Chris Hedges: The Crucifixion of Julian Assange | Scheerpost

[Scott]

I found an article that bears the name of this thread that was published today. From my reading of the introduction to it, I thought it was quite good and perhaps worth a bit of discussion. Quoting the introduction of the article below:

**
March 27, 2024

British courts for five years have dragged out Julian Assange's show trial. He continues to be denied due process as his physical and mental health deteriorates. This is the point.

By Chris Hedges / Original to ScheerPost

Prosecutors representing the United States, whether by design or incompetence, refused — in the two-day hearing I attended in London in February — to provide guarantees that Julian Assange would be afforded First Amendment rights and would be spared the death penalty if extradited to the U.S.

The inability to give these assurances all but guaranteed that the High Court — as it did on Tuesday — would allow Julian’s lawyers to appeal. Was this done to stall for time so that Julian would not be extradited until after the U.S. presidential election? Was it a delaying tactic to work out a plea deal? Julian’s lawyers and U.S. prosecutors are discussing this possibility. Was it careless legal work? Or was it to keep Julian locked in a high security prison until he collapses mentally and physically?

If Julian is extradited, he will stand trial for allegedly violating 17 counts of the 1917 Espionage Act, with a potential sentence of 170 years, along with another charge for “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion” carrying an additional five years.

The court will permit Julian to appeal minor technical points — his basic free speech rights must be honored, he cannot be discriminated against on the basis of his nationality and he cannot be under threat of the death penalty.

No new hearing will allow his lawyers to focus on the war crimes and corruption that WikiLeaks exposed. No new hearing will permit Julian to mount a public-interest defense. No new hearing will discuss the political persecution of a publisher who has not committed a crime.

The court, by asking the U.S. for assurances that Julian would be granted First Amendment rights in the U.S. courts and not be subject to the death penalty, offered the U.S. an easy out — give the guarantees and the appeal is rejected.

It is hard to see how the U.S. can refuse the two-judge panel, composed of Dame Victoria Sharp and Justice Jeremy Johnson, which issued on Tuesday a 66-page judgment accompanied by a three-page court order and a four-page media briefing.

The hearing in February was Julian’s last chance to request an appeal of the extradition decision made in 2022 by the then British home secretary, Priti Patel, and many of the rulings of District Judge Vanessa Baraitser in 2021.

If Julian is denied an appeal, he can request an emergency stay of execution from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) under Rule 39, which is given in “exceptional circumstances” and “only where there is an imminent risk of irreparable harm.” But it is possible the British court could order Julian’s immediate extradition prior to a Rule 39 instruction, or decide to ignore a request from the ECtHR to allow Julian to have his case heard there.

Julian has been engaged in a legal battle for 15 years. It began in 2010 when WikiLeaks published classified military files from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — including footage showing a U.S. helicopter gunning down civilians, including two Reuters journalists, in Baghdad.
**

Full article:
Chris Hedges: The Crucifixion of Julian Assange | Scheerpost

 

[Hawkeye10]

I have been trying to figure out what the ruling of yesterday means, so far I am nowhere, my grapevine is very conflicted on this.

 

[goat]

I have been trying to figure out what the ruling of yesterday means, so far I am nowhere, my grapevine is very conflicted on this.

Hedges makes it clear that it's a stall tactic until after the US election. The youth Biden needs to vote for him are protesting the genocide in Gaza along with the extradition of Assange. Even the DOJ offering a plea deal is a stall tactic that if Assange agrees to will require all journalists to give up their sources.

 

[Scott]

I have been trying to figure out what the ruling of yesterday means, so far I am nowhere, my grapevine is very conflicted on this.

Perhaps because it's unclear, insofar as why the 2 judge panel ruled the way it did. I suspect that the stench of extraditing Assange without even assuring that he wouldn't be given the death penalty or his first amendment rights was too much even for these corrupt judges running the show. So they're now basically saying they won't give Assange up if the U.S. doesn't at least give assurances on this 2 basic points. It's not much, but it looks like that's all Assange will get for the time being. If the U.S. decides to accede to the U.K.'s demands, then Assange would be able to do one last appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, but there's no guarantee that the UK would wait for them to decide on whether they'd hear the appeal or even listen to said Court even if it did decide to listen to Assange's appeal.

 

[Scott]

Hedges makes it clear that it's a stall tactic until after the US election. The youth Biden needs to vote for him are protesting the genocide in Gaza along with the extradition of Assange. Even the DOJ offering a plea deal is a stall tactic that if Assange agrees to will require all journalists to give up their sources.

Actually Hedges only said that this is one possibility, out of many. I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually a combination of several reasons. The only thing that's immediately clear is that this stretches out the final outcome at least a bit more.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Perhaps because it's unclear, insofar as why the 2 judge panel ruled the way it did. I suspect that the stench of extraditing Assange without even assuring that he wouldn't be given the death penalty or his first amendment rights was too much even for these corrupt judges running the show. So they're now basically saying they won't give Assange up if the U.S. doesn't at least give assurances on this 2 basic points. It's not much, but it looks like that's all Assange will get for the time being. If the U.S. decides to accede to the U.K.'s demands, then Assange would be able to do one last appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, but there's no guarantee that the UK would wait for them to decide on whether they'd hear the appeal or even listen to said Court even if it did decide to listen to Assange's appeal.

So why wouldn't the the American regime tell our lapdogs the Brits what they want to hear, and then he would end up in America before news about his transfer even gets out?

I am having trouble seeing this as anything but a speedbump.

 

[Scott]

So why wouldn't the the American regime tell our lapdogs the Brits what they want to hear, and then he would end up in America before news about his transfer even gets out?

They may well do that in the near future. As to why the U.S. didn't do this from the start, perhaps they thought that the UK judges would have extradicted him even without giving assurances that the death penalty or Assange's first amendment rights would be respected. Or perhaps, as Hedges suggests, this is all an elaborate ploy to delay Assange's extradition until after the U.S. elections.

I am having trouble seeing this as anything but a speedbump.

That may well indeed be all it is. I suspect we'll be finding out soon enough, though it's possible the final outcome may not happen until after the U.S. federal elections.

 

[Hawkeye10]

DOJ claiming to seek a plea deal even as they go out of their way to say that they are not committing to being willing to ever accept a plea deal smells like shit.....like playing games.

 

[Hawkeye10]

They may well do that in the near future. As to why the U.S. didn't do this from the start, perhaps they thought that the UK judges would have extradicted him even without giving assurances that the death penalty or Assange's first amendment rights would be respected. Or perhaps, as Hedges suggests, this is all an elaborate ploy to delay Assange's extradition until after the U.S. elections.



That may well indeed be all it is. I suspect we'll be finding out soon enough, though it's possible the final outcome may not happen until after the U.S. federal elections.

That is a very long time to stall, and I dont see why either the Brits or the American Regime would want a stall......both are fully devoted to being brutes....stalling is a signal of weakness.

 

[Scott]

That is a very long time to stall, and I dont see why either the Brits or the American Regime would want a stall......both are fully devoted to being brutes....stalling is a signal of weakness.

There are a lot of people who aren't happy with how Assange is being treated. Perhaps the thinking is that delaying a trial until after the U.S. elections might be best.

 

[goat]

Actually Hedges only said that this is one possibility, out of many. I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually a combination of several reasons. The only thing that's immediately clear is that this stretches out the final outcome at least a bit more.

The goal is for Assange to die in a British dungeon. Delaying the extradition is the latest tactic. A trial here in the US would be yet another embarrassment for Biden. The espionage act is solely for US citizens, yet there's no prosecution of the NYT. Hillary and Pompeo have planned on ways to assassinate Assange before 2012. Too many zoomers are aware of these plans.

Why didn't the US agree to allow Assange first amendment rights or an exemption from the death penalty? They know the British court won't extradite him without a phony guarantee.

 

[Hawkeye10]

There are a lot of people who aren't happy with how Assange is being treated. Perhaps the thinking is that delaying a trial until after the U.S. elections might be best.

Its pretty much only we (me) enemies of the Revolution types who are objecting.

 

[Scott]

The goal is for Assange to die in a British dungeon. Delaying the extradition is the latest tactic.

You may be right. I mean, I'd be surprised if the U.S. would be upset that Assange died before being extradited. That being said, I still think it's possible that they may only want to delay things until after the coming federal election.

A trial here in the US would be yet another embarrassment for Biden. The espionage act is solely for US citizens, yet there's no prosecution of the NYT. Hillary and Pompeo have planned on ways to assassinate Assange before 2012. Too many zoomers are aware of these plans.

I had heard about Pompeo, I hadn't heard Hillary was involved, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Why didn't the US agree to allow Assange first amendment rights or an exemption from the death penalty? They know the British court won't extradite him without a phony guarantee.

It is certainly a good question, but I'm personally not sure that the U.S. was aware that the 2 judge panel would decide that these assurances were non negotiable. Now that it's become clear, I'm certainly interested in finding out whether the U.S. government will accede to these demands or not.

 

[Scott]

There are a lot of people who aren't happy with how Assange is being treated. Perhaps the thinking is that delaying a trial until after the U.S. elections might be best.

Its pretty much only we (me) enemies of the Revolution types who are objecting.

Adittedly, my vision on this may be a bit biased- most of the news sources that -I- read are objecting .

 

[Hawkeye10]

Adittedly, my vision on this may be a bit biased- most of the news sources that -I- read are objecting .

Hmmmm.