Time for government to stand ground and protect Assange (Sydney Morning Herald)

[kpete]

Time for government to stand ground and protect Assange
Jennifer Robinson
March 1, 2012


"Indicting Assange represents a dramatic assault on the First Amendment, journalists and the public right to know." Photo: AP

WikiLeaks's latest release of confidential emails obtained from the US private intelligence firm Stratfor indicate the US Department of Justice has issued a secret, sealed indictment against Julian Assange. While the Department of Justice has refused to confirm the existence of the Assange indictment - it refuses to comment upon any alleged sealed indictment - the Stratfor email is the best confirmation we have of the long-stated concerns about the risk of Assange's extradition to the US to face criminal prosecution for his publishing activities with WikiLeaks.

The email was from Fred Burton, Stratfor's vice-president for counterterrorism and corporate security, and former deputy chief of the Department of State's counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service. On Australia Day last year, Burton revealed in internal Stratfor correspondence: ''Not for Pub - We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect.''

.....................................


The question we must now ask: if a Texas private intelligence firm knew of the sealed indictment for more than a year - why doesn't our government? Did the government know? Was its denial of knowledge dishonest?

...........................

Whether or not the government knew before, it certainly knows now. The Prime Minister, the Attorney-General and the new foreign minister must take action. Nicola Roxon, the Attorney-General, campaigned hard in opposition to bring Hicks home, urging the Howard government ''to take urgent action to protect this Australian citizen they have so far neglected for such a long period of time''. She has so far remained silent. But if she can go into bat for Hicks, she can go into bat for Assange. The government must protect Assange, not just because of who he is, but because he is Australian. And, as the Stratfor emails confirm, an Australian is at risk.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/time-for-government-to-stand-ground-and-protect-assange-20120229-1u3cn.html#ixzz1nmt9BEvL

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

1. logged in 1st time in weeks just to recommend this thread

I don't much care for DU's new layout, its just not user friendly.

But I found a link to this post in google, and just HAD to log in to recommend.

It used to be that a post like this would be featured on the front page, but the new format
just screws everything up.

I'll try to come back in a few weeks.

[fasttense]

2. Our US federal AG seems to ignore most crimes except for those

that he can use against liberals.

[grahamhgreen]

3. I will not forget that he pardoned Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens (R) and ignored

the persecution and imprisonment of Don Siegelman (D-AL), Ingored Bush war crimes (torture!) and war profiteering, failed to prosecute banking fraud, etc.....

[grahamhgreen]

4. In a nutshell, exposing war crimes is not a crime, it is a duty:

Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950.

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.


Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.


Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.


Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.


Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.


Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

(c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connexion with any crime against peace or any war crime.


Principle VII

Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

LINK: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/390

The documents released simply show a pattern and practice of criminal behavior. It was and is everyones duty to expose these crimes, IMHO.

[cbrer]

5. I'd like to hear Hillary Clinton's comments about Assange

Weren't quite a bit of his first releases her gossip about foreign dignitaries? It would be interesting, as well as a show of character, to hear what she says about this and the first amendment.