John Pilger on Julian Assange

[Bryn]

Yes, very good news - another victory for true democracy and compassion over the present, terrible government (who have behaved appallingly throughout this case)....but still awaiting further developments here, so.....

Yes, whatever one thinks of his personal character or alleged sexual proclivities, his exposure of war crimes has been a service to humanity. In addition to which the USA's penal system is a crime in itself. In some cases an excuse for slave labour on a par with what the USA accuses China of. It's also a system with engages in state murder, accelerated in recent weeks by their current head of state, himself hopefully soon to be subject to that same corrupt penal system.

[french frank]

Yes, whatever one thinks of his personal character or alleged sexual procivaties, his exposure of war crimes has been a service to humanity.

Indeed. I don't think he's a very admirable human being, and he's been spared extradition on humanitarian grounds rather than politically 'democratic' grounds. Not sure whether at any point the possibility of judicial execution was raised or was relevant in court.

[Serial_Apologist]

Indeed. I don't think he's a very admirable human being, and he's been spared extradition on humanitarian grounds rather than politically 'democratic' grounds. Not sure whether at any point the possibility of judicial execution was raised or was relevant in court.

One is either sane or insane before being executed. I seem to remember stories of prisoners being granted stays of execution, on grounds that at the time they were not well enough!

[Bryn]

Indeed. I don't think he's a very admirable human being, and he's been spared extradition on humanitarian grounds rather than politically 'democratic' grounds. Not sure whether at any point the possibility of judicial execution was raised or was relevant in court.

Hopefully, the appeals procedure will extend long enough, with Assange on bail, for a future President Harris to withdraw the extradition request, anyway, her previous record regarding the USA's judicial system notwithstanding. My mention of the USA's retention of the death penalty was not intended to refer specifically to Assange's case. Apart from anything else, a commitment not to use such a penalty in his case would be required in order for an extradition to the USA to take place.

[Joseph K]

Yes, whatever one thinks of his personal character or alleged sexual procivaties...

It's important to note that these were dropped.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792

[Cockney Sparrow]

I also find it difficult to find much to admire in Assange - in particular reckless in disclosing information putting others at risk. But I don't have detailed knowledge of what he has/hasn't done and leave the merits of the case itself to his supporters and the Courts.

Apologies if this is alluded to above (I haven't followed links to RT or on Y Tube etc but it is mentioned briefly in the Guardian article) - I wasn't previously aware of a wider implication in this case.

Alan Rusbridger on Today. R4 between 7.30 and 8.00 am this morning made the point that the case had implications for journalists and investigators. For example one of his alleged offences is to have used false/multiple identities to access information - which is hardly what we would see as spying or undermining national security but is a technique used by journalists. What if other governments (and quite likely the US itself) define a behaviour (one of our other current freedoms) as an offence in terms of national security and start demanding extradition of journalists or other public interest investigators?

[french frank]

It's important to note that these were dropped.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792

Also important to note that the Swedish decision to drop the case was due entirely to the elapse of time due to Assange's asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy. Not that the accusations were no longer considered credible (rather the reverse): 'Ms Persson said: "I would like to emphasise that the injured party has submitted a credible and reliable version of events ... &c.' The asylum had the same effect as a parliamentary filibuster - the outcome nothing to do with the merit of the arguments.

I seem to remember stories of prisoners being granted stays of execution, on grounds that at the time they were not well enough!

One has to refrain from laughing at the pitiful state that the country has descended into. The lust for guns and executions no laughing matter.

[Joseph K]

I also find it difficult to find much to admire in Assange - in particular reckless in disclosing information putting others at risk. But I don't have detailed knowledge of what he has/hasn't done and leave the merits of the case itself to his supporters and the Courts.

I'm sure most of 'his supporters' would deny the language your message is couched in - this is not about an individual and their character and its admirability or otherwise - it's about standing up for the idea of journalism free to expose war crimes.

And French Frank, yes, perhaps should have read the article in the link I posted. I would have no qualms about him being on trial for those accusations.

[Serial_Apologist]

One has to refrain from laughing at the pitiful state that the country has descended into. The lust for guns and executions no laughing matter.

'Twas long thus, lest we forget. We were probably brought up on the nostrum that trigger happiness, as long as exercised wearing a white stetson, with a quick finger twirl first around the trigger, and before the other fella, was the John Waynian admission to How The West Was Won in all those 50s movies and on TV, along with homilies about right and wrong, and the faithful (long-suffering) li'l lady back home. That cosy picture of armed personal freedom and safety had to be held fast to in the 1960s when all sorts of things were being questioned by young more widely educated people before its underpinnings were threatened too. My goodness me, a new generation thinking in terms of learning to unlearn the lessons of history pedalled by our elders and betters. Well, I was.

[french frank]

'Twas long thus, lest we forget. We were probably brought up on the nostrum that trigger happiness, as long as exercised wearing a white stetson, with a quick finger twirl first around the trigger, and before the other fella, was the John Waynian admission to How The West Was Won in all those 50s movies and on TV, along with homilies about right and wrong, and the faithful (long-suffering) li'l lady back home. That cosy picture of armed personal freedom and safety had to be held fast to in the 1960s when all sorts of things were being questioned by young more widely educated people before its underpinnings were threatened too. My goodness me, a new generation thinking in terms of learning to unlearn the lessons of history pedalled by our elders and betters. Well, I was.

Absolutely true. In fact I was distracted in my thinking from the guns and executions by just having spent a chilling hour listening to the Commander in Chief bulleying a state official into falsifying the election result in his favour. That pitiful state.

[jayne lee wilson]

I'm sure most of 'his supporters' would deny the language your message is couched in - this is not about an individual and their character and its admirability or otherwise - it's about standing up for the idea of journalism free to expose war crimes.

And French Frank, yes, perhaps should have read the article in the link I posted. I would have no qualms about him being on trial for those accusations.

Neither accusation or allegation is charge or let alone proof. Too often forgotten in the rush to join the crowd and condemn.

Remember that the Swedish Authorities never came to London to question Assange, though he was willing to submit to that. Nor did they guarantee his safety from the threat of extradition to the USA, which was the main reason for his refusing to go to Sweden for trial, and his self-imposed exile in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Given the subsequent events he has been vindicated in that fear. One also recalls the many UK journalists who rubbished his fears about such an extradition. They should be very ashamed.

How much better it would have been for accuser and accused, if the Swedish Government had been more flexible, and stronger in the face of the USA...
If a democratic government does nothing else it should try to avoid inflicting suffering upon anyone....
Assange should be released, but the Government is desperate to avoid upsetting anyone they need a deal with. Just look at the Turkish Arms deal, without a word from the UK about Human Rights violations....

[Bryn]

It's important to note that these were dropped.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792

I was well aware of that, which is why I chose to allude to "alleged sexual proclivities". The reasons for the abandoning of the prosecution are very much to the point. It's a bit like a 'Scottish verdict'.

[Barbirollians]

But as the journalist (remember them?) John Pilger pointed out on Twitter today (my emphasis below):

Assange has been discharged by the judge at the Old Bailey on grounds that he was too great a suicide risk if extradited to the US. This is wonderful! It's a face-saving cover for the British to justify their disgraceful political trial of Assange on America's behalf.

No - I suggest you read the judgment .Pilger who once was a great journalist and lots of other extreme leftists spent much of the last few months traducing the magistrate - confecting a narrative that she was not giving him a fair hearing (a considerable amount of the attacks on her appear to have been based on anti-semitism )only to be both delighted by the result and disappointed by his lack of martyrdom.
I
Assange was found not to be a journalist ( he failed to redact the leaked info ) not to be at risk of not receiving a fair trial but a very ill man saved from extradition by the Human Rights Act .

[Joseph K]

Owen Jones -

But this is about something much bigger than Assange: it’s about journalism, the free press, and most importantly of all, the ability to expose atrocities committed by the world’s last remaining superpower.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/04/julian-assange-extradition-ruling-us-mental-health-whistleblowers

[LHC]

No - I suggest you read the judgment .Pilger who once was a great journalist and lots of other extreme leftists spent much of the last few months traducing the magistrate - confecting a narrative that she was not giving him a fair hearing (a considerable amount of the attacks on her appear to have been based on anti-semitism )only to be both delighted by the result and disappointed by his lack of martyrdom.
I
Assange was found not to be a journalist ( he failed to redact the leaked info ) not to be at risk of not receiving a fair trial but a very ill man saved from extradition by the Human Rights Act .

It will be interesting to read the full judgement when it is published, but the verbal judgement as reported yesterday seems very clear that Julian Assange's activities were clearly not those of a journalist, and hence he could not claim the same protections that would be afforded to a journalist, and also meant the 'free speech' protections did not apply in his case. From Joshua Rozenberg's twitter reporting yesterday:

Assange judgment: password cracking of a DOD computer went beyond the activity of a journalist.

Assange judgment: Assange had been communicating with Manning through Jabber. He made a comment and she then uploaded more docs to a secure cloud directory. [More details of what they did]. This took him outside investigative journalism. Not protected by free speech (Shayler).

Assange judgment: DJ explains how Official Secrets Act works in UK. Defence claims he was protected as a journalist. But he disclosed names of informants. 100 at risk; 50 requested help. Others deterred from revealing abuses. Newspapers including @theguardian condemned decision.

Full thread here:

https://twitter.com/JoshuaRozenberg/status/1346041479626698752

I am glad he won't now be extradited, but I don't think he is really a champion for journalism and free speech as is claimed by his supporters, and personally I think his decision to release unredacted material on wikileaks, knowing that this would endanger the lives of many people named in the leaked documents, when the Guardian, Amnesty International and others all advised against this and were working to produce appropriately redacted documents was unforgiveable. Indeed, it was reported at the time that his view about the people named in the leaks was 'Well, they're informants so, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.'