Owen Jones on Julian Assange

[Lateralthinking1]

Just now on BBC News Mark Weisbrot, speaking from Washington in the US appeared to pour scorn on the idea that this was anything other than a concocted subterfuge instigated by the US, possibly with collusion from the UK, Sweden and Australia. As he said, the Swedish police have not been investigating the supposed crimes in Sweden, whereas they were diligent in going to Serbia to investigate suspected murderers.

See the 10pm news on the BBC News Channel on iPlayer 19th August.

Mark Weisbrot - also at http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/markweisbrot

And if it is subterfuge, that is diabolical. It would place doubts in the minds of women in real need of support about being believed. Surely it could only emanate from male politicians who held women in contempt, wherever they might be.

Time to bring in The Hague!

(Or is it Strasbourg?)

[Pabmusic]

And if it is subterfuge, that is diabolical...Time to bring in The Hague! (Or is it Strasbourg?)

Just now on BBC News Mark Weisbrot, speaking from Washington in the US appeared to pour scorn on the idea that this was anything other than a concocted subterfuge instigated by the US, possibly with collusion from the UK, Sweden and Australia. As he said, the Swedish police have not been investigating the supposed crimes in Sweden, whereas they were diligent in going to Serbia to investigate suspected murderers...Mark Weisbrot - also at http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/markweisbrot

Strasbourg. But I can't see that he'd have a case - neither can his advisers, for he had the chance to appeal to the ECHR until 28 June, but didn't do so (although he was reported as having been considering it). The British, for their part, were acting under a European Arrest Warrant issued by the Swedes for criminal allegations that (in any other circumstances) people would expect to be pursued. The USA didn't enter into it.

I cannot avoid the conclusion that we are now witnessing a concocted subterfuge by Assange to deflect attention from a criminal investigation.

And as for Mark Weisbrot, I read the article Dave2002 posted in no. 150. This fine piece of reporting seems to sum up the quality of the smoke screen:

First, the merits of the case: Assange clearly has a well-founded fear of persecution if he were to be extradited to Sweden

But he had applied for residence in Sweden at the time of the allegations, so presumably didn't have such a fear in late 2010. Perhaps his fear now is that he'll be prosecuted for the sexual offences.

It is pretty much acknowledged that he would be immediately thrown in jail.

I'd certainly be surprised if he were given bail again, seeing how he abused it before.

Since he is not charged with any crime, and the Swedish government has no legitimate reason to bring him to Sweden, this by itself is a form of persecution.

As allegations have been made of criminal conduct in Sweden, it's not easy to see how the "Swedish government has no legitimate reason to bring him to Sweden". Even at the simplest level, they have the authority of a European Arrest Warrant that has been properly issued (and well tested in British courts).

We can infer that the Swedes have no legitimate reason for the extradition, since they were repeatedly offered the opportunity to question him in the UK, but rejected it, and have also refused to even put forth a reason for this refusal.

This is a glaring non sequitur. Because Swedish police are not happy to interview a suspect abroad, in circumstances where they have no power of arrest (and made worse by his known willingness to flee) this raises an inference that there is no legitimate reason to interview him in the first place. I cannot imagine any police force agreeing to interview a suspect only on the suspect's own terms. It's not realistic at all.

If this is the quality of Mark Weisbrot's reporting, then I really can't take him very seriously, let alone his pouring scorn on anything.

I repeat that the Americans could have applied for extradition to the USA at any time since Assange came to Britain. We have a controversial treaty with the USA that allows a 'speeded up' process (basically, British courts don't have to satisfy themselves that there is sufficient proof of the allegation for a jury to convict, before allowing extradition) so it's easy from the UK. But they haven't made such an application in 18 months. The Swedes have, though, in respect of sexual allegations, but we are constantly told Assange is making a principled stand because he fears the Swedes will hand him to the Americans. And many people, including not a few Dave Sparts (who under different circumstances would be defending the complainants against the muck being thrown at them) and that bastion of democratic freedoms and human rights, Ecuador, are backing him up.

[JohnSkelton]

Just now on BBC News Mark Weisbrot, speaking from Washington in the US appeared to pour scorn on the idea that this was anything other than a concocted subterfuge instigated by the US, possibly with collusion from the UK, Sweden and Australia. As he said, the Swedish police have not been investigating the supposed crimes in Sweden, whereas they were diligent in going to Serbia to investigate suspected murderers.

See the 10pm news on the BBC News Channel on iPlayer 19th August.

Mark Weisbrot - also at http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/markweisbrot

Mark Weisbrot has been saying that for months. Recent sample quote:

How fortunate that Ecuador, unlike Sweden, has an independent government that doesn't take directions from the United States.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-weisbrot/ecuador-should-grant-poli_b_1686553.html

Another bourgeois liberal male who, deep on his heart, thinks women never tell the truth about rape.

[Dave2002]

There was more from Mark Weisbrot a month ago, but most of us did not notice - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...t-plot-ecuador

You may dismiss him as a left wing liberal, or a nut, or slightly paranoid. The point he made on the BBC News last night about Assange finding it more difficult to defend himself if he were handed over to Sweden because of language barriers is a reasonable one, though it would depend how affairs were conducted. Most reaonably educated Swedes have a good understanding of English and are able to use it effectively, though there can be errors of understanding by both English speakers and native Swedish speakers if the discussion gets detailed, technical and tough.

I took slightly more notice of Weisbrot on the news because he seems to be a well informed American presenting fairly reasoned arguments. He appears to be critical of some of the actions of the government and agencies of his own country, though at the present time he seems to be free to travel and to speak and write freely. There is quite a lot of good in the USA, some not so good, and some - such as the rendition of foreign suspects to third countries where it seems they have been tortured, which might come under the domain of "dark forces", as mentioned earlier. In his July 21 article Weisbrot points out that there is evidence that Sweden has previously been involved in some of the activities relating to renditon.

[JohnSkelton]

There was more from Mark Weisbrot a month ago, but most of us did not notice - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...t-plot-ecuador

You may dismiss him as a left wing liberal, or a nut, or slightly paranoid. The point he made on the BBC News last night about Assange finding it more difficult to defend himself if he were handed over to Sweden because of language barriers is a reasonable one, though it would depend how affairs were conducted. Most reaonably educated Swedes have a good understanding of English and are able to use it effectively, though there can be errors of understanding by both English speakers and native Swedish speakers if the discussion gets detailed, technical and tough.

I took slightly more notice of Weisbrot on the news because he seems to be a well informed American presenting fairly reasoned arguments. He appears to be critical of some of the actions of the government and agencies of his own country, though at the present time he seems to be free to travel and to speak and write freely. There is quite a lot of good in the USA, some not so good, and some - such as the rendition of foreign suspects to third countries where it seems they have been tortured, which might come under the domain of "dark forces", as mentioned earlier. In his July 21 article Weisbrot points out that there is evidence that Sweden has previously been involved in some of the activities relating to renditon.

I'm a left-wing nut. That's the subsidiary aspect to this that irks me; that certain left-wing nuts are suddenly so certain that these allegations are fabricated, while some of them have put out all sorts of claims about the alleged victims which seem to have no substance other than they want to believe them (aside from the sheer disgustingness of gossiping about alleged victims of sexual abuse and outing them).

Assange is the perfect hero for liberal middle-class radicals. He looks good, he sounds good, he could be out of one of their favourite issue films, he is middle class not a prole, his politics are vague and vaguely about freedom and he never mentions class, and he has certainly been instrumental in getting some important information into the public domain which the US in particular badly wanted suppressed: particularly concerning Iraq and the murders of civilians. But he is also accused of sex crimes against two women and to sit there as the Weisbrots do and like some pub bore insist that of course they are making it up makes me feel ill. Especially as the line seems to mutate between the Swedes have got it in for him, Swedish law is the product of crazy man-hating feminists (shock horror) and therefore unfair, and the Americans want to render him.

If the latter is the case, what has changed since he tried to become a Swedish citizen?

As for the language argument - I suppose the answer is be careful only to commit an alleged crime in a country where you are a fluent speaker of the native language (if you can make sure it has laws which suit you, so much the better). In any case, it's Sweden for heaven's sakes.

[Dave2002]

Another bourgeois liberal male who, deep on his heart, thinks women never tell the truth about rape.

Talking of rape, here's another well informed American politician - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/us...e-comment.html, but presumably neither bourgeois or liberal!

[Bryn]

... Assange is the perfect hero for liberal middle-class radicals. He looks good, he sounds good, ...

Eh? He has always looked, and sounded, a pretty shifty character to me. That's not to prejudge his guilt or innocence of the accusations against him, however.

[Tony Halstead]

Er, what does 'guilt of innocence' mean?

[Dave2002]

I made the point about him deserving fair treatment whether he's nasty or not some while back.

Chances are that someone really pleasant wouldn't have uncovered or publicised the affairs and shenanigans like he has, or had the persistence etc. to do so.

Also, some really "nice" people, smooth etc. are like that because they get others, seemingly less nice, to do their dirty work for them. Teflon coated people. Some politicians and powerful people are like that, though not all.

[Bryn]

Er, what does 'guilt of innocence' mean?

It means the forefinger of my left hand drifted downwards when aiming for the "r" of "or".

Now corrected (with 'blue pencil').

[Tony Halstead]

Sorry, I see now.. I'm an exclusively right-handed ( therefore only 50% efficient) typist, although a predominantly left-handed instrumentalist!

[scottycelt]

Some women tell the truth, others lie. Some men tell the truth, others lie.

Surprise, surprise. That's why, in the case of an alleged crime, we need a fair and legal trial in an attempt (sometimes vain) to find out who's telling the truth and who isn't?

[Dave2002]

Scotty

Presumably the £240k bail will now be forfeit, and will at least partially defray any expenses to "the taxpayer".

[jean]

It may broaden the discussuion here too much to include thie, but it's a worrying aspect of the whole Wikileaks project that I'd forgotten:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-israel-shamir-russia-scandinavia

[Flosshilde]

It may broaden the discussuion here too much to include thie, but it's a worrying aspect of the whole Wikileaks project that I'd forgotten:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ia-scandinavia

Yo're right, Jean, it's not relevant to this discussion about JA, & I don't see the point in posting it unless you want to smear JA with other 'crimes' & by extension Wikileaks as a whole.