19 ms·

Julian Assange Extradition Appeal: Day 2

364 points by dane-pgp 5y ago

ameminator 5y ago
It is so plainly obvious that this "prosecution" of Assange is so political that he should not be extradited. Yet, it's the fact that US prisons are so inhumane that is keeping Assange out of the US. What a national embarrassment.
- blitzar 5y ago
  > this "prosecution" of Assange is so political Which political party is persecuting him this time? Remember when one side pushed for charges and the other side pardoned him? No neither do I.
  - stephen_g 5y ago
    That’s not what that means. See [1] - “States will define as political crimes any behaviour perceived as a threat, real or imagined, to the state's survival, including both violent and non-violent oppositional crimes” As in it’s political not because of party politics, but because it’s threatened the power of politically powerful people and agencies in the US establishment. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_crime
bob229 5y ago
Lock this sex offender away
zugi 5y ago
Assange was a non-U.S. citizen working outside the U.S. - I don't get what gives the U.S. jurisdiction to try him in the first place. If China tried to extradite a U.S. citizen acting within the U.S. who published leaked information allegedly in violation of Chinese law, we'd laugh them out of the courtroom, and rightly so. Adding insult to injury, publishing leaked military secrets is not even illegal in the U.S. due to the first amendment right to a free press. When the New York Times publishes leaked classified information, there's no trial or extradition. In the U.S., those who will have legitimate access to classified information first sign legally binding agreements not to disseminate it, and those who violate that agreement can be prosecuted. And in this case, that already happened: Manning served 7 years in jail for leaking the very information that Assange is being extradited over. With the leaker found and prosecuted, convicted, and sentence served, the U.S. Department of Justice should congratulate itself on a job well-done and move on to other things. It's absurd that they continue to pursue the publisher of the information almost a decade later.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  > I don't get what gives the U.S. jurisdiction to try him in the first place. Complex foreign policy. The U.S. has jurisdiction because the country who has him says that they do. They could just as easily tell the U.S. to jump in a lake. > publishing leaked military secrets is not even illegal in the U.S. Then he will win. He is also charged with hacking though.
  - bakuninsbart 5y ago
    The idea that there could be anything resembling a fair trial is simply laughable. The US has been trying to kill Assange for more than a decade, he will be basically dead as soon as they get their filthy hands on him.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      > he will be basically dead as soon as they get their filthy hands on him. I admire your impartiality
  - PoignardAzur 5y ago
    > Then he will win. He is also charged with hacking though. That charge is laughable. The US government is very much going for the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach, backed by humongous amounts of soft power. I don't see how anyone looking at the facts of the affair (the false rape charge, the grievous violations of international law, the amazing procedural irregularities of the first extradition hearing) can see this as anything but a thinly-veiled attempt to make an example out of a political opponent.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      Laughable? Okay then, he should easily win in court.
      - derekjdanserl 5y ago
dj_gitmo 5y ago
A key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government and offered immunity in exchange for his testimony. He has since admitted that his testimony was false. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-relied-on-false-testimony-from-a-diagnosed-sociopath-and-convicted-pedophile/ https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
TheDesolate0 5y ago
Assange was a total asshat at cons. Much like RMS, he was never to be allowed alone with women; he just didn't know how to act correctly. I totally can see that he would be guilty of rape.
throwawaysea 5y ago
It’s scary how little coverage this has in traditional news media. Breaking Points covered this yesterday, although YouTube flagged this video with an age inappropriate warning and demonetized it. I get two different pop up modal warnings when I try to view this: https://youtu.be/dcSMcSwI7K0 https://youtu.be/dcSMcSwI7K0
yawaworht1978 5y ago
I don't like the us foreign policies at all, nor the military forces and all the politicians everywhere collecting dust with their knees when the us is manhandling instead of using diplomatic channels. However, I don't like wannabe anarchists like him never, ever taking responsibility. He ran away from the Sweden case, whatever that was about. And I don't like this "he was just propagating the messages that are sent to him". He was taking money(called donations) and the operation was large, WikiLeaks is not some one person garage operation. This was internal government document leaking as a service, period. Many Californian companies are generously using NDAs for much less critical info and leakers or thieves pay hefty consequences. Why wouldn't Assange? In many places this would be classified as straight up espionage. He provocated the us government and military, of course they were to go after him. It's not right, it might not be legal, but it was bound to happen. Anarchists don't believe in rulers ,rulers don't believe in anarchy and the rulers have the bigger guns, plain and simple.
dane-pgp 5y ago
> No timeline was given for a decision, but we expect it to take weeks if not months. It's strange to think that after all this time, Assange could walk away a free man by the end of the year, although it's not hard to imagine that some government will come up with another reason to arrest him (or worse) if that happens.
- roenxi 5y ago
  At any point from around 2011 the US could stop persecuting the man and it seems quite likely that all his legal problems would just disappear in about that timeframe. All of this has been a cynical and persistent campaign from the States showing off how far beyond the strict legal jurisdiction they can reach when someone embarrasses the government.
- Synaesthesia 5y ago
  There's no reason why he should be held in the manner he is right now. No charges against him, he's not posing any threat.
  - mikro2nd 5y ago
    The argument that he's a flight risk is quite strong, supported by his historic behaviour. No, I don't think they should be holding him at all, given that extradition has already been refused, but this is about punishment and vengeance and politics, not about right, wrong or justice.
    - unixhero 5y ago
      He will be taking a flight allright. Probably to go home to Australia. The only way to actually return. I hope it ends well for him.
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      His past behavior supports denying bail but absolutely doesn't justify solitary confinement in a maximum security prison.
tyingq 5y ago
"To highlight just how justified Assange’s fears have been, Fitzgerald also reminded the court of the recent Yahoo News revelations...that the CIA under the Trump Administration made serious plans to kidnap and even assassinate Julian Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London." That seems like it would undermine the rough basis of the US appeal, that they can offer assurances about humane treatment.
- bryanrasmussen 5y ago
  maybe the argument will be that since the CIA is not authorized to operate on U.S soil the only way to keep Assange from being assassinated by the CIA is to place him in a U.S prison.
  - elzbardico 5y ago
    That would be truly kafkian!
    - bryanrasmussen 5y ago
      I was thinking more that's a hell of a catch, that catch-22.
      - tyingq 5y ago
        Well, consider what a UK judge might think of that statement.
squarefoot 5y ago
The thing has been so deeply politicized that assuming things will end up as they should, Assange should fear for his life as a free man anyway; I'm sure he couldn't even think of visiting the US then fly away alive. After all that propaganda depicting him as enemy of the US, chances are that some thugs, whether because batshit crazy, or following orders, could attempt to kill him anyway. Possibly also at home in Australia. The same applies to Edward Snowden: should he get the pardon one day, he'd still be a target for someone. No matter how it ends, these guys have been already punished enough, and by forcing them to live in fear, some of that punishment will last forever.
- toyg 5y ago
  > Possibly also at home in Australia. Considering how much the government of Australia washed their hands of him, I don't expect Assange will ever call it "home" again (if he ever did).
- mach1ne 5y ago
  I don't think the risk is that high. It's a surprisingly high threshold to plan and kill another person if you aren't already used to it. There is more than sufficient reason for madmen to kill every world leader, yet this happens extremely rarely.
  - hbrav 5y ago
    World leaders have some level of police protection. Which also has a second order effect - if you're serious about an attack, you need to do some planning. And that planning often comes to the attention of the police.
  - ostenning 5y ago
    Unless you're a machine
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  Sadly, if Assange does end up free the safest place for him will be somewhere like Russia, which will only further intensify the propaganda against him.
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Wow, when I first heard the US's "assurances" I thought they were bullshit as they could just put him in some other terrible prison with some other kind of special measures. Apparently I gave the US far too much credit, the actual assurances given don't even need crafty loopholes to be avoided. They can just stick him in ADX with SAMs for new transgressions.
- xbar 5y ago
  I think this is really the most interesting part of the story. It is an impressive excoriation against the US Bureau of Prisons and its policies. The US loosing an extradition case from its very closest ally because the US prison system cannot be trusted to keep even white collar "criminals" (loosely) alive would globally confirm that the US is a human rights violator.
  - blitzar 5y ago
    Is the need to 'guarantee' special treatment not an admission of guilt?
    - vkou 5y ago
      It's an admission that the prison system is in many ways inhumane, but that's hardly a secret.
Threeve303 5y ago
Say what you will about what he has done in his life and feel free to have your own opinion about the way he has handled himself during all of this... What should concern people is the publicly visible example of a human being having their inalienable human rights ignored. It is debatable if what he did should be considered Journalism. Lots of legal questions about how U.S. laws should apply to people not citizens of the U.S. Tons of questions about his associations and about the 2016 election specifically... Still, none of this is a reason to isolate someone for years without a trial or access to legal counsel. If the U.S. is going to apply its laws to Julian Assange, it needs to apply the basic rights that come along with it. He deserves a right to counsel, a speedy and fair public trial by a jury, the right to not have his liberty or property taken from him without due process happening FIRST. These are all fundamental things we should all agree on regardless of the crime you have supposedly committed. This strange fusion of the entertainment, legal and prison systems will not stop at Julian Assange. It was done to Chelsea Manning. If it can happen to them, it could happen to you one day. TLDR; People have deserved a speedy and fair trial in western legal systems going back to when the Magna Carta was written. Whatever is happening here isn't justice.
- choward 5y ago
  > It is debatable if what he did should be considered Journalism. How so? How is what he did any different than the New York Times publishing whistleblower documents? It's only "debatable" because the media he's in competition with says it is.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  It's hard to follow through on the right to a speedy and fair public trial when the defendant cries asylum and holes up in an embassy for years. Human rights always get fuzzy at the interface between nations. A lot of nations don't even agree on what human rights are.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
    >It's hard to follow through on the right to a speedy and fair public trial when the defendant cries asylum and holes up in an embassy for years. you got this backwards
Synaesthesia 5y ago
There's very little mention of this in the news. This is the most important fight for Press Freedom in our time. If we allow this precedent to be set, then nobody will be able to report on the security state at all. We cannot allow the so-called "espionage laws" erode democracy.
- Krasnol 5y ago
  I assume the reason for this is that many journalists out there don't consider Assange as a journalist and therefore the whole thing no fight for "Press Freedom".
- viktorcode 5y ago
  > This is the most important fight for Press Freedom in our time. I beg to differ. Journalists are assassinated regularly for their work. More often than not this happens as the result of investigations into corruption. I wouldn't put Assange's work over what those people are doing.
  - xboxnolifes 5y ago
    Assassination is already illegal, there is no legal precedent to fight on that front. On the other hand, letting Julian Assange be judged as guilty here sets further legal precedent that it is illegal to published leaked classified information.
- KennyBlanken 5y ago
  > There's very little mention of this in the news. Associated Press, NPR, CBS, Yahoo News, Washington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, Reuters UK, France24, Sydney Morning Herald and SKY News all covered this.
  - furgooswft13 5y ago
    When you can even find an article about Assange from these mainstream rags, buried under pages of coivd/climate/race-baiting "news", it is invariably in support of his continued incarceration and punishment.
andy_ppp 5y ago
Would we extradite other journalists if the United States said to do so. Why is Joe Biden following through on such things, it makes me personally extremely suspicious.
- mindslight 5y ago
  Never forget that the lesser of two evils is still evil.
- kspacewalk2 5y ago
  When he actively coached and encouraged Manning to steal top secret data from US government databases, and then released it wholesale without regard for its newsworthiness, he ceased being any definition of a journalist. Not sure what he is now, but the word choice I'd use for him is going to be heavily influenced by his later collaboration with Russian intelligence.
  - dj_gitmo 5y ago
    The key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government. He has since admitted that his testimony was false. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-relied-on-false-testimony-from-a-diagnosed-sociopath-and-convicted-pedophile/ https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-...
    - nobody9999 5y ago
      >The key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government. That's not all that unusual. In many cases, folks are brought to trial and convicted on the testimony of unsavory characters. An excellent example of this is the conviction of John Gotti[0], who was convicted of (among other things) the murder of Paul Castellano[1]. The evidence against Gotti was largely based on information provided by Sammy "The Bull" Gravano[2]. All three of those guys are/were thoroughly disreputable people and stone killers. Gravano, despite his long and violent criminal career, was given a very short prison sentence and was then placed into the US' Witness Protection Program[3], giving him protection and financial support from the US Government. Despite this, Gravano continued to be the gangster he always was and was convicted of additional crimes and sentenced to prison again (20 years in New York and 19 years on Arizona, served concurrently). Just because someone is a scumbag, doesn't mean they can't play a part in prosecutions. There are many other examples of this sort of thing as well. >He has since admitted that his testimony was false. Assuming that can be verified, it's a great point in Assange's defense. Which, I'm sure, won't be lost on his lawyers. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Castellano https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Castellano [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Gravano https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Gravano [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Witness_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Witness_...
supergirl 5y ago
so he has to remain in jail while the US gov tries multiple ways for many years to extradite him?
- viktorcode 5y ago
  I think he remains in jail because he's a flight risk
dustingetz 5y ago
What is the appeals process?
andrewla 5y ago
From the perspective of freedom of the press in the United States, the best way for Assange's case to help journalism and journalists exposing state secrets would be for him to be successfully extradited and to be acquitted at trial for his purported crimes. The extradition circus is really just that. The problem is not extradition or venue, it is that under the US Constitution and the First Amendment he should be entirely shielded from any of this, and we need a court to declare that, otherwise the government can continue to use the cudgel of pretrial detention and heavy-handed plea bargaining to continue to punish individuals who expose government acts.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Simplified timeline: - they'll never prosecute him - case gets dropped - case gets re-opened - they'll never arrest him - Assange is arrested - they'll never extradite him - Assange flees to embassy and stays there for 7 years - They'll never turn him over the police - Assange is turned over to the police - They'll never extradite him - If they'll extradite him and he'll be acquitted... Sure. Really, if Assange is extradited to the United States he will be convicted and while he is in jail there will be many new reasons found to keep him in jail, in as uncomfortable a way as possible. The US is pretty vengeful, especially against those who make their wrong-doings plain as day. Fortunately at least in a US jail he'll be safe from suicide. Oh, wait.
  - andrewla 5y ago
    Don't get me wrong, if I were Assange I would fight this extradition to the bitter end. Pretrial detention alone is an incredibly harsh punishment (and why he won the first extradition case). Despite the US's vengefulness, Chelsea Manning is now free, if not entirely left to her devices, and she's the one who actually leaked the information that Assange is being indicted in reference to. Reality Winner is in a halfway house now. Things are not so bleak as you picture here. Both of them had plea deals, and although Manning was put on trial, it was not in front of a jury. We desperately need a reckoning to decide if we're a country that will imprison people for speech.
    - 5y ago
1cvmask 5y ago
The only safe place today for a whistleblower is China or Russia. They can kidnap you like they did to the Venezuelan diplomat (violating the Vienna Convention) who was tasked to help secure food and medicine around the US embargo and sanctions. They can force the landing of your plane on friendly territory of a countries head of state like they did to Bolivia's Presidents Evo Morales plane over Austria (violating numerous UN and diplomatic treaties). They can try to kill you as the CIA planned for Assange as they do regularly (look up the Orwellian Disposition Matrix). We live in a different era of empire where the corporate media and the corporate journalists are the ones calling for censorship. The media used to "actively" report on matters like the Pentagon Papers, Church Commission, My Lai Massacre. Decorated CIA officers like John Stockwell who exposed genocides and massacres in non-white countries were not muzzled (although denied an income from their whistleblowing). Daniel Ellsberg was free to roam. It seems that the journalists who actively cover the machinations of the national surveillance state are primarily entrepreneurs (substack etc.) and not part of the corporate media apparatus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stockwell_(CIA_officer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stockwell_(CIA_officer) https://www.amazon.com/Search-Enemies-CIA-Story/dp/0393009262 https://www.amazon.com/Search-Enemies-CIA-Story/dp/039300926... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://peoplesdispatch.org/2021/10/19/outrage-following-illegal-extradition-of-venezuelan-diplomat-alex-saab/ https://peoplesdispatch.org/2021/10/19/outrage-following-ill... https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/cia-plot-shows-us-promises-on-assange-can-t-be-trusted-court-told-20211028-p5945a.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/cia-plot-shows-us-promis... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_Lai_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_Lai_massacre https://taibbi.substack.com/p/yes-virginia-there-is-a-deep-state https://taibbi.substack.com/p/yes-virginia-there-is-a-deep-s...
- viktorcode 5y ago
  Russia's one of the most dangerous countries to work in as a journalist.

364 points by dane-pgp 5y ago

It is so plainly obvious that this "prosecution" of Assange is so political that he should not be extradited. Yet, it's the fact that US prisons are so inhumane that is keeping Assange out of the US. What a national embarrassment.

blitzar 5y ago
> this "prosecution" of Assange is so political Which political party is persecuting him this time? Remember when one side pushed for charges and the other side pardoned him? No neither do I.
- stephen_g 5y ago
  That’s not what that means. See [1] - “States will define as political crimes any behaviour perceived as a threat, real or imagined, to the state's survival, including both violent and non-violent oppositional crimes” As in it’s political not because of party politics, but because it’s threatened the power of politically powerful people and agencies in the US establishment. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_crime

bob229 5y ago

Lock this sex offender away

zugi 5y ago

Assange was a non-U.S. citizen working outside the U.S. - I don't get what gives the U.S. jurisdiction to try him in the first place. If China tried to extradite a U.S. citizen acting within the U.S. who published leaked information allegedly in violation of Chinese law, we'd laugh them out of the courtroom, and rightly so. Adding insult to injury, publishing leaked military secrets is not even illegal in the U.S. due to the first amendment right to a free press. When the New York Times publishes leaked classified information, there's no trial or extradition. In the U.S., those who will have legitimate access to classified information first sign legally binding agreements not to disseminate it, and those who violate that agreement can be prosecuted. And in this case, that already happened: Manning served 7 years in jail for leaking the very information that Assange is being extradited over. With the leaker found and prosecuted, convicted, and sentence served, the U.S. Department of Justice should congratulate itself on a job well-done and move on to other things. It's absurd that they continue to pursue the publisher of the information almost a decade later.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
> I don't get what gives the U.S. jurisdiction to try him in the first place. Complex foreign policy. The U.S. has jurisdiction because the country who has him says that they do. They could just as easily tell the U.S. to jump in a lake. > publishing leaked military secrets is not even illegal in the U.S. Then he will win. He is also charged with hacking though.
- bakuninsbart 5y ago
  The idea that there could be anything resembling a fair trial is simply laughable. The US has been trying to kill Assange for more than a decade, he will be basically dead as soon as they get their filthy hands on him.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    > he will be basically dead as soon as they get their filthy hands on him. I admire your impartiality
- PoignardAzur 5y ago
  > Then he will win. He is also charged with hacking though. That charge is laughable. The US government is very much going for the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach, backed by humongous amounts of soft power. I don't see how anyone looking at the facts of the affair (the false rape charge, the grievous violations of international law, the amazing procedural irregularities of the first extradition hearing) can see this as anything but a thinly-veiled attempt to make an example out of a political opponent.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    Laughable? Okay then, he should easily win in court.
    - derekjdanserl 5y ago

dj_gitmo 5y ago

A key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government and offered immunity in exchange for his testimony. He has since admitted that his testimony was false. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-relied-on-false-testimony-from-a-diagnosed-sociopath-and-convicted-pedophile/ https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

TheDesolate0 5y ago

Assange was a total asshat at cons. Much like RMS, he was never to be allowed alone with women; he just didn't know how to act correctly. I totally can see that he would be guilty of rape.

throwawaysea 5y ago

It’s scary how little coverage this has in traditional news media. Breaking Points covered this yesterday, although YouTube flagged this video with an age inappropriate warning and demonetized it. I get two different pop up modal warnings when I try to view this: https://youtu.be/dcSMcSwI7K0 https://youtu.be/dcSMcSwI7K0

yawaworht1978 5y ago

I don't like the us foreign policies at all, nor the military forces and all the politicians everywhere collecting dust with their knees when the us is manhandling instead of using diplomatic channels. However, I don't like wannabe anarchists like him never, ever taking responsibility. He ran away from the Sweden case, whatever that was about. And I don't like this "he was just propagating the messages that are sent to him". He was taking money(called donations) and the operation was large, WikiLeaks is not some one person garage operation. This was internal government document leaking as a service, period. Many Californian companies are generously using NDAs for much less critical info and leakers or thieves pay hefty consequences. Why wouldn't Assange? In many places this would be classified as straight up espionage. He provocated the us government and military, of course they were to go after him. It's not right, it might not be legal, but it was bound to happen. Anarchists don't believe in rulers ,rulers don't believe in anarchy and the rulers have the bigger guns, plain and simple.

dane-pgp 5y ago

> No timeline was given for a decision, but we expect it to take weeks if not months. It's strange to think that after all this time, Assange could walk away a free man by the end of the year, although it's not hard to imagine that some government will come up with another reason to arrest him (or worse) if that happens.

roenxi 5y ago
At any point from around 2011 the US could stop persecuting the man and it seems quite likely that all his legal problems would just disappear in about that timeframe. All of this has been a cynical and persistent campaign from the States showing off how far beyond the strict legal jurisdiction they can reach when someone embarrasses the government.
Synaesthesia 5y ago
There's no reason why he should be held in the manner he is right now. No charges against him, he's not posing any threat.
- mikro2nd 5y ago
  The argument that he's a flight risk is quite strong, supported by his historic behaviour. No, I don't think they should be holding him at all, given that extradition has already been refused, but this is about punishment and vengeance and politics, not about right, wrong or justice.
  - unixhero 5y ago
    He will be taking a flight allright. Probably to go home to Australia. The only way to actually return. I hope it ends well for him.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    His past behavior supports denying bail but absolutely doesn't justify solitary confinement in a maximum security prison.

tyingq 5y ago

"To highlight just how justified Assange’s fears have been, Fitzgerald also reminded the court of the recent Yahoo News revelations...that the CIA under the Trump Administration made serious plans to kidnap and even assassinate Julian Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London." That seems like it would undermine the rough basis of the US appeal, that they can offer assurances about humane treatment.

bryanrasmussen 5y ago
maybe the argument will be that since the CIA is not authorized to operate on U.S soil the only way to keep Assange from being assassinated by the CIA is to place him in a U.S prison.
- elzbardico 5y ago
  That would be truly kafkian!
  - bryanrasmussen 5y ago
    I was thinking more that's a hell of a catch, that catch-22.
    - tyingq 5y ago
      Well, consider what a UK judge might think of that statement.

squarefoot 5y ago

The thing has been so deeply politicized that assuming things will end up as they should, Assange should fear for his life as a free man anyway; I'm sure he couldn't even think of visiting the US then fly away alive. After all that propaganda depicting him as enemy of the US, chances are that some thugs, whether because batshit crazy, or following orders, could attempt to kill him anyway. Possibly also at home in Australia. The same applies to Edward Snowden: should he get the pardon one day, he'd still be a target for someone. No matter how it ends, these guys have been already punished enough, and by forcing them to live in fear, some of that punishment will last forever.

toyg 5y ago
> Possibly also at home in Australia. Considering how much the government of Australia washed their hands of him, I don't expect Assange will ever call it "home" again (if he ever did).
mach1ne 5y ago
I don't think the risk is that high. It's a surprisingly high threshold to plan and kill another person if you aren't already used to it. There is more than sufficient reason for madmen to kill every world leader, yet this happens extremely rarely.
- hbrav 5y ago
  World leaders have some level of police protection. Which also has a second order effect - if you're serious about an attack, you need to do some planning. And that planning often comes to the attention of the police.
- ostenning 5y ago
  Unless you're a machine
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Sadly, if Assange does end up free the safest place for him will be somewhere like Russia, which will only further intensify the propaganda against him.

boomboomsubban 5y ago

Wow, when I first heard the US's "assurances" I thought they were bullshit as they could just put him in some other terrible prison with some other kind of special measures. Apparently I gave the US far too much credit, the actual assurances given don't even need crafty loopholes to be avoided. They can just stick him in ADX with SAMs for new transgressions.

xbar 5y ago
I think this is really the most interesting part of the story. It is an impressive excoriation against the US Bureau of Prisons and its policies. The US loosing an extradition case from its very closest ally because the US prison system cannot be trusted to keep even white collar "criminals" (loosely) alive would globally confirm that the US is a human rights violator.
- blitzar 5y ago
  Is the need to 'guarantee' special treatment not an admission of guilt?
  - vkou 5y ago
    It's an admission that the prison system is in many ways inhumane, but that's hardly a secret.

Threeve303 5y ago

Say what you will about what he has done in his life and feel free to have your own opinion about the way he has handled himself during all of this... What should concern people is the publicly visible example of a human being having their inalienable human rights ignored. It is debatable if what he did should be considered Journalism. Lots of legal questions about how U.S. laws should apply to people not citizens of the U.S. Tons of questions about his associations and about the 2016 election specifically... Still, none of this is a reason to isolate someone for years without a trial or access to legal counsel. If the U.S. is going to apply its laws to Julian Assange, it needs to apply the basic rights that come along with it. He deserves a right to counsel, a speedy and fair public trial by a jury, the right to not have his liberty or property taken from him without due process happening FIRST. These are all fundamental things we should all agree on regardless of the crime you have supposedly committed. This strange fusion of the entertainment, legal and prison systems will not stop at Julian Assange. It was done to Chelsea Manning. If it can happen to them, it could happen to you one day. TLDR; People have deserved a speedy and fair trial in western legal systems going back to when the Magna Carta was written. Whatever is happening here isn't justice.

choward 5y ago
> It is debatable if what he did should be considered Journalism. How so? How is what he did any different than the New York Times publishing whistleblower documents? It's only "debatable" because the media he's in competition with says it is.
shadowgovt 5y ago
It's hard to follow through on the right to a speedy and fair public trial when the defendant cries asylum and holes up in an embassy for years. Human rights always get fuzzy at the interface between nations. A lot of nations don't even agree on what human rights are.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
  >It's hard to follow through on the right to a speedy and fair public trial when the defendant cries asylum and holes up in an embassy for years. you got this backwards

Synaesthesia 5y ago

There's very little mention of this in the news. This is the most important fight for Press Freedom in our time. If we allow this precedent to be set, then nobody will be able to report on the security state at all. We cannot allow the so-called "espionage laws" erode democracy.

Krasnol 5y ago
I assume the reason for this is that many journalists out there don't consider Assange as a journalist and therefore the whole thing no fight for "Press Freedom".
viktorcode 5y ago
> This is the most important fight for Press Freedom in our time. I beg to differ. Journalists are assassinated regularly for their work. More often than not this happens as the result of investigations into corruption. I wouldn't put Assange's work over what those people are doing.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  Assassination is already illegal, there is no legal precedent to fight on that front. On the other hand, letting Julian Assange be judged as guilty here sets further legal precedent that it is illegal to published leaked classified information.
KennyBlanken 5y ago
> There's very little mention of this in the news. Associated Press, NPR, CBS, Yahoo News, Washington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, Reuters UK, France24, Sydney Morning Herald and SKY News all covered this.
- furgooswft13 5y ago
  When you can even find an article about Assange from these mainstream rags, buried under pages of coivd/climate/race-baiting "news", it is invariably in support of his continued incarceration and punishment.

andy_ppp 5y ago

Would we extradite other journalists if the United States said to do so. Why is Joe Biden following through on such things, it makes me personally extremely suspicious.

mindslight 5y ago
Never forget that the lesser of two evils is still evil.
kspacewalk2 5y ago
When he actively coached and encouraged Manning to steal top secret data from US government databases, and then released it wholesale without regard for its newsworthiness, he ceased being any definition of a journalist. Not sure what he is now, but the word choice I'd use for him is going to be heavily influenced by his later collaboration with Russian intelligence.
- dj_gitmo 5y ago
  The key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government. He has since admitted that his testimony was false. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-relied-on-false-testimony-from-a-diagnosed-sociopath-and-convicted-pedophile/ https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/27/assange-prosecution-...
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    >The key witness against Assange is a convicted pedophile and sociopath who was being paid by the US government. That's not all that unusual. In many cases, folks are brought to trial and convicted on the testimony of unsavory characters. An excellent example of this is the conviction of John Gotti[0], who was convicted of (among other things) the murder of Paul Castellano[1]. The evidence against Gotti was largely based on information provided by Sammy "The Bull" Gravano[2]. All three of those guys are/were thoroughly disreputable people and stone killers. Gravano, despite his long and violent criminal career, was given a very short prison sentence and was then placed into the US' Witness Protection Program[3], giving him protection and financial support from the US Government. Despite this, Gravano continued to be the gangster he always was and was convicted of additional crimes and sentenced to prison again (20 years in New York and 19 years on Arizona, served concurrently). Just because someone is a scumbag, doesn't mean they can't play a part in prosecutions. There are many other examples of this sort of thing as well. >He has since admitted that his testimony was false. Assuming that can be verified, it's a great point in Assange's defense. Which, I'm sure, won't be lost on his lawyers. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Castellano https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Castellano [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Gravano https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Gravano [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Witness_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Witness_...

supergirl 5y ago

so he has to remain in jail while the US gov tries multiple ways for many years to extradite him?

viktorcode 5y ago
I think he remains in jail because he's a flight risk

dustingetz 5y ago

What is the appeals process?

andrewla 5y ago

From the perspective of freedom of the press in the United States, the best way for Assange's case to help journalism and journalists exposing state secrets would be for him to be successfully extradited and to be acquitted at trial for his purported crimes. The extradition circus is really just that. The problem is not extradition or venue, it is that under the US Constitution and the First Amendment he should be entirely shielded from any of this, and we need a court to declare that, otherwise the government can continue to use the cudgel of pretrial detention and heavy-handed plea bargaining to continue to punish individuals who expose government acts.

jacquesm 5y ago
Simplified timeline: - they'll never prosecute him - case gets dropped - case gets re-opened - they'll never arrest him - Assange is arrested - they'll never extradite him - Assange flees to embassy and stays there for 7 years - They'll never turn him over the police - Assange is turned over to the police - They'll never extradite him - If they'll extradite him and he'll be acquitted... Sure. Really, if Assange is extradited to the United States he will be convicted and while he is in jail there will be many new reasons found to keep him in jail, in as uncomfortable a way as possible. The US is pretty vengeful, especially against those who make their wrong-doings plain as day. Fortunately at least in a US jail he'll be safe from suicide. Oh, wait.
- andrewla 5y ago
  Don't get me wrong, if I were Assange I would fight this extradition to the bitter end. Pretrial detention alone is an incredibly harsh punishment (and why he won the first extradition case). Despite the US's vengefulness, Chelsea Manning is now free, if not entirely left to her devices, and she's the one who actually leaked the information that Assange is being indicted in reference to. Reality Winner is in a halfway house now. Things are not so bleak as you picture here. Both of them had plea deals, and although Manning was put on trial, it was not in front of a jury. We desperately need a reckoning to decide if we're a country that will imprison people for speech.
  - 5y ago

1cvmask 5y ago

The only safe place today for a whistleblower is China or Russia. They can kidnap you like they did to the Venezuelan diplomat (violating the Vienna Convention) who was tasked to help secure food and medicine around the US embargo and sanctions. They can force the landing of your plane on friendly territory of a countries head of state like they did to Bolivia's Presidents Evo Morales plane over Austria (violating numerous UN and diplomatic treaties). They can try to kill you as the CIA planned for Assange as they do regularly (look up the Orwellian Disposition Matrix). We live in a different era of empire where the corporate media and the corporate journalists are the ones calling for censorship. The media used to "actively" report on matters like the Pentagon Papers, Church Commission, My Lai Massacre. Decorated CIA officers like John Stockwell who exposed genocides and massacres in non-white countries were not muzzled (although denied an income from their whistleblowing). Daniel Ellsberg was free to roam. It seems that the journalists who actively cover the machinations of the national surveillance state are primarily entrepreneurs (substack etc.) and not part of the corporate media apparatus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stockwell_(CIA_officer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stockwell_(CIA_officer) https://www.amazon.com/Search-Enemies-CIA-Story/dp/0393009262 https://www.amazon.com/Search-Enemies-CIA-Story/dp/039300926... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee https://peoplesdispatch.org/2021/10/19/outrage-following-illegal-extradition-of-venezuelan-diplomat-alex-saab/ https://peoplesdispatch.org/2021/10/19/outrage-following-ill... https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/cia-plot-shows-us-promises-on-assange-can-t-be-trusted-court-told-20211028-p5945a.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/cia-plot-shows-us-promis... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_Lai_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_Lai_massacre https://taibbi.substack.com/p/yes-virginia-there-is-a-deep-state https://taibbi.substack.com/p/yes-virginia-there-is-a-deep-s...

viktorcode 5y ago
Russia's one of the most dangerous countries to work in as a journalist.