Britain orders the extradition of Julian Assange to
the United States. Approved by the Home Secretary.
The UK Government's decision to uphold the application
by the United States Department of Justice to
extradite Australian publisher Julian Assange according
to Nils Melzer and many other legal experts, imperils
journalists everywhere. Melzer states that the misguided
charges against Assange risk criminalizing reporting and will
damage press freedom. According to Melzer - free Assange
is the only right option.

Melzer describes this as another blow to press freedom, justice,
and rule of law and asks - how far have we sunk?

http://bloomsbury.com/au/trial-of-julian-assange-9781839766220/

Your thoughts please?

Jules is going to appeal the decision, but good luck in finding where the money to pay the lawyers is coming from, as Jules is big on transparency as long as it isn't Wikileaks or its donors. If he does end up going to the United States, it will be to face a trial. Chelsea (nee Brad) faced a trial some years ago without a jot of support from Wikileaks. I guess Jules had some very pressing priorities at the time. I wont celebrate unless he gets convicted. At least he is a step closer to an outcome.

It appears that Julian Assange could appeal the decision
and WikiLeaks said he would. Which of course means that
Assange's legal battle is not at an end. Not by a long shot.
It's been going on for more than a decade.

He can launch an appeal at London's High Court and he can
ultimately seek to take his case to the UK Supreme Court.

However, if the appeal is refused - Assange must be
extradited within 28 days.

Which looks like this is not the end of the fight for Assange
but only the beginning of a new legal battle.

The United States has given a package of assurances that
Assange will be treated fairly - taking his mental
health into account - including a pledge
that Assange could be transferred to Australia
to serve any sentence.

The federal government says it will continue to offer
consular assistance to Assange.

"We will continue to convey our expectations that
Mr Assange is entitled to due process, humane and
fair treatment, access to proper medical care, and
access to his legal team." A statement late on Friday
night from Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong and
Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said.

"The Australian government has been clear in our view
that Mr Assange's case has dragged on for too long and
that it should be brought to a close."

"We will continue to express this view to the governments
of the United Kingdom and the United States.

I agree Foxy. It is not finished yet. I suspect that Jules will have a fair amount of support in the United States. If people there thought like me he would end up rotting in prison.

How does anyone break US law when they are not US citizens and are not in US jurisdiction at the time of the alleged offence?

The Australian Government should be demanding his immediate release.

Hi Fester,

Why do you think Assange should rot in an American prison?
Hasn't he paid enough?

American prisons are the most dreadful places -
and their system of torture apparently beggars belief.

Is Mise,

Good points raised.

For anyone interested - read about the David Hicks case:

http://lawcouncil.asn.au/policy-agenda/human-rights/david-hicks

I also came across the following on the web that in 1791
in an attempt to stop the publication of the first part of
Thomas Paine's work - "The Rights of Man", the British
government tried to buy up the copyright.

The publisher refused to sell.

The following year, after the 2nd part of the work was
published, the government tried a more direct tactic,
charging Paine with sedition, libel and treason.

Outraged, Paine listed the things his book had done -
exposing fraud, ending war, and promoting universal peace.
Stating - "if these things are libellous - let the name libeller
be engraved on my tomb."

Sound familiar?

Now hundreds of years later governments around the world still
endeavour to supress damning information, violating the
right to freedom of expression and targeting those responsible
for exposing it.

If sent back to the US - Assange would stand trial on
espionage charges and is convicted could face a prison sentence
of up to 175 years.

One more thing:

Assurances by the US authorities that they would not put
Julian Assange in a maximum security prison or subject
him to abusive special administrative measures (SAM)
including prolonged solitary confinement have been
discredited by their admission that they reserved the
right to reverse those guarantees.

There have been recent reports that the CIA considered
both kidnapping and killing Assange while he was holed up
in the Ecquadorian Embassy. They bugged the embassy,
followed Assange's family and associates and burgled the
office of his lawyer which clearly shows the political
motivation behind this case.

All things the US government has not contested.

Our federal government needs to take a strong stand in the
name of justice for its Australian citizen - and not let
this case drag on - as they allowed with the David Hicks
case.

"How does anyone break US law when they are not US citizens and are not in US jurisdiction at the time of the alleged offence?"

If your actions result in people being harmed or killed I would like to think that you should be accountable for your conduct in some part of the world. Jules has had the best legal representation other people's money can buy, and that representation has not convinced the British courts that he should not be sent to the United States to stand trial for his conduct.

Foxy,

I don't like Jules at all. I probably like him even less than you like George Pell. For me, George had the integrity to face a trial and put himself at the mercy of the courts, whereas Jules in my eyes has demonstrated a detestable cowardice in evading the law. Further, I don't see such behaviour as reason for mitigation. For all I know Jules might be the lovely person that you think him to be, but for me he is a bit like a dodgy tele-evangelist ripping of his parishioners. Yuck!

Fester,
Pell faced accusers in his own country for offences against Australian law, if Assange has broken any laws then he should be tried in Australia, if he hasn’t broken Australian law and has broken no US law within their jurisdiction then it is not lawful to send him to the US to face trial.
He might be the greatest bastard in the World but he is entitled to our protection as a citizen of this country. How much trust can we place in our Government to look out for us when in a foreign country?

«How does anyone break US law when they are not US citizens and are not in US jurisdiction at the time of the alleged offence?»

Not only do I agree with Is Mise's concise statement, but I stated the same all along.

But alas, we are slaves - tragically, no one on this planet dares to simultaneously defy both America and China (possibly save Israel which has its own nukes), both oppressors in their own ways, but China being even worse, the outcome is inevitable: Julian will be cruelly tortured paying the price of our helplessness and any further discussion is futile.

The right thing was to snatch Julian many years ago, when he was released on bail in an estate near the beach. An Australian navy ship or submarine should have landed commandos at night to take him onboard (then of course deny that we had anything to do with it), but only Israel does such operations, we here live as chickens and will die as chickens.

«How does anyone break US law when they are not US citizens and are not in US jurisdiction at the time of the alleged offence?»

Again, the British courts rejected this argument. Could I ask if I would be breaking US law for the following: I send a bomb in the post to the United States which explodes in a postal facility, killing and injuring employees as well as damaging the facility. Am I in the clear because I am neither a US citizen nor in US jurisdiction? According to some accounts the harm that Jules did was far greater than any bomb I could have sent.

Fester,
You’d be charged under Australian law.
What Assange may or may not have caused to happen, he couldn’t have done so if the US was not breaking the law itself; Assange in my opinion did the wrong thing and for reward, but that dosen’t change the fact that the US has no jurisdiction over him. He is an Australian and our Government should be protecting him.

Is mise

Indeed I would be charged under Australian law, but would I have broken US laws? You don't have to answer the question like politician. It is a simple question.

Dear Fester,

Clearly if someone posted a bomb from Australia, then either it would already be against Australian law, or the Americans would tell Australia: "Fix this to our satisfaction or no more mail from Australia is accepted".

Another country might be happy about its citizens sending bombs to America, then it would become an international issue between that country and America, perhaps even a war, but no individual should be charged for what was perfectly legal at the time in their country.

Most Australian women break the Saudi modesty laws daily in the way they dress, but is anyone suggesting that they should therefore be extradited to Saudi Arabia?

Get over Assange. The Australian Government is not going to interfere in the situation, as Foreign Minister Wong made clear tonight.

DEFAT has made it clear that Australia is not a party to Assange’s case, nor can the Australian government intervene in the legal matters of another country.

Some people just have to side with anti-heros and scumbags, but nobody is listening. All the wailing about this unpleasant character, especially by those who didn't bat an eyelid when George Pell was wrongly jailed for 404 days is disgusting, to say the least.

Dear Ttbn,

I was as upset about George Pell being jailed as now about Julian.

Just as I don't like to be jailed myself, I don't wish it on anybody else.

And yes, I am very aware that nothing we say here can make a difference: Australia is weak and needs America to save it from China, there is no other way, hence it is a fact that we must continue to grovel to America even when they are in the wrong. Just let it be known without delusion that Australia is unable to protect its citizens, including when faced with injustice.

Could it simply be just a case of paying the price for indoctrinated ideology ?

Dear Yuyutsu,

My question was "Would I have broken US laws for my action even though I was not a US citizen nor in US jurisdiction?". I think the claim that Jules is innocent because he wasn't a US citizen nor in US jurisdiction quite absurd.

If Jules goes to the US, he will face a trial in an impartial court and have good legal representation. That is more than the victims of his actions got.

Yuyutsu

You have most likely done nothing to be jailed for. I wouldn't want to be in jail either; and that's why I stick to the law.

Jail is punishment for bad people. There is no case for bad people to go unpunished when most people are not bad.

In Australia, there are not enough people locked up by weak, or corrupt and cowardly judges and magistrates. In the last couple of days in SA, we have had a pervert caught with child porn given 8 months home 'detention' because he is "not suited to jail", according to the rotten judge, who would be sacked if it were not for our equally rotten prosecutors who do not appeal, and the even more rotten politicians who are supposed to be serving us.

Fester,

You would not have broken US law because you were not subject to its jurisdiction.
As for Assange getting a fair trial, both the English and American Courts have ,in the past and no doubt in the future, have/will hand down politically motivated decisions.
Two famous cases from the past are the execution of William Joyce (Lord Haw Haw) and the jailing of the doctor, Samuel Mudd who attended John Wilkes Booth after Lincoln’s murder
.
Joyce was innocent and Mudd was eventually pardoned.

Hi Foxy,
The UK could've just as easily extradited him to Australia years ago, and let us deal with the US ourselves going forward.

In which case we could've said that we'll allow the US and their goon squad to come here and hold their trail, with a judiciary combined from both countries, in order that our citizen gets a fair trial and that his right to a fair one are upheld.

If found guilty, then we'll imprison him here as per the courts decision ourselves.

Given that the US was spying on him in a supposed neutral embassy and planned to assassinate him, it's hard for anyone to think he's going to get a fair day in court.

I'm happy for him to face court for that which he's accused of, so long as he gets a fair trial, but I don't think that will be the case in the US.

The Assange situation deserves special attention in my opinion, in the interests of fairness, something I don't think the US would favor.

I also don't believe that Julian Assange would get a fair
trial in the US. And I don't get why the former army
analyst Chelsea Manning who passed on the documents to
WikiLeaks was released out of a US military prison 7 years
after being arrested. Julian Assange has already served
more than ten years.

We sad David Hicks almost 20 years ago brought back by PM John
Howard. This is not unprecedented.

Australian independent MP Andrew Wilkie has called on the
newly elected Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese to pick up
the phone and demand an end to what he described as
"madness." This has been a political matter from the
start. Mr Wilkie has received the backing of a number
of crossbench MPs, including Dr Monique Ryan, Allegra
Spender, Zali Stegall, to name just a few.

Court cases as we know take time. But we're talking here
about an Australian whose mental and physical health
continues to decline.

Hi Foxy,
"And I don't get why the former army analyst Chelsea Manning who passed on the documents to WikiLeaks was released out of a US military prison 7 years after being arrested."

I don't think this is about Wikileaks releasing images of US military blowing up journalists in Iraq via Chelsea Manning in 2010.
What this is about is Assange releasing the Podesta emails in 2016 and costing Hillary and the Democrats the election that Trump ended up winning.
He also released the CIA's Vault 7 hacking tools which the United States used for covert actions against others in 2017.
Obama wasn't going to prosecute Assange originally, the attitude of the US changed when he cost Hillary the election and give up the US governments secret hacking tools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning
"Assigned in 2009 to an Army unit in Iraq as an intelligence analyst, Manning had access to classified databases. In early 2010, she leaked classified information to WikiLeaks and confided this to Adrian Lamo, an online acquaintance."
"The material was published by WikiLeaks and its media partners between April 2010 and April 2011."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podesta_emails
"Some or all of the Podesta emails were subsequently obtained by WikiLeaks, which published over 20,000 pages of emails, allegedly from Podesta, in October and November 2016."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_7
"Vault 7 is a series of documents that WikiLeaks began to publish on 7 March 2017, detailing the activities and capabilities of the United States Central Intelligence Agency to perform electronic surveillance and cyber warfare."

Hope this helps draw a more well-informed picture of what happened for you.
A lot of other things happened as well around that time, relating to whistlebowers.
- And more.

Is Mise,

"Joyce was innocent"

To you perhaps. To me a fervent Nazi collaborator and a traitor, although I don't favour the death penalty.

"You would not have broken US law because you were not subject to its jurisdiction."

Again, to you perhaps, but such an argument was used by Jules' lawyers and failed. Perhaps you should be lobbying to have the law changed, but I don't fancy your chances. Here is another scenario: I am a Canadian citizen, get an explosives licence, then use a drone to drop bombs over the border, killing and injuring US citizens. Have I not broken US law as I am neither a US citizen nor in US jurisdiction? I think your reasoning absurd and understand why the British courts rejected it.

As an afterthought...
- I might add that part of those Vault 7 hacking tools allowed the CIA to spoof metadata so that a computer forensic analysis would draw a conclusion that a foreign actor (ie. Russia) had committed the hacking when in fact it was actually the CIA themselves.

It allowed them to commit such frauds as the hacking of the DNC server, and maybe also the Christopher Steele dossier, though I honestly can't remember all of the exact details now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee_cyber_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrowdStrike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guccifer_2.0

That server that Trump had been looking for ended up being moved to the US embassy in Kiev, where he couldn't get to it.
- But Biden already had significant sway in Ukraine already so Trump got nowhere.

Why President Trump asked Ukraine to look into a DNC "server" and CrowdStrike
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-crowdstrike-ukraine-server-conspiracy-theory-60-minutes-2020-02-16/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden_Ukraine_conspiracy_theory

Hunter Biden, the black sheep who got Trump impeached, explained
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/1/20891510/hunter-biden-burisma-ukraine-shokin

This stuff all ends up leading to Hunter Biden and Rosemont Seneca and Metabiota and biolabs in Ukraine;
And it probably also connects to EcoHealth Alliance and gain-of-function research for Coronavirua as well.
- I'm not well versed on all of these details.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/fund-led-by-biden-s-son-involved-in-financing-biolabs-in-ukraine-russia-122032401368_1.html

You can find out more about the Vault 7 tools here:
http://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

I am fairly certain that they (Ukrainian NAZI's - or to be more precise Ihor Kolomoyskyi) were doing human trials on psychiatric patients.

Which is why I recently shared the info.
Zelenskiy's Kolomoisky Connection
http://youtu.be/MXgli7TpINw

Zelensky, Hunter Biden — and Their Sugar Daddy, Kolomoisky
http://youtu.be/fUPKZkqXfZI

It's really a huge web of information to try and narrow down the facts of what was actually going on.

Thank You Armchair Critic for taking the time and trouble
to give us more information on this issue. It is appreciated.
I'd like to also thank everyone who's also taken the time to
give an opinion in this discussion. It's not as easy to fathom
everything that's going on.

Legal experts say that the Assange case could take months or
even years to conclude. " We will appeal this case all the way,
if necessary, to the European Court of Human Rights," Mr
Assange's attorney, Jennifer Robinson, said.

Ms Robinson has asked US President Joe Biden to drop the
charges brought against Mr Assange during Donald Trump's
presidency, arguing they posed a "grave threat" to free speech.

Many people believe that Assange did nothing wrong. That he's
committed no crime and is not a criminal. That he's a
journalist and a publisher and that he's being punished just
for doing his job.

The documents in question related to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
and revealed that the US had killed hundred of civilians
in Afghanistan in previously undisclosed incidents. The
leaked files also showed that 66,000 civilians had been killed
by Iraqi forces and that prisoners had been tortured.

Assange supporters claim Assange's actions were journalism and
in the public interest.

We know that Assange is a powerful advocate for the necessity
of open information in a democracy. Yes, it wasn't smart to
offend the powerful, and embarrasing the powerful is "wrong"
in view of self-interest.

However, this has gone on long enough surely. And the person
who initially supplied the documents has been released.
Our newly elected PM should take responsibility - as he
claimed he always does - during his election campaign - and
ask that an Australian citizen be returned to Australia.

If John Howard could do it for David Hicks (a terrorist)
surely Albanese can do it for a journalist and publishe4r -
Julian Assange?

Hi Foxy,
I think probably Assage did what he did in 2016 (releasing the Podesta emails) was to try and put Trump in the Whitehouse and not Hillary.
- I know you always supported the narrative Foxy, but Bill and Hillary were into some really shady stuff.
Releasing the Vault 7 CIA tools may have even been an attempt by Assange to give Trump himself the tools to try and understand what was really going on, but he was a businessman, and not well adept enough about how things work in Washington and withing the government to get to the bottom of things.

I just started watched a live YouTube stream that focuses on Assange and the many issues related to him if anyone wants something to watch.

BREAKING: Top Ukrainian Military Official LASHES OUT At Zelensky Adviser
http://youtu.be/f93RewJnNHA

You can easily pull the red playback slider thingy back to the beginning and watch it too, if anyone wishes to do so.
In the video, from the beginning Jackson Hinkle immediately discusses Assange.

Dear Fester,

«If Jules goes to the US, he will face a trial in an impartial court and...»

Maybe, maybe not - he would be an idiot if he did. I just wouldn't take my chances, same for all I ever said and wrote about China and Russia, I don't take any chances, I've never been there and never willingly ever place my foot there (nor even transit again via Hong-Kong airport).

---

Dear Ttbn,

«You have most likely done nothing to be jailed for.»

Well legally speaking I have, and so I believe each and every adult person on this earth, including, if nothing else, for breaking laws they were not even aware of. For starters, I did not report to the regime when I had COVID (well I actually did report, but only anonymously through a friend so they still have their numbers right to plan for hospital and ICU spots, but not my name): I did isolate at home for 9 days, but never told those bastards about my positive RAT. By law, they could jail me for that. Could you find me ANYONE who never ever broke any COVID regulation, who never visited a friend or a relative when not allowed, or perhaps too many of them, or perhaps only got a haircut illegally or exercised outside more than the time allowed during lockdown?

As I was driving earlier today, I took the slightly longer route to avoid driving past a jail. It just depresses me to think of all the tormented people suffering inside and pass through this gloom bad energy. I find this barbaric practice cruel and inhumane, cruel for cruelty sake and out of sync with spiritual principles.

Fortunately, so long, God protected me from jail and I pray He always will. I put my trust in God and His eternal and just law, not in people and their stupid arbitrary laws. I can also confidently say that whenever I was a "victim" of crime, I know in my heart of hearts that I fully deserved it.

Fester,
The Canadian would have been subject to Canadian law and therefore subject to trial in that jurisdiction for murder.
Joyce was born in Ireland, became a U S citizen but renounced that citizenship, he was not at the time that he worked for the Nazis a British citizen, therefore they had no jurisdiction.
Britain murdered Joyce just as they had judiciously murdered many others.
Joyce’s greatest crime was being a figure of fun inBritain, hence “Lord Haw Haw” as a nickname.
Joyce did have a British passport, which he obtained pre-war under false pretences, to wit: he lied, the penalty for which was a fine, instead they hanged him in revenge.
Judicial murder.

I did not read all the posts this time, so others might already have said that:
Julian has not offended against Britain to any serious extent.
He did not do physical harm any of them?
All he did was attempt survival in a hostile environment.
Why should Britain be arbitrarily deciding the fate of Julian?
What has it to do with them?
They need to return him to Australia, and we will deal with his offences, if any.

I also have the idea that ALL the people are entitled to know EXACTLY what their government is doing.
It cannot be an offence for any person to have such information?
How else can we assess and decide the suitability of a government.
This concept of a 'cloak of secrecy' is absurd.
If it is so bad that it has to be kept 'under wraps' forever, then they shouldn't be doing it.
We mustn't allow any person in any government to undermine the freedom we have to know what they are up to.
It is not only right that we should know, it is absolutely necessary.

Ipso Facto,
Governments need secrecy, especially in diplomacy and trade, it’s not the secrecy that is the problem but the illegal acts that some Governments do that is the problem.

Is Mise,

Propaganda is a weapon of war. I don't think less of the Brits for hanging the bugger after the war, but times change. Hanoi Jane has never been tried for treason in the US, and that was over fifty years ago.

So I'd be charged with murder in Canada, but how does that work if the murders were committed outside Canadian jurisdiction? Would that make Jules a law breaker in the country he was in when Wikileaks released the information about the foreign operatives and informants?

Most of the media we watch on TV and in the news is all generic mockingbird media, it's all the same and parrots a single talking point and narrative.
The few genuine people that are out there trying to do real journalism and report an unbiased truth are attacked, demonetised, de-platformed, or even worse held to account and prosecuted for acting illegally based on the laws of our own governments.

Just last night the team George Webb is affiliated with were all held up at gunpoint (12 witnesses) and had their server and laptop stolen and held ranson by someone who apparently is trying to extort them.

I don't buy the extortion claim.
He was getting too close reporting on those Ukrainian biolabs.
How did the armed intruder know they had a server and not web-hosting?
Why would you risk an armed intrusion on 12 people just for extortion money?
How did they know they didn't have the data backed up and would even be willing to pay?

That's the reason their site is now out of action...
http://www.neighborhoodnewsstudio.com/

Incidentally, if anyone saw the video I shared a few weeks ago, this was the website hosting the video where George connected Rothschilds to Kolomoisky, via Gregoire Chertok and Larisa Chertok
I did mention it 2 weeks ago, (link below) but cant find the actual link to the 2 comments where I added the link to George's video where he himself mentioned it.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9825&page=0#334573

http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b14zbl0qxk6g6j/grgoire-chertok-plays-banker-to-frances-elite
"Grégoire Chertok’s favorite place may be the inside of a cinema, but nothing gets the Rothschild & Cie. partner’s blood rushing like a big takeover."

http://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/oligarch-toys-planes-palaces-other-posh-possessions.html
"Igor Kolomoisky shares Damir Akhmetov’s admiration for Lake Geneva. However, Kolomoisky’s lakeside villa — registered under the name of his sister Larisa Chertok — is much smaller."

Fester,
Only if what he did was a crime in that country, murder is a crime in Canada, he plotted it in Canada and controlled the device used from that country
Paedophiles who engage in sex with underage children in foreign countries, even though it is lawful there.can be charged under our law when they enter our jurisdiction but only if they are Australian citizens.
If they are not Australian citizens then they can only be deported/refused entry.

Nice to see that you think the execution of an innocent man is OK if his offending actions upset you.

Hope you don’t do jury service.

A University of Oxford blog back in 2010 published an
interesting article on "WikiLeaks - rights and wrongs."

To which someone responded with the following:

" Wikileaks has posted to its website only 960
of the 251.297 diplomatic cables that it has. Almost
every one of these cables were first published by one
of its newspaper partners which are disclosing them
(The Guardian, the NYT, El Pais, Le Monde, Der Speigel).

More over the cables posted by WikiLeaks were not only
first published by these newspapers, but contain the
redactions applied by these papers to protect innocent
people and otherwise minimize harm."

So why is only Assange the one being charged?

And can a publisher be held accountable for the conduct
of others in providing crucial information to the public?

Here's the University of Oxford blog:

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2010/12/wikileaks-rights-and-wrongs/

"Nice to see that you think the execution of an innocent man is OK if his offending actions upset you."

Joyce was not innocent. Propaganda made Germans feel that genocide was reasonable conduct. It made Russian soldiers feel okay about committing war crimes against Ukrainian civilians. You assume the Brits were unjust and brutal in hanging Joyce, but maybe they knew a little more about propaganda than you? Maybe propaganda is the devil that whispers in your ear?

Fester,

Suggest that you read a little about the Joyce case.
He was tried on three counts for High Treason and found Not Guilty on two, on the third count he was found guilty because he was holding a British Passport, had he approached a British Legation for a handout and they found that he’d lied to get the passport then he’d have got nothing, they would not have considered him a British subject.
So how could they hang him on the same lie?
Only if the British Government was prepared to commit murder.

Assange's case is no different, he is an Australian citizen (however much we wish he weren’t) and as such the British Government has no jurisdiction over him except for crimes committed against the law of Bfitain.
They certainly have no right to deport him to a country that has no jurisdiction over him.

So why is only Assange the one being charged?
Foxy,
This case is more mentality orientated than technicality !

The British Kangaroo Court has agreed to send Julian Assange before America's Judge Freisler for a show trial. Yet Donald Trump who incited a riot at the Capitol Building in Washington leading to death, walks free, go figure so called American justice.

Is Mise,

I remember my father and grandmother talking of Lord Haw Haw, and they didn't see the slightest injustice in his hanging. Mind you, my grandmother was a fervent commie. What I did note from reading of him was that he got legal representation and a trial. His appeal went to the House of Lords. I don't believe in the death penalty, but I think he got fair justice for those times and was a truly horrible character.

Fester,
Of course he was a horrible person, but that’s not the point, he was not a British citizen so they murdered him.
Another person who paid with his life was Sir Roger Casement, the Irish Nationalist, he was hanged on the parsing of a sentence in the relevant Act, that was written in Latin; the mere placing of a comma, but that was enough excuse for Judicial murder but as the Brits had also murdered most of the Leaders ot the 1916 Easter Rising, after an illegal military hearing in Dublin, Casement’s fate was no surprise.
His chances of clemancy were destroyed by the British Govt. by allegations of homosexuality, which had, of course, nothing to do with his case.
Assange will no doubt join the long list of British political victims.

Thank you Is Mise,

No love between the Brits and the Irish, that is for sure. I have been much entertained reading of these characters you mention.

Cheers

The last man hanged in Australia was Ronald Ryan, 3rd February 1967. Ryan was a criminal, and he had committed many illegal acts, but the evidence and eyewitness accounts that Ryan shot prison officer George Hodson was inconclusive. Fully expecting the death sentence would be commuted to life in prison the jury found Ryan guilty of murder. With a state election looming the Premier of Victoria, Sir Henry Bolte, insisted that the death sentence be carried out, declaring it would win him the election. To this day, many claim Ryan's execution was politically motivated.

Fester,
Obviously you have never been to Ireland, the most popular tourist are the British.
Many British people retire to Ireland where they are welcome.
Political strife doesn’t alter the regard that ordinary working people feel for each other, without the support of workers in Britain, Ireland, arguably, would have taken much longer to gain independence.

That Julian was not a US citizen and not in the US when he passed on the files he was given by a US citizen should mean he is not liable.
The crime seems to be that he gave someone secret US files that came
into his possession while not in the US.

Editors of US newspapers are in the same situation but they have not
been charged. Neither have owners of Australian TV stations who published on air the videos that are part of the same files.

Why have Australian editors of newspapers, TV and radio not been
prosecuted ?
I know they committed this crime as I saw the video on TV.

If Assange is innocent, he would have turned himself in 10 years ago, and all this nonsense would have been over and done with.

Julian Assange did offer to be interviewed at the
Swedish Embassy in London or in Scotland Yard when
charges against him were first made back in 2010.
He also gave himself up to the British police and
was taken to an extradition hearing. He was granted bail
by the High Court after his supporters paid 240,000 pounds
in cash and securities.

However a British Court ruled that he should be extradited
to Sweden - and from then things got worse. The man went according
to the letter of the law. Sweden dropped the charges against
him - but the dirty tricks kept up to get him across to the US.
This is a travesty and our PM should put a stop to it going
any further.

I find both David HICKS & Julian ASSANGE curious in their similarity. To my uneducated perspective, both are no-hoper's and do nothing to value add to our great Nation. HICKS was found fraternising with the enemy, and ASSANGE has been accused of having protected documents in his possession, being the intellectual property of the United States. In both instances I'm not entirely sure of their precise allegations/charges.

Can anybody tell me why these two individuals seem to get more support, more sympathy, from the Oz population, than someone else who's infinitely more in need of that emotion? I read somewhere about an Oz woman who' locked up in some Middle Eastern country for some absurd, some spurious charge or other. We hear very little le about her, but plenty on these two?

Interesting-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils_Melzer

http://duckduckgo.com/?q=Melzer+surname&ia=web

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melzer
http://www.hebrewsurnames.com/MELZER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltzer

O sung wu

Some people here and elsewhere like belonging to a mob; it makes them feel 'cool', with it. Assange has had huge, unwarranted publicity, so what better case to attach themselves to! It makes them feel part of something; useful; important; up with the the latest 'thing'.

To me, they are bloody idiots lacking lives of their own. Some of them must be upset to find that the Labor government is on the same wavelength as the previous government was when it comes to peanuts like Assange.

To Armchair Critic- thanks for the interesting information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0jThc4Lszo

Assange has exposed US war crimes. In a just world it would seem more reasonable to prosecute those who have committed those crimes rather than one who has exposed them.

Hi David,

Very true, we have our fair share of war criminals in Australia, instead of jail, we pin a bloody medal on them.

Dear Paul1405,

I object to your equating those Australians who get medals with war criminals.

There are those peanuts who respect the rule of law and feel sorrow at the undermining of human rights by the very people who should be upholding them.

I am reminded of the criminal who was captured by the British police and his accomplice later shot a person dead before being himself captured.
The one who fired the shot went to prison because he was underage but his accomplice, who was already in custody when the shot was fired, was executed for murder as he was deemed to ‘be in company’ with the actual murderer.
Appeals based on the fact that he was no longer “in company’ because he was in police custody failed and his execution took place.
Another political murder.

I thank O Sung Wu for reminding us of Australian and other women who are locked up in the Middle East.

My sympathy and prayers go to them, as well as to Julian Assange and to all others who are being locked up by different regimes throughout the world. May God redeem them all soon and have them reunited with their families and loved ones.

Hi David,

I'm not saying all who have a medal pinned on them are war criminals, but there are war criminals who have medals pinned on them, for various reasons. Afghanistan shows that to be the case.

It appears that our PM is talking privately
with the Americans regarding Assange. I guess
to keep it all diplomatic. As long as Assange
gets to go home - that's what's important. It's
gone on for far too long. And he's already paid
the price. Anyway, it has to be settled soon.
I believe there only ten days left before Assange
can be extradited to the US.

Foxy,

If JA was simply acting as a journalist he would not be facing charges. As he actively assisted someone to commit espionage, he is in serious trouble.

Maybe he could get a pardon from B B B Biden.

Dr Agnes Callamard, Amnesty International's Secretary
General summed up the Assange case - the following way:

" To me it is a damning indictment that virtually
no one responsible for alleged war crimes committed in the
course of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars has been held
accountable, let alone prosecuted, and yet a publisher who
exposed such crimes is potentially facing a life-time in
jail."

"The US government's unrelenting pursuit of Julian Assange
makes it clear that this prosecution is a punitive measure
but the case involves concerns which go far beyond the fate
of one man and puts media freedom and freedom of expression
in peril."

"whistleblowers, publishers and journalists are of vital
importance in holding governments to scrutiny and
human rights violations to account. The charges against
Julian Assange should be urgently dropped and he should
be released.

I keep telling you Foxy,
This isn't about exposing war crimes in Afghanistan.
It's because he released the Podesta emails and cost Hillary and democrats the 2016 election, that in itself is enough to have the current incumbents hating him.
But even worse, he released the CIA Vault 7 hacking tools, you have to understand he probably helped Trump win the election, but Trump had Mike Pompeo as his secretary of state from 2018, and before that he was director of the CIA, it was he that convinced Trump to go ahead and prosecute him.
Also Mike Pompeo has lost a heap of weight, he doesn't even look like the same bloke anymore.
Look at him in this picture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Pompeo
And look at him now.
http://nypost.com/2022/01/06/mike-pompeos-weight-loss-story-down-90-pounds-in-6-months/
I wonder if he's going to try for the Presidency in 2024, if not as Trumps running mate, to keep Trump in check with the establishment.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/pompeo-leverages-foreign-policy-bonafides-2024-shadow-primary-rcna21483
- People are hedging their bets -

And all of this - regards Assange, is separate to the fact that Assange may know the truth about Seth Rich.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Seth_Rich
- Who may have been the REAL leaker at the DNC, not 'Russian' hackers.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/will-julian-assange-and-wikileaks-finally-tell-the-truth-about-seth-rich-918946/
As well as all this there's an untold story about Eric Braverman, former CEO at the Clinton Foundation.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/clinton-foundation-eric-braverman-115598/
http://stream.org/the-mysterious-disappearance-of-former-clinton-foundation-ceo-eric-braverman/
It's said that Braverman learned about all the funny business and number fudging going on at the Clinton Foundation, and wouldn't sign off on it. So he quit or went into hiding.
- Then Seth Rich was killed, it may have been a message by Hillary.
'This is what will happen to you, should you speak of what you know.'

I keep telling you Hillary wasn't as clean as people like yourself think she was.

Hi Foxy,

Don't you think SM is right, if Julian Assange had toed the line there would have been no reason to send the Gestapo around in the middle of the night and drag him away for a little bit of torture in our free and democratic society. You know the motto of Supreme Leader and our El Presidente for life;

"Toe the line,and all shall be fine!"

Gee, El Presidente is so democratic he is even thinking of holding and election for President one day, maybe in 2040, too soon, how about 2060 or 2070, maybe never. Nah, its really not necessary to have elections in our free and democratic society, El Presidente said we would all vote for him anyway, so why waste the time....seems reasonable to shonkyminister, particularly since he's been made State Minister for the spending of excess cash.

Pauliar,

We all know that you are a little thick, but the distinction between picking up a $50 lying on the pavement and breaking into someone's house is roughly the difference between JA receiving hacked information and JA actively helping Bradley Manning break into US secret files and then publish them.

Assange was always free to publish information given to him. However, assisting Manning to hack the CIA database is another kettle of fish.

[Deleted for abuse]