominem constructed wall of evasion.

            Do you or do you not believe that Tommy Robinson is entitled to due process?

            If you just answer that one simple question then there will be no need for me, or anyone else, to parse your words in order to seek some form of meaning.

          • J

            First you’d have to demonstrate why he should have been treated relatively leniently most of his criminal life (compared to Assange, an angel by comparison) and then demonstrate convincingly why he’s not receiving ‘due process’ now.

      • Sandra Dunn

        Islam (and all religions) is not a race. Humans are born with their race but not with their religion – which is a forced thing that they can choose later not to adhere to. Most religious leaders claim they are a race for obvious reasons. The Catholics used to try this on with us when we were vulnerable little kids in catechism class ( a regualr brainwashing exercise that apparenly is legal even though indoctrinisation is often accompanied by child mental cruelty stories about hell or something similar). We were taught that we Catholics had a special mark on our souls which meant we were a special ‘Universal’ race apart first, before being English… Hahahahaha They are all at it!

        • John2o2o

          “The Catholics used to try this on with us when we were vulnerable little kids in catechism class”

          – I’m sorry, but what is Catechism class? I never had one and I was raised a Catholic.

          “We were taught that we Catholics had a special mark on our souls which meant we were a special ‘Universal’ race apart first, before being English.”

          – Well I wasn’t.

          I no longer go to church and nor do any members of my family except my mother. I would not consider myself religious today.

          But I was not brainwashed by what you describe as “child mental cuelty” stories at school in the 1970s and 1980s. Perhaps my mother’s generation was. The church is largely reformed from those days since Vatican II, though I did pick up a religious guilt complex which certainly seriously impacted on my life. Nobody did that to me though.

  • Brendan

    Reporters Without Borders (RSF) should be added to Craig’s dedication list. A few weeks after Julian Assange was arrested and taken to Belmarsh prison, its UK bureau director wrote a piece praising the UK as a beacon of press freedom in a world where journalists face grave danger:

    “The UK plays an important standard-setting role, and showing the world that we know our press freedom climate is not perfect, but that we are working to get it right, puts the UK in a position of strength and will set a positive international example.”

    https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/world-press-freedom-day-uk-plays-important-role-in-setting-global-standards-for-press-freedom/
    Of course, she did not mention the detention of Assange at all. The UK does not appear either in RSF’s list of countries where “RSF was able to clearly establish that they were killed or imprisoned in connection with their journalistic work” in 2019.
    https://rsf.org/en/barometer?year=2019&type_id=235#list-barometre

    Instead of defending Assange’s right to publish without spending many years in detention, RSF instead supports the UK’s version of the Magnitsky Act. This is despite the fact that Magnitsky had nothing to do with journalism, apart from the fact that the story about him is nearly all fake news. He wasn’t even a lawyer, as RSF claims, and he did not investigate anything.
    https://rsf.org/en/news/rsf-welcomes-uk-magnitsky-amendment-calls-accountability-press-freedom-predators

    The main role of RSF, the supposedly independent NGO (non-governmental organisation), appears to be the spreading of state propaganda. It doesn’t even make much effort to hide it. As the UK bureau director wrote in her article, RSF “will work closely with parliamentarians from all parties,” and “In parallel to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s own media freedom campaign”.

    • John2o2o

      Interesting comment Brendan.

      “In parallel to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s own media freedom campaign”.

      I think that at least one of the UK security services is administered through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Presumably MI6.

    • Robyn

      Reporters Without Borders tried to get the Swiss Press Club to prevent Vanessa Beeley speaking about her work in Syria (notably on the White Helmets) at a conference in 2017. Say no more.

  • douglas clark

    Craig,

    “So now Julian is a political prisoner, a journalist in a maximum security prison, probably for years, waiting for his case to be heard and extradition faced for the grievous crime of doing his job and publishing. While the British liberal establishment simply buries its nose in its perfumed handkerchief and pretends that the fear it derided as imaginary, has not come true.”

    Is there anything we can do to stop the state acting like an arse? Like bail or summat?

  • Brendan

    I wonder, will we hear any more from the 70 MPs and Peers who wrote an open letter, a day after Julian Assange was arrested, calling for him to be extradited to Sweden? I suspect not, when some of them were only using the letter to pretend that there was a genuine rape case against Assange in Sweden. Some MPs practically said he was guilty.

    Emily Thornberry said: “Whenever I see pictures of Julian Assange or hear about him I think of two women in Sweden. They deserve a day in court. They deserve justice.”

    In the House of Commons, MP Diane Abbott described Assange as “a man suspected of rape, which is what in this case actually happened,”.

    • Sandra Dunn

      Emily Thornbury is an extremely simple minded person to have fallen for the propaganda. She obviously couldn’t be bothered to read all the facts so jumped on a pretend ‘feminist’ bandwagon. She is not my kind of feminist but an unthinking grandstanding reactionary – obviously!

      • Yr Hen Gof

        Simple minded? Perhaps a little more sophisticated than that.
        Her father was for some time a United Nations Assistant Secretary-General, her husband Sir Christopher Nugent is currently a High Court Judge.
        She’s quite a high profile Friend of Israel, speaking of the BDS movement she said “bigotry against the Israeli nation [that] has never been justified.” Further, she said that “boycott of its products, its culture or its academics” was akin to “hatred of the nation and its people.”
        I think Lady Thornberry knows exactly what she’s about.
        I’m not a fan.

    • Jarek Carnelian

      Brendan, it was not Diane Abbot, Shadow Home Sec and MP for Hackney North, it was MP DIANA R. Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North):

      “I am concerned that a man suspected of rape, which is what in this case actually happened, was able to do what he did for several years to escape justice. I have seen media reports that lawyers for the victims in Sweden are taking steps to start the proceedings off again. I wonder whether the Home Secretary might be able to investigate that and let the House know. I am sure that many Members of Parliament are very anxious about the matter.”

      – in the House of Commons starting at 3:30 pm on 11th April 2019.

      • Brendan

        Yes, you’re right, thanks. That was a typo. Diane Abbott’s comments were much more balanced, even though she did not really support Julian Assange and she also took the accusations too seriously.

    • Peter

      From the quoted article:

      “As President Donald Trump threatened Friday to launch a catastrophic war against Iran, including an implicit threat to use nuclear weapons, the historic significance of what Manning and Assange did is clear.”

      So perhaps a word too for Edward Snowden who informed us that we are all being comprehensively monitored electronically 24/7. You can of course be sure that when plans for war are being laid, overt and/or clandestine, anyone who might oppose such wars will be receiving special attention. That will almost certainly include everyone who comments on this blog.

      Assange, Manning and Snowden look more like saints every day.

      Elsewhere, and O/T, the Labour conference has just voted down the anti-Corbyn “back remain now” motion. That’s the best news in a while in my book.

    • Brianfujisan

      Indeed Vivian

      Re Chelsea’s daily $1000 fines –

      “Despite the fact that Chelsea is currently deeply in debt, and cannot work while incarcerated, Judge Trenga was able to conclude that fines totalling $441,000 fall within the parameters of a ‘coercive’ sanction, and do not intrude into the forbidden realm of the punitive,” her attorneys stated.

      She { Chelsea } further suggested the grand jury’s current existence runs contrary to key civil liberties protections and contended it has been many decades since the grand jury bore any resemblance to what the drafters of the Constitution supported.

      To the notion that she holds the key to her cell, and may walk free anytime, Manning responded, “[That key] is held in the beating heart of all I believe. To retrieve that key and do what you are asking of me, your honor, I would have to cut the key out, which would mean killing everything I hold dear, and the beliefs that defined my path.”

      https://truthout.org/articles/judge-wont-reconsider-1000-per-day-fines-for-chelsea-manning/

    • Ingwe

      Although moving a writ of habeous corpus is still an extant legal option, judicial review is now the usual legal process followed where a public body appears to acting capriciously or ultra vires. I’m unclear whether Mr Assanges’s legal team are considering this and/or are appealing against the District Judge’s order.
      All suggestions that his legal team are in someways inferior or inadequate are completely false and you can be sure they will be looking at all options.
      I’m afraid to tell you that, the legal system, in which I worked as a lawyer for over 30 years, is imperfect, has little if anything to do with “justice” and seldom offers remedies for what are political issues.
      What Mr Assange is facing is not really a legal issue; he is caught in the real politick of a decaying, reactionary empire and its UK and Swedish lackeys.

    • nevermind

      Yes please do. I did this when Craig was questioned about his torture exposures and was promptly banned from commenting ever again.

      Moderators, of what they call newspaper comments, are subjected to editotial rules, not the law or any moral consideration. I have not missed the MIGuardian for one minute, despite do many hete still linking to some of their controlled and directed journalist.

  • ERIC

    and also thanks to all the Hollywood stars, of which only one came out to support Assange. Interestingly, the sole person was Pamela Anderson, usually seen as stupid blonde with big fake boobs. The rest of the hypocrites in Hollywood remained silent. They rather pretend to save the world from evil by joining such groups like the CFR. Blame on them. AND A BIG THANKS TO PAMELA ANDERSON FOR BEING SO OUTSPOKEN AND SUPPORTIVE!!!!

  • Jim Crint

    Seems to me my comment on Habeas Corpus has fallen on deaf ears and yet to me, a non-lawyer, it seems to offer the remedy we want: that is why it was instated in the first place as long ago as 1679 but actually has its roots in Magna Carta. What it says in simple terms is: you have somebody imprisoned, by what right? Justify, or release.

    Isn’t that the point?

    I may be wrong, but let’s discuss. I repeat my offer to put up a substantial sum into crowdfunding if legal opinion thinks it a goer. At least it will create publicity and cause trouble for the opposition.

    • Sandra Dunn

      Emily Thornbury is an extremely simple minded person to have fallen for the propaganda. She obviously couldn’t be bothered to read all the facts so jumped on a pretend ‘feminist’ bandwagon. She is not my kind of feminist but an unthinking grandstanding reactionary – obviously!

      • Sharp Ears

        Emily Thornberry, aka Lady Nugee, is a member of Labour Friends of Israel.

        Her mother, Sallie, a member of the Labour Party, was a Mayor of Guildford. Shock horror. In the Tory heartland, and a single mother of three in a council house after the father, Cedric Thornberry, pushed off. He was Asst Secretary General in the UN at the time.

  • Glasshopper

    I always thought the Narallah piece Assange did for RT was going to seal his fate. The straw that broke the came’s back. He was a marked man after that.
    Well done to Craig Murray for helping to keep this tragic story going.

  • Seth

    No surprise that David Aronovitch is on that list.
    A janitor of the Murdoch school, the posh school that is

  • Jim Crint

    Ingwe thanks for your reply but as I said I am not a lawyer and I can’t negotiate all that.
    Wikipedia was just there to explain the scope to the uninitiated.
    In your view, can we do anything with it?

    • Ingwe

      I think there is merit in your suggestion of getting counsel’s opinion on the merits of successfully applying for a writ of habeous corpus. And, like you, I and I suspect many others, would be prepared to contribute to a crowd funding scheme to pay for such an opinion.
      I reiterate, I believe Mr Assange’s lawyers will almost certainly have considered or are considering this and all legal options available to bring about the release of their client.
      If Mr Murray, who is in contact with Mr Assange’s lawyers were to put to them that there are those of us who would assist with crowdfunding such an application, we may receive confirmation that such steps are underway or have been considered and rejected.
      I share the sense of frustration and impotence of just standing around waiting whilst an innocent man for whom we collectively owe an enormous debt of gratitude languishes in Belmarsh. And we should think also of Chelsea Manning and her inordinate bravery in the stand she’s taking.

  • M.J.

    It is an exaggeration to say that Assange will spend years in jail. His sentence for jumping bail was just under 1 year and began on 1st May 2019. Even after the extradition hearing is completed at the beginning of next March he will not have completed his sentence in the UK. However I predict that to enable him to be tried in the U.S., the British government will benevolently set aside this part of his sentence, and therefore he will not have spent years behind bars, at least as a result of British justice. In America, his lawyers will surely emphasize the First Amendment and the precedent of the Pentagon papers. Whether or not Assange is eventually acquitted, he should receive a fair trial in America.

    • Loony

      It is comforting to learn that the actual period of incarceration that Julian Assange will endure is to be determined by your prediction.

      Why bother spending the better part of £7 billion pa o a justice system when it could all be replaced with your predictive powers- or are you like a misfiring shaman whose powers only work in the specific case of Julian Assange?

    • Sandra Dunn

      But M.J. Once In America, he could suffer an ‘accident’ of some kind while being held. It’s so obvious what is going on. And as for those journo hacks, politicians and establishment figures that Craig has listed, what have they to say now? I wonder what happened to the two women that were supposedly raped? I read that one of them at least did not want anything to do with what happened. I guess it was Assange’s video ‘Collateral Murder’ that upset the MIC. Why didn’t Saint Obama pardon him? He must have known Assange was set up.

      • John A

        Epstein was the first ‘suicide’ in that maximum security establishment in New York since 1998. I suspect Assange will be suicided sooner or later.

    • Republicofscotland

      “the British government will benevolently set aside this part of his sentence”

      Oh please spare me the sanctimony, the British government are not benevolent when it comes to Assange his minor bail offence would probably have under, any other circumstance been dealt with by a fine.

      However the British state was desperate to get its international law breaking hands on Assange. Spending millions of pounds of taxpayers money staking out the Ecuadorian embassy, and if that snake Moreno hadn’t sold Assange out for a big fat IMF/World bank loan (The US has controlling interest in both) he’d still be at the embassy.

      • John2o2o

        “if that snake Moreno hadn’t sold Assange out for a big fat IMF/World bank loan (The US has controlling interest in both) he’d still be at the embassy.”

        Agreed.

        Julian should have been allowed to leave many years ago.

    • Jarek Carnelian

      MJ, please take note of the Espionage Act of 1917:

      “On June 11, the U.S. government formally submitted an extradition request to the United Kingdom for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. He is facing an 18-count indictment accusing him of soliciting and publishing classified information and conspiring with former Army private Chelsea Manning to crack a Defense Department computer password. All of these charges (other than the one about the computer password) arise under the rarely used Espionage Act of 1917.”
      STEPHEN ROHDE, JUNE 19, 2019 in “The American Prospect”.

      If ANY of the charges against Assange are tried under that Act he is very unlikely to fare well. This antiquated law was written a century ago to prosecute German saboteurs and is the favored weapon for silencing dissidents and discouraging whistle-blowers, especially since the Obama Administration.

      In 1951, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted and sentenced to death under the Espionage Act – though we are asked to believe that this could never happen to Assange.

      The Espionage Act intentionally skews the proceeding against the leaker, and does NOT CONSIDER the possibility of a public interest defense. Think about that.

      • M.J.

        Daniel Ellsberg (see wiki) was also tried under the Espionage Act of 1917. Eventual result: the charges were dismissed.
        Lilke I said, Assange should get a fair trial in the United States.

        • Tony

          Tried because of Henry Kissinger who served on an advisory panel to the Johnson administration. It appears that Nixon was not initially bothered about the leaks especially as they covered the JFK/LBJ administrations.

    • Ingwe

      @M.J “a fair trial in America”. Words, for once fail me. Thankfully, we have apt emoticons.????

  • Sandra Dunn

    It was extraordinary and vile how so many of the neo-liberal leaning, bourgeois Left, turned on Assange – for what reason, other than some weird jealousy of his abilities that those Guardian hacks who were originally working with him in The Guardian’s basement, couldn’t handle? And after the massive falling out, how the Guardian editor and his friends and relations, wrote an endless amount of disgraceful and pathetically poorly written propaganda pieces against Assange. After that I vowed never again to buy the printed Guardian or Observer.

    • Ishmael

      I think quite a lot are actually fairly right wing nationalists. You scratch under the surface & they have this same twisted devotion to “country” as those they ineffectually “fight” on the right. & they associate their stability with that of the establishment. …& Not without some good reason.

      They don’t want to fight the state. They want to (& do) defend it.

      Even those considered far left, they are engaged (as they see it) this historical countries great traditions, like a grad mythical narrative who they are the real players in. Of course thats utter nonsense, & they never did squat for most people unless forced.

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      It was extraordinary and vile how so many of the neo-liberal leaning, bourgeois Left, turned on Assange

      Personally, I’m not surprised. These are people that were gung ho on invading Iraq, causing more than a million deaths and setting the Middle East on fire . And, how about Jack Straw (and Tony Blair) gleefully “renditioning” a pregnant woman to Libya? These Blairite creatures are simply despicable.

      • Tony

        Sadly, there is also the extradition of James Earl Ray to the U S in 1968.
        He was threatened with execution and so never had a trial.

        According to William Pepper’s book, ‘The Plot to Kill King’, the assassination was an FBI operation. If so, then that would almost certainly mean that President Johnson approved it. He and J. Edgar Hoover were very close. Hoover attended a party to celebrate Johnson’s ‘election’ to the Senate in 1948 and the pair worked closely together ever since.

  • Goose

    Political prisoner : A political prisoner is someone imprisoned because they have opposed or criticized the government responsible for their imprisonment.

    His detention seems to meet this criteria.

    For how many journalists have, or would, handle such documents if offered them? My guess is all the investigative journalists at major news outlets would. Most newspapers even encourage such behaviour with secure drop addresses.

    Far more at stake here than one man if a precedent is set.

  • Tom74

    Well said, Craig. Anyone who saw the pile of rubbish the Observer was serving up yesterday masquerading as news and analysis will be in no doubt where their loyalties lie.

  • Republicofscotland

    It’s utterly disgraceful that a British magistrate (following orders of course) has used the flimsy excuse of Assange absconding to hold him probably illegally in prison until the US has its house in order to acquire him. Here I am thinking that the Spanish judicial systems face is covered by a thin veil, which hides a contempt for democracy as Catalan politicians spend hundreds of days behind bars as political prisoners without conviction.

    However one just has to look closely as the failure of democracy in Westminster, politicians colluding with the Queen, widespread lying and deceitfulness and failed promises by the bucket load, to know that we should expect the judicial system to follow suit.

    UN experts have said Assange was showing symptoms associated with extensive exposure to psychological torture living in Belmarsh Prison. Assange will have to endure this for longer now the British judicial system has failed him. Then it will be off to America to face even greater trials which will surely take their toll as well.

    It would appear in Britain, that telling great big lies, leads to becoming PM, whilst telling the truth by exposing evil deeds, leads to unfair imprisonment.

    • Ishmael

      Yes, but why not look to “your own” (as you may put it)

      Those who say nothing, do nothing, are complicit. More so for those in positions of great influence. These people could not act without the acquiescence of their peers.

      • Republicofscotland

        The truth is Ishmael, that most folk don’t really care enough, I bet thousands of folk walked by the Ecuadorian embassy carrying their prawn sandwiches and low fat lattes, and never gave a thought to Assange, nor the risks he’s took to bring us information that we’d otherwise never know about.

        The British state doesn’t like its dirty washing aired, and that’s why very few British journalists will speak up about Assanges plight, most are paid not to understand what’s going on with Assange.

        Look at the state of Westminster politics right now. It would take full blown revolution to really change the major influencers, peers, etc, its not going to happen, not enough people care as I’ve already said.

        All we can hope for is to maintain a steady stream of whistleblowers.

      • kathy

        She is beginning to look like nothing but a craven coward willing to take any insults the British state wishes to throw at her – and a disgrace to Scotland.

    • Ishmael

      The SNP are in the club.

      Why did Nicola feel the need to be polite to Borris? Why didn’t she say ‘What are you doing torturing a journalist in the heart of london? …It’s been going on for years now, YEARS…

      Nothing.

      • Republicofscotland

        Like I said not enough people care, no nations leaders want their countries dirty laundry washed in public. Sturgeon is no different, silly you thinking otherwise.

      • kathy

        I am afraid she is beginning to look like nothing but a craven coward and not a credit to her country.

    • John2o2o

      “politicians colluding with the Queen”

      I generally agree with you on most issues ros, but your prejudices are showing here.

      The queen is a constitutional monarch not an absolute monarch. She has no power.

      I know, I keep having to say this here on this forum. I support only the truth.

  • Ishmael

    I recall that interview/interrogation with Alan Rusbridger, like the one Craig had.

    These twisted a-holes in the state, pigs with their noses in the trough, really do believe they are patriots, & they commit atrocity after atrocity in it’s name. They are religious fanatics. They really do associate the states ability to act with impunity with the national good imo.

    It doesn’t matter, they are “British”. Exceptional. Even (& perhaps especially) while torturing & killing people.

    How twisted is that. ?

  • Tarla

    Self censorship by the Guardian who have refused to report, on their rolling Labour party conference, on a Labour party member of Palestinian origin, who talked about how the UK were responsible for creating the crisis in Palestine, that his parent’s fled their village after a murderous assault by the colonial occupiers. The cowards at the MI5 approved Guardian will report on any scumbag who ‘denounces’ Corbyn or Assange but refuse o report on those that have been on the receiving end of British imperialism. They also refused to report on a Labour party member from the occupied north of the island of Ireland. Cowards.

  • Jarek Carnelian

    His case will be heard by the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) under Judge Brinkema.

    “No national security defendant has ever won a case in the EDVA. In my case, I asked Judge Brinkema to declassify 70 documents that I needed to defend myself. She denied all 70 documents. And so I had literally no defense for myself and was forced to take a plea … They don’t call EDVA the ‘Espionage Court’ for nothing … A fair trial in the Eastern District of Virginia, under Judge Leonie Brinkema, is utterly impossible.” – John Kiriakou

    “Judge Leonie Brinkema is a Reagan appointee to the federal bench and she was promoted to District Court bench by Bill Clinton in the mid-1990s. She reserves all national security cases for herself…” so she seems cut from the same cloth as our Arbuthnots.

    Anyone still thinking Assange might get fair treatment in the USA?

  • CasualObserver

    Unreasonable to keep Assange on remand pending a case that could last 18 months or more. Probably HMG are worried that a ‘State Actor’ will whisk him away by other than scheduled means.

  • Doug Scorgie

    Sharp Ears 09.10 23/09/2019.

    Quoting Raab: “Someone wanted in connection with alleged sexual offences should face justice.”
    …………………………………..

    Has he ever said such a thing about the alleged sexual offences directed at Prince Andrew?

    • Sharp Ears

      Rhetorical question there Doug!

      Not as far as I know. Have you noticed how he has gone to ground?

      It’s all about Harry & Meghan now with their 13 strong entourage in South Africa. One of their two private secretaries is the ex UK Ambassador to Albania. YCNMIU.

  • Jeffrey Kaye

    In fact, Assange is being treated far more harshly than was General Augusto Pinochet, who some 20 years ago was also held in custody in the UK fighting extradition to Spain. The charges against Pinochet included multiple instances of torture, and conspiracy to torture, which invoked the “disappearances” of 100s of political opponents! For this Pinochet was allowed to reside under house arrest with his wife in a lavish mansion, where he was allowed many visitors, including Maggie Thatcher. Today, Julian Assange is kept in hellish conditions at Belmarsh Prison for the crime of publishing documents that exposed the torture crimes of the United States. Your list is a roll-call of shame and infamy!

    • SA

      Assange is a normal citizen and Pinochet was an ex head of state. Did you expect them to be treated the same way?

  • Ort

    To paraphrase a verse from Bob Dylan/Jacques Levy’s song “Hurricane” (1975):

    Now all the criminals in their coats and their ties
    Are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise
    While Julian sits like Buddha in a ten-foot cell
    An innocent man in a living hell

  • jenny

    the brits have always been interested in keeping a stiff upper lip and denying reality – the tory governemnt of the last 10 years are steeped in lunacy – not one fit for purpose – still assange is lucky, disabled people are dying by the day and nobody gives a F***

      • jenny

        so, disabled people are expendable according to you? typical progressive nonsense –
        of course assange’s position is perilous but at least he’s still alive – ask all the dead disabled people, killed by this government what they think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Hatuey

    Can the people who comment regularly on here tell me what they have done towards assisting Assange? Have you tweeted anyone, emailed, or written? I’m interested to hear about it.

    I don’t think writing to Assange himself would count as helping in any way, so please don’t clog up the airwaves with that sort of thing or your other hobbies… and needless to say, comments on here count for nothing too.

    • John2o2o

      “Have you … written? I’m interested to hear about it. I don’t think writing to Assange himself would count as helping in any way”

      Thank you Hatuey, yes I have written and I received a reply from Julian in which he expressed his enthusiastic thanks.

      I think you will find that members of Julian’s family may disagree with you on your assertion about writing to Julian. I think it helps him a great deal to know that people care.

      • Hatuey

        Whilst I think it may be beneficial to marginally improve Assange’s mood for a few fleeting seconds with a message of support, there is no disputing the fact that such a message does precisely nothing towards drawing wider public attention to the case and pressing for his release.

        Poor Assange.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.