So Julian Assange has lost his case regarding extradition to Sweden. He has that “I have never been able to present my side of the story”.
Now’s his chance to face his accusers. Assange strives for political openness and accountability therefore let the evidence be tested in court where he’ll be able to put forward his side of the story.
Cath Elliott has a lot more to say on this which I am in agreement with.
Advertisement
Context? What’s that, right?
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html
Then the doosey of a question:”Since when has the state – any state – had the interests and protection of women at its capitalist heart? Why would any feminist continue to put their trust in the state and its current legal system after the way it neglects at best, abuses at worst, women?…We should be focussing on the real issue here: the fact that an individual who hasn’t even been charged – but has humiliated and exposed world leaders, intelligence operatives and imperial misadventures across the globe – is going to be forcibly removed and flown to another country for questioning. You don’t need to be questioned or conferred with in order to be charged. ”
http://web.overland.org.au/2010/12/supporting-assange-%E2%89%A0-condoning-rape/
We have the contradiction where some lefties — like yourself — are cheering the judge’s ruling, regardless of its very dubious civil rights attributes, and others are organising street protests against it.
Then you have the complication that those who support Assange being forcibly returned by the British state to Sweden won’t do anything active in that regard except to air their opinion as blog fodder or cowardly not take a public position at all — thus letting, Pontius Pilate like, a default compliance with the legal proceedings to rule.
If it is such a clear case of rape then where are those protests — maybe big protests — advocating that Assange be sent to Sweden for trial?
The tragedy is that by lapping up this cynical exploitation of of the spectre of violence against women, only cheapens the much broader issue (as it did with the invasion of Afghanistan) of the everyday rape and subjugation of women. As this related story — about the sexual assault on a female CBS reporter in Tahrir Square — argues:
”Perhaps more critically, it reveals how the assault of a white woman by brown men demands attention, while the daily assaults on brown women by brown men and on white women by white men almost never constitute “news.”
http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/700/the-marriage-of-sexism-and-islamophobia;-re-making-the-news-on-egypt
`he’ll be able to put forward his side of the story.’
Let us hope that is the case and he doesn’t end up locked away for years with no charges brought and no sign of a trial or extradited on to the USA. I simply think that in the circumstances these fears are legitimate.
I agree that every man should when accused of these things submit to the scrutiny of the law but Assange had every right to fight this extradition and make the case he has made. It is his legal right to do so. I hope that his appeal is successful. If not I hope he has a speedy and fair trial in Sweden and that the publicity generated helps with that rather than hinders it.
Rape has to be taken seriously and the only way he can prove his innocence is throught the courts. or of course his guilt
Looking on the net, it seems that rape trials in Sweden are held in private, so I’m not sure that Assange gets to present his side of the story.
To be honest, I am not satisfied that the reasons for going ahead with this trial have nothing to do with Wiki-leaks.
Whichever way you look at it puts you in a horrible position.
The only way round it is to make a comment that if he gets imprisoned that loads more information will be published – then we will see real justice come into play – whether or not the release of such information will be seen to jeopardise national security and world peace is enough reason for the system to fail.
Of course, I think its probably more to do with wikileaks than anything else (although some people get cocky with such “fame” and decide they can do what they want without consequences) but regardless of such allegation being merely an allegation or an actual case, why would he be allowed to “skip” trial when the average person who hasn’t got such a controversial website would be stuck through it?
The lame security the US has for the cables to be leaked are only to already be obtained by Russian, Chinese etc. spies and headed back to their intelligence agencies. in fact, I am sure MI6 already have them. This is how they operate.
He just needs to be man enough and face the justice system. OK, he could be set up and wrongly jailed or perhaps extradited to the US; but unlike Joe Bloggs wrongly accused of rape where his picture is in the Sun newspaper with headlines such as “rapist caught” and article text with “alleged” and “suspicion” included in it (as pre-trial)… where only a small snippet will be added apologising (if at all) when his innocence is shown; Assange would no longer be seen as the rapist but the person behind wikileaks who was almost framed for a crime he didn’t do to stop further leaks. Joe Bloggs however, will always be referred to as a rapist although a) he had never raped anyone and b) a court found his completely innocent of any wrong doing.