Det är glädjande att Julian Assange nu har släppts från Belmarshfängelset där han tillbringat 1901 dagar. Det faktum att han gjort en uppgörelse med det amerikanska justitiedepartementet och kommer att dömas enligt spionerilagen innebär dock ett farligt prejudikat för pressfriheten och för alla dem som försöker avslöja missförhållanden och ställa makthavare till svars.
The massive obituaries to Daniel Ellsberg at the weekend in both New York Times and Washington Post were proof of the status he held in the United States.
Only Presidents get that size of obituary.
...
Dan Ellsberg maintained until the last his “respectability” in society as the “good whistleblower”.
Yet the publication of papers from Chelsea Manning and others, similar in so many ways to Ellsberg’s Pentagon Papers, became demonised, then criminalised, and Julian became the “bad whistleblower”, or more accurately publisher of whistleblowers.
Now Dan Ellsberg totally rejected this characterisation. It infuriated him and he actively fought against it, including at Julian’s extradition hearing, on which see below.
But how did this process of characterisation happen?
To me, the fundamental point is that the United States achieved consensus that the Vietnam War had been a terrible mistake. It was fought in the interests of colonialism, for the suppression of a nation, and was ultimately unwinnable.
Thomas Drake: The Edward Snowden revelations broke when I was serving as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. I experienced firsthand the reality that secrecy in the service of national security is sometimes necessary in our nation’s surveillance programs. Unfortunately, I also saw that claims of secrecy can be used by our intelligence agencies to spy on Americans without warrants and in violation of the Constitution.
"the government argues that upstream surveillance is too secret for Wikimedia’s case to go forward, invoking the “state secrets privilege” and claiming that any use of sensitive evidence to defend the case could hurt national security. In a split decision, a federal appeals court threw out the case citing state secrets."
President Joe Biden has followed in Donald Trump's footsteps in pursuing prosecution of Julian Assange. That's dangerous. By Stephen Rohde, constitutional lawyer, author and past chair of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, in Chicago Tribune 27 Sept 2022
<strong>Editorial:</strong> Priti Patel could have turned down the American request. By not doing so she dealt a blow to press freedom Fri 17 Jun 2022 17.34 BST
Kit Klarenberg Jun 18 /22
British Home Secretary Priti Patel has signed off on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition to the US. His legal team now has just 14 days to appeal the decision, which journalist Peter Hitchens rightly branded “a total and unmitigated disgrace” shaming Britain. If unsuccessful, he faces up to 175 years in a supermax prison.
That an FBI official who played a key role in concocting false accusations against Assange now "reports” or “analyzes” that very same case under the logo of NBC News says more about the institutional corruption of these news outlets than thousands of articles could ever get close to.
The WikiLeaks publisher, 50, who is being held on remand Belmarsh Prison in London while fighting extradition to America, was left with a drooping right eyelid and signs of neurological damage.
23Sep, 2021
Independent Member for Clark, Andrew Wilkie, has called on the Prime Minister to use his Washington trip to negotiate the release of Australian journalist Julian Assange with his new partners in the AUKUS alliance.
“Mr Assange should be at home with his young family, watching his two little boys grow up,” Mr Wilkie said. “But instead he’s languishing in one of the United Kingdom’s most notorious prisons after recently losing a British High Court battle to stop the United States Government from expanding its appeal against an earlier refusal to allow his extradition. A full appeal hearing is expected next month.