Why should Assange be punished when Bush goes free?

[Joanne98]

On Wednesday, in response to a question from the opposition, a minister of the Crown stood in the House of Commons and assured the honourable members that neither he nor the Prime Minister of Canada advocates the murder of Julian Assange.

Which is nice, I suppose. But it’s also troubling.

How is it possible that in this civilized nation a member of Parliament felt the need to raise the matter? And while we’re asking rhetorical questions that would not need to be asked in a sane world, how is it possible that the Republican party has so completely embraced aggression that almost all its leading figures feel the near-drowning of suspects is a valid interrogation technique? Why is it that most people are not disturbed that American officials who apparently committed heinous crimes in the war on terror will not be investigated and held to account, while Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is hunted to the ends of the Earth? And how is it possible that when a former president of the United States of America admits he authorized the commission of torture, the international media and political classes express not a fraction of the anger they are now directing at the man who leaked the secrets of that president’s administration?
The question in the Commons Wednesday was prompted by the televised comments of Tom Flanagan, political scientist and former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “I think Assange should be assassinated, actually,” Flanagan said Tuesday.



Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/12/03/dan-gardner-why-should-assange-be-punished-when-bush-goes-free/#ixzz173PsaFWG

[stray cat]

1. We still try and convict others