#E8FFFF">The following is from Australian government, Labor opposition silent on espionage charges against Assange (28/5/19) by Oscar Grenfell | World Socialist Web Site:
By their silence, the Liberal-National government and Labor are signalling their support for the US-led persecution of Assange, over his role in the exposure of US war crimes, mass surveillance and diplomatic conspiracies around the world.
The political establishment is making clear that nothing will be done to prevent Assange's extradition from Britain to the US, where he would face a show-trial that would establish a precedent for the suppression of freedom of the press and free speech.
…
The refusal to defend Assange on the part of the official parties is in line with their collaboration in the US-led vendetta against him since 2010.
Successive Labor and Coalition governments have refused to exercise their legal discretion and diplomatic powers to protect Assange. Instead they have joined in the chorus of denunciations and aided the US intelligence agencies in their efforts to destroy WikiLeaks.
…
The refusal to defend Assange on the part of the official parties is in line with their collaboration in the US-led vendetta against him since 2010.
Successive Labor and Coalition governments have refused to exercise their legal discretion and diplomatic powers to protect Assange. Instead they have joined in the chorus of denunciations and aided the US intelligence agencies in their efforts to destroy WikiLeaks.
…
Labor and Coalition MPs made mealy-mouthed statements that they would provide him with unspecified consular assistance, committing them to nothing. With the assistance of the Greens, the unions and the pseudo-left, they buried the issue of Assange's plight throughout the official federal election campaign that began just hours after his detention by British police.
Now, senior political figures are voicing concerns that the government's abandonment of Assange may provoke widespread opposition from workers, students and young people, who rightly view him as a heroic figure who is being attacked for revealing the truth.
On Friday, former Labor foreign minister Bob Carr told the Guardian that the additional charges against Assange “change the game” and could “test the patience” of US allies, including Australia. He noted that the length of the maximum sentence against Assange made the charges against him almost as severe as those which attract capital punishment.
Carr issued a warning to the Coalition government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison that its Foreign Minister Marise Payne “needs to protect herself from the charge that she's failed in her duty to protect the life of an Australian citizen.”
Carr stated that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade would likely provide Payne with “talking points” for discussions with her US, British and Swedish counterparts. Sweden has revived a sexual misconduct investigation into Assange, aimed at blackening his name and creating an alternate route for his extradition to the US.
“Not to do so would leave the minister exposed to withering criticism that they did not take all appropriate action that might have made a difference, mainly before the British court makes a decision,” he warned.
(The article goes on to goes on to point out Bob Carr's previous role as an effective agent for the U.S. government within the Australian Labor Party and questions the motives for his apparent support for Julian Assange. Whilst Bob Carr's previous record of support for the U.S. should not be overlooked, I think that it would be more helpful to Julian Assange to take Bob Carr's words at face value. We should ask Bob Carr to raise his voice more loudly for Julian Assange including on his own blog. A search "Julian Assange site:bobcarrblog.wordpress.com" found nothing!)
Miscarriage of Justice: Why Assange’s Belmarsh Sentence is Wrong
By Nina Cross at 12st Century Wire
Judge Taylor gave Assange effectively a year in Belmarsh Category A prison for skipping bail in 2012. Assange was required to prove he had good reason to skip bail:
Under s. 6(3) of the Bail Act 1976, it is for the defendant to prove that he had a reasonable cause for failing to surrender.
Taylor dismissed Assange’s mitigating reasons for jumping bail, citing the previous judges’ rejection. This is a collective dismissal of what has been a very public aggression towards Assange by the US government and its allies. Examples of threats to Assange, which appeared in his statement, are seen here, here, here and here. The question we must ask in the case of Assange is what type of mitigating proof (threats of assassination, torture and abuse aside) would have stood up in Taylor’s court? Had Assange had a note from Mike Pompeo threatening capital punishment or a life sentence without parole in a high security prison for exposing US war crimes, signed prior to June 2012, would that have got Assange into a B Category prison for 6 months instead?
Taylor dismissed Assange’s fear of persecution by the US, sentencing him to 50 weeks in Belmarsh prison, where his condition, already identified as deteriorating, has worsened to the extent he is now in the prison health ward. Her reason was that Assange had a choice:
“Whilst you may have had fears as to what may happen to you, nonetheless you had a choice…”
This may be technically true. An individual chased by their attacker may have the choice of hiding, if they can, to avoid being attacked; if their attacker hangs around they can choose to come out and risk being hurt or stay out of sight. This ‘choice’ has been presented as an illusion of freedom, and in turn, an illusion of due process.
This reality of the ‘choice’ facing Assange has been summed up by Melzer in a response to Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt’s denial of UK abuse on Twitter:
…