Julian Assange? Is this not the pro-Russian spy, the rapist, narcissist, the alleged child molester, the completely unarmed guy, who smeared his feces at the walls of the embassy, which granted him long refuge? What kind of human droppings, isn’t it?
This is the predominant media image of Assange, and hardly anyone can escape it. Nils Melzer, who has been the UN special representative for torture since 2016, was also initially influenced by this, as he acknowledged some time ago.
The public direction of character, which Snowden did not succeed, was fully effective with Assange. Snowden is always confined to his core theme: the state of surveillance. Assange, on the other hand, spoke about all the essential political processes until his mouth was stuffed.
Wikileaks published important secret political documents. Each publication was a deep blow to the stomach pit for some page. So you can not make friends. Who would like the eternal dissident, who interferes in all things unquestionably, constantly portraying the Western democratic order as something imperfect, beating wounds and then spreading salt in public?
Thus, no wave of official solidarity opposes anyone. Even then, it did not seem obvious that Assange was rightfully afraid of political persecution by the United States from the beginning. Ecuador eventually delivered Assange, under Washington’s pressure. After that, Assange landed in solitary confinement in the British custody, under the harshest possible conditions, in the high security area. No one took the investigations of a journalist from La Repubblica seriously, who could prove that the British had ensured that the Swedes did not stop their investigations on the allegations of rape due to lack of evidence. In matters of Assange and Wikileaks Western politicians and media prefer to listen and show no outrage that the CIA, Assange, for many years, with the help of a Spanish security company spying, including his conversations with his lawyers in the ladies toilet of the Embassy of Ecuador in London. The matter is currently being dealt with in court in Spain, as El Pais reported.
A lot of so-called defenders of human rights ducked away when Melzer gave a devastating verdict on how to deal with Julian Assange at the end of May 2019. Melzer said Literally that he had “in all his practice never seen Democratic states join together to isolate, demonize and abuse an individual for so long, with such contempt for human dignity and the rule of law”. After his visit to the high security prison, Melzer also stated that he had met a tortured person. Melzer was accompanied by two doctors.
Recently there was a hearing of Assange in court. The Guardian noted that Assange had worrying health problems. A friend of Assange, Craig Murray, found much clearer words, and those who attended the hearing with him confirmed the dramatic physical and mental decay of the less than 50-year-old.
What followed, is pathetic official Silence. Unacceptable! Regardless of whether we find Assange and his Wikileaks project good or detest, the alleged torture of a person is the breaking point. It is not enough, like the federal government, to declare in general that you have confidence in the British rule of law. Under international law, allegations of torture must be investigated.
In the case of Assange, it may be a matter of saving a life. The life of a person you might not like or even see as an enemy. But you can turn it and turn it as you want: Assange is the Lackmus Test, how we keep it with the human rights.
The reality is: becoming a Whistleblower is dangerous and no we do not have to look abroad, it is enough to look completely in the Western democracies. The Whistleblower support are generally also low.
Who likes to fraternize with the Ellsbergs, Drakes,Kiriakous, Mannings or Snowdens of this world under such circumstances? They are good for a few title stories and then they are dropped medially, released for hunting. Media are willing to help here and it is not only the Hetzblätter of the Black Widow peace Springer. The mere public authorities are merciless in their desire for retribution.
NYT, Spiegel and the Guardian published at the time in partnership with Wikileaks, the revelations of Manning on the dark side of the American wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the dark side of American foreign policy. Manning was arrested, tortured, sentenced, pardoned by Obama. Today, she sits in Beugehaft because she does not want to participate in an indictment against Assange.
Assange is accused of publishing documents stolen by Manning and allegedly helping her steal them. Welcome to the USA where crimes are invented to put people away as you can see impressively there at the crates. This acts like perverted Nazi 2.0 Shit.
The media that were still involved at that time outperform themselves in pretending that they were not doing anything at all. Their outrage is the verbal press attacks of Trump, not the real threats of journalism. “Democracy this in darkness” blows up the Washington Post daily to its readers, but apparently there is darkness that can be dragged to the light and darkness that is better left in the dark.
Wikileaks has not published nuclear codes or formulae for chemical and biological weapons, but has uncovered political maladministration. With lack of respect for personal data, as Snowden rightly criticised. But today’s incriminated publications did not raise any security or defence - related issues, as the 2011 Guardian correctly described with reference to the Pentagon. In addition, due to British and American judges awards beyond dispute that Assange is a Journalist and Wikileaks a publishing platform.
But these publications harm the Reputation of the United States. The White Knight, who acts forever Noble, the mask was torn from the face. However, instead of drawing lessons from the degenerations, which apparently can also affect a democracy, the messenger of bad news became the object of hatred. As one could see last at the CUM-EX Leaks. Banksters carry on, the transmitter is chased by" Journalist " and Justice. This is how the Assange case stands as a threat in the room: woe to those who dare once again to publicize what is to be buried in the dark.
According to the law in the United States, the motives of a Whistleblower are not important. Just the act. By the charge of Assange anyone can now calculate what Snowden would have happened if he hadn’t stranded in Moscow.
It is worth taking a closer look at the motives of whistleblowers like Manning and Snowden. They said more or less the same, that they, faced with State misconduct, initially waited, that others would open their mouth. That they eventually realized that they had to take the matter into their own hands. Because it was in the public interest: they wanted to end or prevent a war (Ellsberg, Drake, Knigthley), to reveal state-sanctioned torture (Kiriakou), to reveal war crimes, to disclose despotic foreign policy (Manning) or, like Snowden, to stop mass surveillance.
And what do we want?