Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday October 28 2019, @09:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the evil-is-what-evil-does dept.

Craig Murray of Information Clearing House writes about his observation at Westminster Magistrates Court:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52433.htm

Before I get on to the blatant lack of fair process, the first thing I must note was Julian's condition. I was badly shocked by just how much weight my friend has lost, by the speed his hair has receded and by the appearance of premature and vastly accelerated ageing. He has a pronounced limp I have never seen before. Since his arrest he has lost over 15 kg in weight.

But his physical appearance was not as shocking as his mental deterioration. When asked to give his name and date of birth, he struggled visibly over several seconds to recall both. I will come to the important content of his statement at the end of proceedings in due course, but his difficulty in making it was very evident; it was a real struggle for him to articulate the words and focus his train of thought.

Until yesterday I had always been quietly sceptical of those who claimed that Julian's treatment amounted to torture – even of Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture – and sceptical of those who suggested he may be subject to debilitating drug treatments. But having attended the trials in Uzbekistan of several victims of extreme torture, and having worked with survivors from Sierra Leone and elsewhere, I can tell you that yesterday changed my mind entirely and Julian exhibited exactly the symptoms of a torture victim brought blinking into the light, particularly in terms of disorientation, confusion, and the real struggle to assert free will through the fog of learned helplessness.

I had been even more sceptical of those who claimed, as a senior member of his legal team did to me on Sunday night, that they were worried that Julian might not live to the end of the extradition process. I now find myself not only believing it, but haunted by the thought. Everybody in that court yesterday saw that one of the greatest journalists and most important dissidents of our times is being tortured to death by the state, before our eyes. To see my friend, the most articulate man, the fastest thinker, I have ever known, reduced to that shambling and incoherent wreck, was unbearable. Yet the agents of the state, particularly the callous magistrate Vanessa Baraitser, were not just prepared but eager to be a part of this bloodsport. She actually told him that if he were incapable of following proceedings, then his lawyers could explain what had happened to him later. The question of why a man who, by the very charges against him, was acknowledged to be highly intelligent and competent, had been reduced by the state to somebody incapable of following court proceedings, gave her not a millisecond of concern.

Now tell me some fine arguments justifying the legality and justness of such person destruction methodics, I wish to hear them.
 


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Tuesday October 29 2019, @12:24AM

    by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday October 29 2019, @12:24AM (#913045)

    When Assange jumped bail:
    - Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning had been in prison, almost entirely incommunicado, without charges under conditions Amnesty International considered torture. For the same crime the US was after Assange for.
    - A substantial percentage of the US national security apparatus, and even then-senator Joe Lieberman, had worked tirelessly to try to cut off Wikileaks' funding, solely because they didn't like what Assange was publishing.
    - Among the information that Wikileaks was publishing was about the US's international network of military prisons where they were having people tortured and killed. Assange, being neither a US citizen nor a prisoner of war, had few legal protections against that treatment beyond Australia sending a letter complaining about their citizens' treatment (but other than that probably doing nothing else).
    - Several US officials had called for Assange to be imprisoned or even executed without trial.
    - The Swedes had refused any deals that would involve promises that Assange would not be immediately sent to the Americans for $DEITY-knows-what treatment.

    It would be reasonable for Assange to have concluded, as a UN human rights panel would years later, that to go to Sweden to stand trial would be basically walking willingly into being tortured to death over a period of years. And however unpleasant jumping bail might be, it was preferable to that.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=2, Informative=2, Total=4
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5