Freedom of speech hangs in the balance

Even Julian Assanges lawyer has stated that the "sex" charges were a political stunt.  Despite all risks, Julian Assange has offered to have a meeting with the police in UK.  On the dawn of Christmas, Wikileaks founder is not allowed to return home to be with his family over Christmas as Australian authorities are looking into pathways to detain him too.  Scotland yard has received a request by Swedish authorities to extradite Julian to Sweden.  United States government has changed their law within the espionage act so that they can successfully prosecute Julian Assange.  Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks has gained worldwide support from people from all walks of life. Its only a few who do not see or understand the impact right now that this case has on freedom of speech in the future.  

Despite all of the spin, he has been able to prove deeply how United States government and others have engaged in war crimes, corruption and human rights abuses against everyday citizens.  Exposing the truth is always the starting point to improving human rights as the evidence to prove them are often hidden away from the public eye.  For the first time since the pentagon papers, the world has been able to really understand how deep the rabbit hole goes...How we have all been lied to.

The reward for a noble act?  United States, Australia and Sweden have scraped around the garbage dump of "laws" that they can use to detain him.  Detaining is of course in history, proven to be a remarkable method for governments to do what they wish behind closed doors.  Its a place where the media cannot simply waltz in there and keep the spotlight on the authorities treatment.  Most accounts of abuse are often told by the subject after the detainment where authorities can debate the occurrence or write it off as "before the reforms".  Public reforms are a wonderful show when abuses happen to make it to the media and maintains the visage that governments are actually working to look after their people in a fair and transparent manner.
A brilliant example is the Australian government making a public apology for the stolen generation whilst initiating a very controversial program that only targeted indigenous communities in the Northern Territory.

This time, despite all of the threats by governments around the world, they risk losing worldwide support.  In fact, they risk a great backlash.  Supporters of Wikileaks are growing and are a majority, beyond the few trying to claw away at reviving the former regime.  Everyone can at least think of one release that help the world understand that it was not the leak, but the act that was wrong.  Government spokespeople on the issue have openly admitted that the Swedish court case is an opportunity for revenge.  Many well respected reporters have put into perspective how the case is fraught with corruption and denial of justice.  If governments do succeed in their ambitions of revenge, they will lose all support and any efforts to contain public reactions will also add to the outrage.

Governments must choose between saving face and destroying the messenger or doing the right thing and ensuring proper administration of natural justice.  If they choose the latter, they have the opportunity to redeem themselves as responsible leaders with accountability for their past actions and the apologies they made have at least substance.  The outcomes of their decisions also hang in the balance.

US vs WIkileaks: The Words They used

Words to describe Wikileaks releases are:

1.  "Illegal"
Leaks from both the Iraq, Afghanistan war diaries demonstrated how United States repeatedly broke the treaty on convention against torture.  UN chief investigator Manfred Nowak, called upon the United States government to investigate war crimes after the Iraq release.

Iraq war logs: UN calls on Obama to investigate human rights abuses.  Read more here.

The latest embassy cables show that United States were spying on the UN which is currently being investigated.


2.  "..puts peoples lives in danger"
The United States government has either directly threatened or taken no legal action against its citizens on murdering Julian Assange and his family.  In the afghan documents, Amnesty pointed out that the United States had no consideration of the civilians lives in Afghanistan:

3. "...threatens US national security"
As pointed out by the Australian Lawyers for Human Rights President Stephen Keim, the threat posed to Wikileaks and its members is a threat to the freedom of speech.

To really understand not only is Wikileaks not a threat, but a protection to every nations security, one has to really delve into understanding what "National Security" means.

Interests of a country is naturally democracy and within the concepts of a democracy, every country must have freedom of expression without intimidation. Thus, United States government action against Wikileaks and all other media outlets is a threat to every nations security.  These are after all why citizens agreed to supporting the establishment of such in the first place as it was never mean to be securing government interests, but of their people.

4. "..to solve shared problems"
Recent leaks on the Copenhagen Accord reveal how United States government monopolized global action on climate change by paying off developing countries to accept agreements that were obviously not in the interests of the planet.  The fact remains, despite slight inaccuracies that global warming is occurring, that its getting worse and that we only have a few years to solve the problem before it gets to a stage beyond the capacity of human beings.  The prediction of a runaway greenhouse effect remains consistent, despite the efforts of polluting companies to hire "experts" to state otherwise.  Some experts have stated that if action is not taken, this will effect our children.  It is no wonder that United States is the only developed country in the world that has not signed the convention on the rights of the child.




5. "An attack on the international community"
In one of the cable leaks, United States recommended nuclear weapons for Pakistan to defeat India, despite security scholoars raising concerns over the years of state sponsored terrorism.  In July last year, the president of Pakistan publicly admitted to supporting and nurturing terrorist groups.  The same terrorist groups that United States government have publicly stated their dedication on eradicating.

Why Julian Assange Must Not Be Detained

While the chase is on to silence Wikileaks and disable its founder, the world watches and waits.  The struggle to shine the spotlight on the depth of corruption inside the US embassy is one of the most intense.  Commentary from US government is as expected, against the release.  More disturbing, calls for his assassination were made public.

 It leaves a lingering question, is Julian Assange safe in the custody of police or in Swedens jail?  

Whats clear is that the crimes have become merged, the issue is no longer about whether or not the Swedish charges were correct, but more about how they can use these charges as a foothold for United States to detain him.  

Considering United States history on torture of detainees, it is of great concern that the United States government is attempting to use the Swedish charges to detain Julian Assange in their country.  

The same people making such requests are from the top and as Wikileaks have proven, are criminals that are not being charged for crimes beyond the fraying case they are attempting to establish against him.

Amnesty International has noted serious concern over United States transferring prisoners to places where they can be abused without accountability.  The prospective of transferring Julian Assange from Sweden to United States, I would argue as no different other than they are yet again planning to breach the convention against torture.



The outcome of Julian Assanges case is important and will have a dramatic impact on how free speech is delivered in the future.  You can help change this by adding your signature here or by donating to the Julian Assange legal fund here.