The State Ordered Torment of Julian Assange

Now that a blob in a wig in a London courtroom has issued the order to send Julian Assange to the Soviet State of America, where the FBI is the Cheka, the courts are kangaroo, a coup took the White House, and journalism is propaganda, all that is needed for extradition is a rubber stamp.

That rubber stamp is expected to fall by May 18 from the hand of the UK Home Secretary. That would mean the Wikileaks publisher would be transported to the US to stand trial and face up to 175 years for committing journalism -- journalism that harnessed the Internet as a tool of exposure, not as a weapon of control. The Sovietized state of America styles the vital work of Wikileaks "espionage."

Dark days for us all, but for Assange, the man, father and husband, life is a void of continuing darkness and deceit -- and uninterupted torture.

Why? Why? Why this distortion of all due process against this one man? (And if he is extradited, as expected, will he join the J6 political prisoners, also tortured and deprived of due process, in the DC Gulag?) Most explanations for the wrath of the state(s) focus on the video released by Wikileaks, "Collateral Damage," which shows leaked video of war crimes in progress as a US air crew shoots at unarmed and wounded people, including children, on the ground in Iraq.

As shocking as the video is, I don't believe it can possibly be the driver of the war on Assange. I've covered numerous cases in which US soldiers were zealously prosecuted and incarcerated for war crimes by the US during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. After following many of these trials, I have to conclude that the US government, far from being loathe to prosecute, is often willing, eager and even salivating to prosecute troops for alleged crimes committed on the battlefield. Indeed, these trials seemed to be used as a means of currying favor with our Muslim "allies."

I believe there are other reasons for the vendetta against Assange, elite-centered, not troop-centered reasons, reasons having to do with the insurrectionary powers of transparency as practiced and perfected by Wikileaks. The reasons undoubtedly multipled since the initial legal assaults on Assange over fake rape charges began in 2010, eventually driving him to seek asylum inside the Ecuadorian Embassy (2012-2019). They certainly included the masses of Wikileaks that destroyed Hillary Clinton, the Podestas and the DNC. Would Donald Trump have been elected without Wikileaks? I doubt it. Should he have issued a presidential pardon to Assange before leaving office? Ten thousand times YES. 

The story of Julian Assange is long and complex, and, unsurprisingly, not well-reported. One of the best accounts is a 2020 interview with Nilz Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, who discusses in great detail his findings in the Assange case. 

Excerpt:

I’m not saying Julian Assange is an angel or a hero. But he doesn’t have to be. We are talking about human rights and not about the rights of heroes or angels. Assange is a person, and he has the right to defend himself and to be treated in a humane manner. Regardless of what he is accused of, Assange has the right to a fair trial. But he has been deliberately denied that right – in Sweden, the U.S., Britain and Ecuador. Instead, he was left to rot for nearly seven years in limbo in a room. Then, he was suddenly dragged out and convicted within hours and without any preparation for a bail violation that consisted of him having received diplomatic asylum from another UN member state on the basis of political persecution, just as international law intends and just as countless Chinese, Russian and other dissidents have done in Western embassies. It is obvious that what we are dealing with here is political persecution. In Britain, bail violations seldom lead to prison sentences – they are generally subject only to fines. Assange, by contrast, was sentenced in summary proceedings to 50 weeks in a maximum-security prison – clearly a disproportionate penalty that had only a single purpose: Holding Assange long enough for the U.S. to prepare their espionage case against him.

... Julian Assange has been intentionally psychologically tortured by Sweden, Britain, Ecuador and the U.S. First through the highly arbitrary handling of proceedings against him. The way Sweden pursued the case, with active assistance from Britain, was aimed at putting him under pressure and trapping him in the embassy. Sweden was never interested in finding the truth and helping these women, but in pushing Assange into a corner. It has been an abuse of judicial processes aimed at pushing a person into a position where he is unable to defend himself. On top of that come the surveillance measures, the insults, the indignities and the attacks by politicians from these countries, up to and including death threats. This constant abuse of state power has triggered serious stress and anxiety in Assange and has resulted in measurable cognitive and neurological harm. I visited Assange in his cell in London in May 2019 together with two experienced, widely respected doctors who are specialized in the forensic and psychological examination of torture victims. The diagnosis arrived at by the two doctors was clear: Julian Assange displays the typical symptoms of psychological torture. If he doesn’t receive protection soon, a rapid deterioration of his health is likely, and death could be one outcome.

Freedom of the press is already dead.

Why must the torture of Julian Assange continue?