nuclear-news

Injustice of USA cases against Julian Assange and Bradley Manning

Public opinion can make a great difference in determining that such a prosecution not take place. Such a situation as not very different from what eventually happened in the case of  David Hicks.
Think of the different amount of attention given by the Australian Government to Assange’s  case,  compared to that given to the case of the Australian  woman solicitor in Libya by Bob Carr, our Foreign Minister.
It can’t be that Assange has a bad reputation. He is the recipient of many awards testifying  as to his courage and  excellence as a journalist and about him generally.

A Support Assange & WikiLeaks Coalition Statement by Mr Kep Enderby QC JULY 15, 2012 BY KELLIE TRANTER  ” ….There is something terribly wrong going on in both the Assange and Manning cases, and we are being told very little about it.
Sweden’s sex laws are unrealistically repressive, the most repressive in the world! That was made clear in the recent ABC interview with Phillip Adams and in the recent book by Oscar Swartz “A History of Sex in Sweden”.

Bradley Manning has been in custody for long periods of solitary confinement on the ground that he might injure himself, despite psychiatric opinion to the contrary and despite public protest that it amounts to pre-trial punishment without being brought to trial. He was arrested more than 2 years ago.

America still uses the ancient archaic old  English medieval grand jury system of  determining whether a criminal trial  should take place to determine whether  a person has committed a serious crime or not,  with all its scope for the manipulated  injustice.  During the hearing the target of grand jury, the person perhaps to be an accused,
cannot put on a defence.
In America, in Virginia, a federal grand jury has already commenced investigating WikiLeaks – which means Julian Assange – to determine whether an indictment should be served on him. Eminent commentators are claiming that the evidence is mounting that the WikiLeaks case is part of a much broader campaign by the Obama Administration to crack down on all leakers.
Public opinion can make a great difference in determining that such a prosecution not take place. Such a situation as not very different from what eventually happened in the case of  David Hicks.
Think of the different amount of attention given by the Australian Government to Assange’s  case,  compared to that given to the case of the Australian  woman solicitor in Libya by Bob Carr, our Foreign Minister.
It can’t be that Assange has a bad reputation. He is the recipient of many awards testifying  as to his courage and  excellence as a journalist and about him generally.
The Age refers to him as “one of the most intriguing people in the
world” and “internet’s freedom fighter”.
American prisons don’t have the best of reputations these days.
Unfortunately , there are understandable reasons for that: think of
the  secret prisons  it has scattered all round the world: think of
its use of what it calls  “Rendition”. Think of its use of
“Waterboarding” or what we would call “Torture”.   Think of Guantanamo
Bay, think of Abu Ghraib. There is evidence that the revelations by
WikiLeaks helped bring the atrocities at Abu Ghraib to light….
http://kellietranter.com/2012/07/a-support-assange-wikileaks-coalition-statement-by-mr-kep-enderby-qc/

July 16, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA, Legal, USA