Assange Arrested

Your dishonesty and dis-ingenuity RE: Assange is pathetic and transparent. Why should I even respond to you when you can’t even talk about this in good faith? Your stance on Assange is eerily authoritarianism, this is the sort of argument that the likes of Trump, Erdogan, Bolsonaro et al make.

The only law Assange has been ‘convicted’ of breaking is “skipping bail”, a ‘crime’ that barely ever involves prison time.

This is what Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture had to say in his report RE: Assange

“In the course of the past nine years, Mr. Assange has been exposed to persistent, progressively severe abuse ranging from systematic judicial persecution and arbitrary confinement in the Ecuadorian embassy, to his oppressive isolation, harassment and surveillance inside the embassy, and from deliberate collective ridicule, insults and humiliation, to open instigation of violence and even repeated calls for his assassination.”

“The evidence is overwhelming and clear,” the expert said. “Mr. Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture.

“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” Melzer said. “The collective persecution of Julian Assange must end here and now!”

That’s as damning as you can get. Australia has to step in and end this farce - right now.

1 Like

You know as well as anyone Big A that the legal system is a process. Not all Laws are good, but in spite of what many think they are not made to be broken. Leaving my personal view of Jules to one side, he was given very poor advice or made another poor decision to “hide” in the Ecuador Embassy. In my view, he should have been on the first plane back to Australia, where even the LNP government would have found it very difficult to extradite him to USA, given the Legal process involved and the attitude of our High Court. Maybe he would have been sent to Sweden, but even that would have taken a very long time, given the quality of Silks who would have lined up to defend him.

So he has broken a UK law, and they are treating him as a terrorist, which in some peoples view he is. If he was really clever, he would have been in the USA using his First Amendment rights.

You just do not get it. Whether it is a dumb law or not, he broke it and it was a really stupid thing to do. Who-ever gives him legal advice should be jail with him.

Just because I do not agree with your view on Jules is neither dishonest or disingenuous. Manning is a whistle-blower, who broke US Laws and is paying for it. Jules encouraged him to do it, breaking US Law, and then posted every scrap without any vetting or work that a real journalist would, again breaking Laws of many Countries, maybe including Australia. If he was justified in doing this in any way, due to the Public Good, then let him have his day in Court to prove it.

And I do not subscribe to the theory that the USA, UK and Australian Governments are corrupt and full of liars, cheats and thieves. If I believe all I read in the papers and watch on TV, then there is no doubt that some of Government arms go beyond their legal rights and they should be bought to account. Whistle-blowers have paths to lodge their agendas without causing harm to others, and there are many reputable media organisations across the world that would have taken all of Mannings docs, vetted them carefully and then went after the corrupt.

Maybe this view is authoritarian, but I believe in centralised Government with total control. I may live in a democracy and been part of a democratic political Party for 48 years but I have no faith in democracy, little faith in “small” government and no faith in capitalism.

The right wing leaders you mention are not very nice people, and you can add many others to that from across the political spectrum. Most, if not all were elected under a democratic system and all have done some very poor things. Being authoritarian doesn’t mean you have to be corrupt or evil, and if I was the benevolent dictator Manning and Assange would have a chance to prove their worth, before I shot them.

1 Like

Bacchus, I think you’re misjudging this issue as there is an enormous difference in how laws can and should be implemented. The law can be used harshly, something akin to cruelty and violation of human rights. Conversely the law can be delivered to bring a just and fair outcome.

It is clear to UN independent experts, that Assange is a victim of brutal treatment by governments who are motivated by their belief that he needs to be silenced and punished. These actions are BEFORE any due process to determine his guilt or innocence.

1 Like

There is little to no due process when the only avenue to complain is an internal process. If, as happens all too often , the complaint is dismissed in an internal process, the only recourse is to publicly release the evidence of the complaint - and then be charged.
There is a case currently before the Australian courts involving a UK lawyer (McBride) on secondment to Defence in Afghanistan. After his internal complaints about the behaviour of Australian soldiers were repeatedly dismissed, he passed the evidence to some Australian journalists. After finishing his secondment he was picked up on a visit to Australia to see his daughter and cannot leave the country.
What he did was not too dissimilar to the ASIS technical expert in regard to the Timor Leste bugging ( for the purposes of Australian commercial gain).
About the only successful complaints in internal processes have been by frontline forces witnessing the actions. The pressure on those in the armed forces is enormous and they stand accused of disloyalty.
And, remember how the Captain of the Adelaide was treated in the children overboard affair.

Explain to me the “brutal treatment by Governments”. So far, Jules has fled the Law in Sweden, locked himself into the Ecuador Embassy allegedly with his health failing and no medical support, and now is in a cosy Pommy Jail Hospital getting treatment. Hardly brutal when you compare it to the torture and other depravations that Governments allegedly conduct around the world.

With regards to the application of the Law, show me where Jules has been denied justice, wrongly accused and not given due process.

1 Like

The UN have issued 2 statements condemning the treatment of Assange as brutal and a violation of basic human rights.

Assange is allowed under international law to seek refuge if he believes he is a victim of political persecution. Clearly he is an enemy of the USA and it is quite reasonable that he would not surrender to the USA expecting them to be fair and nice to a perceived enemy.

His predictions regarding the charges that would be forthcoming have been correct. Wikileaks is a new form of publishing, ahead of established law, where it is still unclear whether they are protected by journalistic convention or not. Within that void there is ample opportunity for governments to administer military style justice which will silence any perceived threat. And clearly they perceive him as a threat.

Our government, the US government and the UK government have a recent history of ignoring international law, and brutally violating the rights of innocent people in their own and other countries. The acceptance of this specific treatment of an individual, given it’s the widespread view of an apathetic public, is an essential part of the process that enables governments to persecute individuals in plain daylight.


Fascism has taken over the West as never seen since McCarthyism, and it seems it will get a lot worse at this point, before it gets better.

I am surprised anyone on the Left politically could, or would support or defend what is going on with Assange, as it’s a shining example of it’s hold, and I am struggling to understand the dichotomy I’m witnessing in here.


Still don’t get it.

Jules skipped criminal charges in Sweden, broke criminal law in UK and hid in Ecuador Embassy. Where is the brutal political persecution. Water-boarded, fingernails ripped out or beaten with a rubber hose ??

And what are your examples of the Australian Government brutally violating the rights of innocent people in their own and other countries. I accept Jules should be locked up because he was found guilty of an offence, where and how has he been persecuted.

Assange left Sweden as the police and original prosecutor didn’t see a case for him to answer. When you look at the known published facts it is easy to see how they came to that view. When they changed their minds, he got suspicious, maybe even paranoid, and agreed to return as long as there was a commitment not to extradite him to the US. He never received that commitment.

The brutal treatment of Assange described by the UN envoy on TORTURE has been published in recent days. It’s your choice whether you read it.

The same organisation has condemned our treatment of refugees and Indigenous Australians, especially incarcerated young Australians, on many occasions, but our decision makers want to be elected so they choose to ignore this independent view, and pander to the majority view under the slogan of ‘border control’ which masks the absolute brutality of long term detention outsourced by the Australian Government.

When we went to Iraq, 100s of 1000s of innocent people were killed. According to Brendan Nelson, the then Defence Minister, we had to go to Iraq to secure oil supplies for Western economies.

Unfortunately, we’re not the good guys.


Mr Ewok, I read all things published on Jules. He had not been imprisoned before this incarceration and has never been TORTURED. The UN Blokes definition of torture must mean that my two former Wives have a farking lot to answer to, and I will be seeking redress in the Court in The HAGUE.

Australia did send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, including my Son. I did not agree with it or in fact any farking war we have been involved in, other than perhaps defending our Nation from the Japs. However our democratically elected Government legally sent the ADF into these conflicts and were supported by the Opposition. The innocent die in wars and it is sad and just wrong, but that is reality. I have fought strongly against Labor policy on refugees and supported my Indigenous In-Laws in their battles for truth and justice. Jules actions have nothing to do with these issues.

I still do not get why you defend Jules, as he is no hero and has broken Laws.

Great post, Stirry.


Lol wtf does that even mean? Australia as a sovereign nation can “legalise” whatever the ■■■■ it wants domestically - the UN security council did not approve of Iraq and thus our presence there was breaking international law.

So I’m assuming you believe Ellsberg should have been locked up for a long time then?

Encouraging a source to get more information is standard fare for any journalist worth their salt. There is no law against publishing truthful information AFAIK. What’s more, the Pentagon explicitly refused to help WikiLeaks redact the tranches of documents. Your reflexive position is to immediately defend and side with the State - why is that? Despite decades of lies, corruption, cover ups, you’re willing to still take all Gov’t claims at face value? I’m amazed.

Lol…this is just alternate reality type stuff here.

International Law is an oxymoron.

Our democracy lets our PM send troops to where-ever he likes. There is a movement trying to change these War Powers, so that it has to be approved by both Houses of Parliament, but it will never happen, and the majority of the mindless morons who Vote like wars anyway, just like in USA and UK.

CEllsberg is a great example of my position on this. He released the Vietnam Papers to real journalists who did their job and INVESTIGATED before they published.

He had his day in Court aided by some great legal minds and won. Jules should have followed his lead.

And there are Laws about stealing confidential information, truthful or not, and Manning and Jules are subject to those Laws.

My comment is not alternate reality at all, as there have been hundreds of Whistle-blowers who have released information through a real process that have done good. You just like giant conspiracy theories, and it wouldn’t surprise me if you believe that the CIA engineered 9/11.

My issues with Whistle-blowers stem from the Laws in Victoria where I can be secretly accused and have no rights to know who is making allegations about me, and that I am prevented from telling anyone else about my interrogations from the Political Police. One day, I will tell you my story, about how a ■■■■ similar to Jules tried to destroy me. As I am still subject to these Laws, I will wait until I am safely in Cuba.

International law is still law. Australia has as much regard for int’l law as it does for its own citizen in Assange - ■■■■ all.

BuT hE bRoKe teH lAw - that’s literally been your argument this whole thread. Do you believe Ellsberg should have sent to prison?

I’ll remind you that Manning first approached the Washington Post and NYT BEFORE going to WikiLeaks, Manning turned to WL because both WaPo and NYT weren’t interested. This is all public information mate.

What’s more, Ellsberg is very much pro-Assange and pro-Manning. If you think Ellsberg is a hero then you should think Manning and Assange are heroes too.

Journalists / Publishers have to verify two things - is the information given

  1. Authentic; and
  2. In the public interest

The Manning disclosures were unquestionably authentic and I would argue the biggest story since the Pentagon Papers. WikiLeaks partnered up with the Times, the Post, the Guardian, Der Spiegel to release the Iraq/Afghan war logs and cables. How is this ANY different to Ellsberg?

Ellsberg is no hero either. He had his day in Court and the process worked. Not up to me to put him in jail.

Good reason why legit media outlets rejected Manning, think about it.

Slaves to the corporate machine?

1 Like