On the Political Context of the Charges against Julian Assange
An article in The Nation by Joann Wypijewski, titled "Justice Foreclosed", explains better than anything I’ve read why Julian Assange shouldn’t give himself up to let “justice” work its course. From the second paragraph of Justice Foreclosed:
The political context
After noting (accurately in my opinion) that the law is no more likely to deliver justice to Assange in his rape case than it was to a black man charged with raping a white woman in the Jim Crow South, Wypijewski continues:
By that August, Pfc. Bradley Manning, the reputed source of the video and about 750,000 other leaked government documents, was being held without charge in solitary confinement at the Marine Corps brig in Quantico, subjected to what his attorney, David Coombs, describes in harrowing detail in a recent motion as “unlawful pretrial punishment.” In plain terms, Manning was tortured. He faces court-martial for aiding the enemy and has been denounced as a traitor by members of Congress. For disseminating classified materials that exposed war crimes, Assange has been called a terrorist. A coloring book for children, The True Faces of Evil—Terror… includes his face on a sheet of detachable trading cards, along with Timothy McVeigh, Jared Lee Loughner, Ted Kaczynski… A commentator on Fox News urged President Obama to order his assassination. Vice President Joe Biden called him a “high-tech terrorist” and suggested that the Justice Department might be angling for a prosecution.
Julian Assange a terrorist? If he’s a terrorist, then I guess I am too, because if I had access to the material he had, and if I had the courage to release it, I would do so in a heartbeat. If Assange is a terrorist, then I guess that so are all journalists who release information on war crimes committed by the state.
On the murkiness of the rape charges
Like just about everyone else, I don’t know what the truth is surrounding the rape charges against Assange. What I do know is that the circumstances of those charges seem very suspicious. Wypijewski describes some of those circumstances:
On the presumption of innocence
Wypijewski notes that a big reason why some liberals are not supporting Assange in his refusal to face charges is that they involve rape. And in those cases, it is the presumption of guilt that works against their supporting him. I see it slightly differently. If the presumption of guilt is the reason why a “liberal” does not support him, then that person is not really a liberal – at least not in the way s/he looks at this case. There are few things that are more fundamental to liberalism than the presumption of innocence in criminal cases. Wypijewski explains:
On what Assange faces if he gives himself up
Lastly is the issue of what Assange is likely to face if he gives himself up:
For those of you who criticize Assange or call him a coward because of his refusal to give himself up to “justice”, I ask you to consider: Would you give yourself up if you faced a likelihood of indefinite detention without trial and torture?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Very telling.
Since this is ALL about "justice"! doncha know..... 
It means the US is a rogue state that doesn't follow the laws (and the WOT is a pretty despicable use of the word "war"
.
Yet you continue to insist that in THIS case - the Assange case - the US (and Sweden and the UK etc. etc.) are going to studiously observe the legalities.
My point was that the US has no qualms executing people summarily. Even torture and extra judicial renditions are part of Obama's MO. Assange is correct in fearing that the legalities will somehow be laid aside for him as well, especially as top US officials have said as much. Stuffing him into Gitmo as an enemy combatant would do nicely. It doesn't have to be assassination for Assange but the US has demonstrated that even THAT isn't off the table.
This isn't about assassination per se (although I used that example since we all know it) but it can include anything else up to and including that. Obama's already demonstrated he's game.
When he was asked his opinion, he gave it: I would argue that it's closer to being a high tech terrorist than, than the Pentagon Papers
... MR. GREGORY: Do you think he's a criminal?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: If he conspired to get these classified documents with a member of the U.S. military , that's fundamentally different than if somebody drops on your lap, "Here, David , you're a press person, here is classified material."
MR. GREGORY: Mitch McConnell says he's a high tech terrorist, others say this is akin to the Pentagon Papers . Where do you come down?
VICE PRES. BIDEN: I would argue that it's closer to being a high tech terrorist than, than the Pentagon Papers . But look, this guy has, has done things that have damaged and, and put into jeopardy the lives and, and occupations of people in other parts of the world. He's made it more difficult for us to conduct our, our business with our allies and our friends. For example, in my meetings, you know I meet with most of these world leaders , there is a desire now to meet with me alone rather than have staff in the room. It makes things more cumbersome. And so it is, it has done damage ...
Meet the Press transcript for Dec. 19, 2010
Joe Biden, Cory Booker, Mark McKinnon, Andrea Mitchell, Joe Scarborough
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40720643/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/meet-press-transcript-dec/
Well Done!
...and much amazement at the contortions of naysayers.
The 1% do not believe that we have a right to know
what OUR government
is doing with OUR money
in OUR name.
I disagree, and side with the WhistleBlowers.
They are the true Heroes of Democracy.
