-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Posted in Courtroom at 6:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Related: Support Julian Paul Assange
Updated: The decision is now public
>
>
> Breaking: UK judge rules against extradition of Assange to US #AssangeCase
>
> — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 4, 2021
>
Summary: Julian Assange is staying in the UK or going back to Australia (unless Donald Trump’s regime… or Biden’s… appeals today’s decision)
THE freedom to expose crime is on the line. This morning (at this very moment) the decision is being prepared for public delivery (not officially out at the time I type this).
“…it’s probably fair to say that a lot of powerful and well-connected people work overtime to convince the public Assange is an enemy and a threat. Who is he actually a threat to and why?”Julian Assange is not a criminal. The media which supports crimes by states is trying hard to portray him either as a criminal or as a terrible person. This is not out of the ordinary. A lot of the smears and distortions can be traced back to those who fear accountability (for what’s shown in Wikileaks).
Recently we had some terrible experiences ourselves. Some people tried telling Richard Stallman that we were hostile towards him and/or the FSF. This is false. It’s correct to assert that defence of Stallman and Stallman’s mindset can be spun as “hostility” (towards the coup); it’s too easy, isn’t it? Over the years I read a lot about (sometimes leaked internal documents) the tactics of fracturing and dividing people who otherwise collaborate and coordinate. We know that three-letter agencies in the US do this (Wikileaks is one example) and we saw documents from Microsoft suggesting similar tactics.
Last year I was sent about 20,000 E-mails (a bit more) from FSF servers, causing me to interact with FSF staff including their ‘chief of staff’, John. I don’t know who weaponised FSF servers against me (not just one but two of my accounts, including a private email account I do not advertise). Regarding John, I strongly disagree with some of the things published in Techrights about him (and some other people), however I’m compelled not to hide how some other people feel. Burying sentiments is not the way to go. Self-censorship can come at a high cost.
The above two paragraphs, put together, can lead to “conspiracy theories” about someone trying to drive a wedge between myself and people whom I generally support. Similarly, it’s probably fair to say that a lot of powerful and well-connected people work overtime to convince the public Assange is an enemy and a threat. Who is he actually a threat to and why? █
Update: The Assange decision is finally available online, so it need not be judged by corporate media and social control media hearsay.
“410. I order the discharge of Julian Paul Assange, pursuant to section 91(3) of the EA 2003.”
Released on health/safety grounds.
The judge cites section 91(3), which says:
>
>
> Physical or mental condition (1)This section applies if at any time in the extradition hearing it appears to the judge that the condition in subsection (2) is satisfied. (2)The condition is that the physical or mental condition of the person is such that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him. (3)The judge must— (a)order the person’s discharge, or (b)adjourn the extradition hearing until it appears to him that the condition in subsection (2) is no longer satisfied.
>
So it’s rather unclear whether it’s a win for freedom of the press.
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
----------
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Sat May 18 10:49:39 2024