4 ms·

An Assange update; time to go to Craig Murray since no mainstream journalist, let alone paper or network, provides genuine context on this issue... Oh wait, Cr

An Assange update; time to go to Craig Murray since no mainstream journalist, let alone paper or network, provides genuine context on this issue... Oh wait, Craig Murray was jailed, on bogus, utterly unverifiable charges. And prevented from testifying about Assange's legal team being spied on in an embassy. - https://dissenter.substack.com/p/craig-murray-8-months-prison-sentence https://dissenter.substack.com/p/craig-murray-8-months-priso... Let's see what context the Guardian gives... > Assange appeared at the hearing via video link from Belmarsh prison, wearing a dark face covering and a white shirt, with what appeared to be an untied burgundy tie draped around his neck. Jesus Fucking H Christ.

readflaggedcomm 5y ago
Is that Guardian description of untidniness significant? I don't understand.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  Apparently The Guardian considered it worthy of their closing paragraph. I don't know if there's much to be understood from that, except the benthic depths of journalism which they are plumbing.
salawat 5y ago
It did state that the appeal was apparently being allowed on the basis the U.S. was contending that Assange was not "So mentally gone, it would be impossible for him to do anything else than commit suicide", which would apparently be the reasonable legal standard for denial. Which sounds patently absurd. This also is only allowed because of quote "misleading" behavior by a medical professional concerned with not violating confidentiality of minor patients. Which sounds to me like a big fat helping of "no one would bat their eye at this type of concession to patient privacy by a medical practitioner, but the U.S. is calling in a favor." Honestly, I wish the U.K. would just tell the U.S. to sod off. We all know this is contrived BS

4 ms·

An Assange update; time to go to Craig Murray since no mainstream journalist, let alone paper or network, provides genuine context on this issue... Oh wait, Cr

by mandmandam 5y ago

readflaggedcomm 5y ago
Is that Guardian description of untidniness significant? I don't understand.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  Apparently The Guardian considered it worthy of their closing paragraph. I don't know if there's much to be understood from that, except the benthic depths of journalism which they are plumbing.
salawat 5y ago
It did state that the appeal was apparently being allowed on the basis the U.S. was contending that Assange was not "So mentally gone, it would be impossible for him to do anything else than commit suicide", which would apparently be the reasonable legal standard for denial. Which sounds patently absurd. This also is only allowed because of quote "misleading" behavior by a medical professional concerned with not violating confidentiality of minor patients. Which sounds to me like a big fat helping of "no one would bat their eye at this type of concession to patient privacy by a medical practitioner, but the U.S. is calling in a favor." Honestly, I wish the U.K. would just tell the U.S. to sod off. We all know this is contrived BS