It seems that Julian Assange’s luck is up, and he will soon be headed back to the United States to face the music.
Earlier this month, I wrote a fairly extended piece outlining the many reasons why this no longer bothered me. Truth be told, the man was never a hero in my eyes to begin with, but I couldn’t deny the public service he had done. However, that credibility was dealt a massive blow in late 2016. And it completely vanished earlier this year with Assange’s attempt at opening up a twitter backchannel to Sean Hannity. This, to feed him more ill-begotten dirt on selected Democrats.
In other words, MORE attempts to manipulate the internal political affairs of a sovereign nation-state. Since Assange proponents are not beyond using the realm of speculation as an argument, it makes me wonder. . . how many other nation states has he influenced?
Given the circumstances, it’s possible that we may find out. But we shall see. Either way, I won’t shed a tear for this asshole of a man.
One aspect of this saga that came as a bit of a surprise to me was how the 2 sexual assaults that started it all have continually been either overlooked or quickly dismissed. One of the instances timed out due to the statute of limitations running out, but the other has about a year left. Both of which have always been pushed to the sidelines in light of the whole Wikileaks thing, and both of which will likely end up timing out in light of the other charges from a far more powerful nation-state. That is unless Sweden is allowed a crack at him as well. Though seemingly doubtful, one can hope. . .
In a great many instances, this oversight can be understandable. For YEARS, the media (at any level) didn’t do all that great a job at telling this side of the story. Had I not looked into it myself for the previous piece, I also wouldn’t pay much heed to it.
One expects this from a majority of proponents. The biggest reason for this is ignorance of the story, followed by bigotry (the segment that always values male livelihood more than justice). These 2 don’t surprise me.
What DOES surprise me, however, is how Julian Assange can make otherwise progressive individuals seemingly turn a part of this philosophy off in support of the man. This comes to mind when reading the article above (the sexual assaults are not mentioned at all), but this could also be just ignorance again. Christopher Hedges article, however, was less excusable.
Assange was granted asylum in the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to answer questions about sexual offense allegations that were eventually dropped.
Dropped, because his stint in the embassy lasted long enough to run out the statute of limitations. Given differing political trade winds to the ones that ended up coming to be, he may well have timed out both.
Something Hedges readily acknowledges in his article.
Assange feared that once he was in Swedish custody he would be extradited to the United States. The British government has said that, although he is no longer wanted for questioning in Sweden, Assange will be arrested and jailed for breaching his bail conditions if he leaves the embassy.
The UK adds yet another bend to this, but such is their right. It all still boils down to a journalist who seemingly can’t see past Assange’s own delusions of grandeur. Even when the character has displayed characteristics contrary to this journalists own values.
Should Jillian Assange even be facing charges in the United States?
I suppose now would be a good time to again say, I’m not sure. There is plenty of bias on either side of that debate to go around. But personally, I don’t know.
All I do know is that the man is undeserving of the cult following of which he has amassed. He is not the Jesus Christ of free speech. He is just another rapist without a guilty verdict.