“We are an organisation that does not promote leaking, we are an organisation that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency”. Julian Assange ~ Wikileaks founder.
“That’s wormwood (scrubs)!”
Or, correctly, it was Wandsworth Prison in south London where Assange spent just over a week following an attempt by prosecutors in Sweden to extradite him in relation to sexual assault allegations which have been made against him by two young women.
If this is the case referred to in the review subject, it relates purely to Assange, the Wikileaks founder, and not to the website itself.
What’s more interesting to me than the actual allegations, is how the Swedish investigation has divided people and the media. I can’t recall an extradition hearing causing so much fuss. The Assange supporters, including a pouty Bianca Jagger talking about the Rule of Law (which she could barely pronounce with those teeth) and Jemima Khan, believe that it’s all part of a set up, lead by the Americans, in order to extradite him to the US to face possible charges there.
I couldn’t understand why Assange was making such a big deal about the Swedish allegations. If any European state wished to talk to me (or you for that matter) in connection with criminal charges, I would have no choice but to go voluntarily. Assange claims to have racked up nearly £600,000 in legal bills thus far, and that’s before it’s even decided whether he will be extradited.
I find it difficult to understand why someone who’s used to taking such a combative stance in his work isn’t taking the same attitude with such a personal matter. If he is innocent of any wrongdoing, as he claims, then why is he not prepared to put his side of the story to the Swedish prosecutors readily?
“The players cannot keep counsel; they'll tell all.”Most of the facts of the investigation thus far are readily available, for those bothered enough to read about them. More worrying than the actual allegations is the fact that before any Swedish court has had a chance to decide on the facts of the case, a vicious assault is being waged online against the two women involved.
They’ve been named and had their photos posted on the internet by people (who always seem to prefer to remain anonymous in situations like this) who claim they’re CIA agents and left wing feminists (never a nice term used in this context). Surely their identities should have remained confidential, at least until the outcome of any investigation?
Assange himself has given many interviews since being released on bail, some of which I have seen or heard. In a Today radio 4 interview with John Humphrys, it would be fair to say he came across awfully. Partly due to Humphrys superb handling, if you were to judge him purely on that 25 minute interview you would probably want him found guilty. On the other hand, in another interview with David Frost he came across much better.
“Have you heard the argument? Is there no (criminal) offence in't?”It’s been said that the charges being levelled at him would not amount to a criminal offence under UK law, and indeed is/are the least serious of all the differing sexual assault charges under Swedish law.
It’s also been said that this is the first time Sweden has wanted to extradite someone for such charges.
That raises the question, why are they doing it? The top Stockholm prosecutor had already dismissed any charges against Assange. A politician then took it upon himself to take the matter up with a prosecutor in Gothenburg, who did decide to investigate.
While I feel the charges being investigated are minimal (and take me back to the notion that had Assange been prepared to wear a condom then he wouldn‘t be in this mess now), I feel he should go to Sweden voluntarily. We will have to assume that the rule of law in Sweden isn’t being manipulated by other forces.
“My gorge rises at it.”Of all the other aspects about Wikileaks and what Assange grandly calls “Cablegate”, what annoys and surprises me most is how easily US companies with any affiliation to Wikileaks have cowered under the demands of their government. Paypal, Visa and MasterCard have all cut their financial ties to the site without any formal criminal investigation but on the insistence of certain politicians. For a country which takes its civil liberties and constitution so seriously, how is this being allowed, and what support is Assange and Wikileaks getting from fellow journalists?
Not much, judging by the media coverage I’ve seen. Either this is because his fellow hacks believe he had no right to publish the Cablegate documents or because he had the right but shouldn’t have.
“That it should come to this!”I confess I was only vaguely aware of Wikileaks existence in Spring of last year, when the footage involving the American military killing 12 civilians in Iraq was released via Wikileaks.
This lead to the prime suspect, Private Bradley Manning, being detained indefinitely pending trial. The American government is tipped to try to make a case against Assange and Wikileaks, but has not yet done so.
Many American politicians have since joined the Assange witchhunt, including nice comments made by the level-headed Sarah Palin: ““He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders?”. This could surely only serve to benefit Assange and his supporters.
Possibly one of Assanges’ failings was that in the haste to release all the information Wikileaks has gained on the Iraq war quickly (around a quarter of a million documents, apparently), Assange and his team didn’t properly redact some documents, and thus the names of some of those Afghan civilians who were assisting the US military were published, posing a very real threat to their safety. When this has been raised in interviews with Assange, he has merely claimed that nobody has been hurt as a result of this. This strikes me as either a very bad oversight, or more likely that Assange sensed this was a wonderful opportunity for his site to reach the masses to such an extent that they simply published far too quickly. Surely the safety of those in the region should have eclipsed his own ego?
The Media’s the thing
Prior to the release of the Iraq/Afghan cables, everything Wikileaks had published was little more than idle gossip. Did you want to know that Anna Nicole Smith, the ‘model’ famed for marrying an elderly oil tycoon, had allegedly bribed the Bahamian Immigration Minister into expediting her residency there? It was partly responsible for Gibson later resigning.
Were it not for the Cablegate leaks, Wikileaks would probably have remained a website for those with too much time on their hands to visit and Assange would never have become a household name. Who really wants to know that Prince Andrew made some inappropriate comments in Kyrgystan?
Assange has undoubtedly done a good job in highlighting the atrocities committed by the American Military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and as the initial publisher, should be protected from US prosecution by the First Amendment.
I’ll watch with interest on 11 January to see if Assange gets extradited to Sweden or not. If he does, it’s in the interests of the UK and Sweden to see that the proper legal processes are followed and he gets a fair trial in a courtroom, and not by media.
Has the engineer finally been hoist with his own petard?It’ll be a shame if his own personal behaviour, whether it’s found wanting or not, results in a means of the US charging him in connection with his work.
Should we stand shoulder to shoulder with this man? 
