bigOfeature

LIBERTY FOR JULIAN ASSANGE

January 15, 2023 – 6:40 am

Fifty years ago today, Beatle George told us that All Things Must Pass. Then he told us about Living in the Material World. For 36 years, BigO has been trying to keep the spirit and history of the music alive. Before all things pass, we still need your help to live in this material world. You can help us to do this with a kind donation. Please give what you are happy to give…

HOW TO DONATE

Our costs will always be there. So readers who can donate towards the cost of the site, please open a Skrill account. Readers who wish to contribute to BigO will now have to use Skrill (click here). We are no longer able to use PayPal to receive donations. Register an account at Skrill. To make a payment, use this e-mail address as recipient’s e-mail address in Skrill: mail2[at]bigomagazine.com. Looking forward to hearing from you.

+ + + + +

JUST TO LET YOU KNOW
To reduce spamming, the BigO website is going through Cloudflare. What it does is scan your browser to ensure the visitor is not a spam. Do not be alarmed as this usually takes only a few seconds.  Email us if you still have difficulty accessing the BigO site; or playing or downloading the tracks. If you know a better way of reducing spam, do let us know.

+ + + + +

His wrongful detention in the United Kingdom has gone on since 2012 when he avoided arrest by staying in the Eucadorian Embassy. Since 2019, he has been inside a British jail. Hasn’t he been imprisoned for long enough and for none other than telling the truth? By B Nimri Aziz.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s vindication seems - maybe, perhaps, imaginably - achievable. It’s enough for me to publish my singular New Year resolution - not a wish, but a firm resolution - to more actively contribute to growing pressure to free Julian Assange, the mistreated, vilified and imprisoned, brave and brilliant founder of WikiLeaks.

It’s a finite issue, unlike negotiations to end a raging war or a global agreement on climate controls. Yet freeing Assange had appeared almost insurmountable not long ago. Whereas, given the painstaking pursuit to free Assange by a pitifully small coterie of determined supporters, some success may be at hand.

Their movement’s goal is clear: the US government must drop its extradition order. Then, Assange should be released from Britian’s notorious Belmarsh prison,where he’s held only on a charge of dodging a bail hearing. Then, if faced with further legal action, his lawyers argue, he should be detained in his own country, Australia.

During these four years in Belmarsh, Assange’s situation looked bleak. Particularly because his struggle for justice was essentially ignored by the press and thereby by the public, including many human rights groups. The very newspapers which so righteously published WikiLeaks’ documents revealing Washington’s criminality in Iraq and elsewhere, maligned him. Then they abandoned the principle of press freedom which he represents.

In 2019 when a new Ecuadorian leader revoked Assange’s asylum in their London embassy, British authorities forcibly removed Assange from the embassy and slapped him into Belmarsh prison. Then the UK government initiated hearings regarding Washington’s request for his extradition to the US. A series of challenges by Assange’s legal team yielded little hope of success.

During these four years in Belmarsh, Julian Assange’s situation looked bleak. Particularly because his struggle for justice was essentially ignored by the press and thereby by the public… The very newspapers which so righteously published WikiLeaks’ documents revealing Washington’s criminality in Iraq and elsewhere, maligned him. Then they abandoned the principle of press freedom which he represents.

With diminishing legal options, freedom of journalists and publishers to expose government wrongdoings became an increasingly louder argument for Assange’s release. That seemed to garner new attention. More journalists joined the free-Assange movement, perhaps realizing the implications that a successful indictment of Assange might hold for themselves.

A few weeks ago, the world heard Assange’s name after a decade-long blackout. Unexpectedly, on November 28, those same press giants largely responsible for that blockade and for defaming Assange, decided to speak against his prosecution by US authorities.

Their plea became headline news - as if the case was just discovered. The New York Times, joined by its peers in the UK, France and Germany, published an open letter headlined “The US government should end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets”.

Their brief statement made its appeal on the principle of press freedom. “This indictment sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine America’s First Amendment and the freedom of the press. Holding governments accountable”, it said, “is part of the core mission of a free press in a democracy.”

Too often, the same public who’d cared little about Assange’s fate or interpretations of press freedom which his prosecution raises, suddenly had a change of heart. The voice of those news giants is so frightening in its power to singlehandedly transform public opinion and government policies. Although we still don’t know how that appeal will affect Washington’s extradition order.

I will not join those who applaud the media giants’ new posture. What we ought to reflect on is the real source of this ideological change: the quotidian struggle to win his freedom, year-after-year, against seemingly impossible odds. It was not human rights organizations or our supposed-free press who did this. It was individuals.

The changed public mood derives from painstaking efforts by a small group of lawyers, family, and media critics who themselves became unpopular and marginalized for their support of the imprisoned man. I have no doubt that the breakthrough represented in that highbrow open letter wouldn’t have been possible without the tireless, persistent educational and legal campaigns by that committed team.

I will not join those who applaud the media giants’ new posture. What we ought to reflect on is the real source of this ideological change: the quotidian struggle to win his freedom, year-after-year, against seemingly impossible odds. It was not human rights organizations or our supposed-free press who did this. It was individuals. The changed public mood derives from painstaking efforts by a small group of lawyers, family, and media critics who themselves became unpopular and marginalized for their support of the imprisoned man.

I was aware, having followed their legal appeals and public events for more than a decade, of a remarkable but little publicised October 9 London protest, perhaps a watershed in the campaign: more than 5,000 individuals linked hands, forming a human chain around the British parliament building to call for Assange’s release. A glowing, living example of support.

Not long before that, the film Ithaka was released - a video document of the campaign led by Assange’s family members, most notably his 76-year-old father John Shipton. (The elder Shipton’s eloquence and compassion are deeply moving.) During the US tour portrayed in Ithaka, Shipton and Assange’s brother Gabriel often drew hardly more than a dozen listeners. (Audiences were larger in Europe and Australia.)

On December 1, the Australian government which had hitherto made no effort to aid Assange, indicated a new position. “Enough is enough”, proclaimed Australia’s recently elected Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

In recent weeks, celebrated press freedom campaigners like Daniel Ellsberg announced - “Indict me too”, since he himself had released government secrets. Guests who’d visited Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy learned that their phones and other items submitted to embassy security had been turned over to the CIA; they are now suing former CIA director Pompeo along with others for violating their rights.

How much more is needed to force the UK and US governments to reverse their policy and free Julian Assange? Given the apparently successful efforts of that slight but resolute group of supporters, we should be encouraged to personally lend our weight, however modest, for the final push.

Note: B Nimri Aziz is a New York based anthropologist and journalist. Her latest book is “Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal.” Find her work at barbaranimri.com. The above article was posted at CounterPunch.

+ + + + +

WHO IS JULIAN ASSANGE?

The 47-year-old is an Australian who spearheaded the anti-secrecy group Wikileaks to expose the inner workings of governments, military and trade deals around the world. Assange is a hacker, freedom of information advocate and considers himself a political refugee. - The UK Sun

Julian Assange is an Australian editor, publisher and activist who founded WikiLeaks in 2006. Julian came to international attention in 2010 when Wikileaks published a series of leaks provided by US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, including leaks that showed war crimes committed with the knowledge of the US government. After the 2010 leaks, the United States government launched a criminal investigation into WikiLeaks, and are now seeking his extradition to prosecute in the US. He is currently held in HM Belmarsh prison in London. - ithaka.movie

+ + + + +