The Guardian: If you give Assange to the US you kill him

While the serious and less serious British media are busying themselves with the Buckingham brides, in the imposing Fleet Street courthouse in London, two lawyers recalled a story of a 1970s “Assange” who got away with it.

In particular, almost 50 years ago, former CIA agent Philip Agee leaked details of his country’s illegal activities on behalf of South American dictators to the British magazine Time Out.

Despite false claims that the revelations led to deaths, Aggie was ultimately never extradited to the US, although he was deported from Britain by the Labor government in 1977.

After many years, Aggie would say that in the modern era it would be very difficult to do what he did and get it… clean. But why have the times changed and what does this mean for Assange?

Aggie’s case was therefore brought up by Assange’s lawyers, Edward Fitzgerald and Mark Summers, before magistrates as their client tries to appeal against a decision to extradite him to the US to stand trial under the Espionage Act over the publication of his documents. , via WikiLeaks.

It is recalled that he had exposed the illegal actions of the US in Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo and elsewhere after information given to him by the former American civil servant Chelsea Manning.

The importance of comparing the two stories is highlighted by the experienced journalist and correspondent of The Guardian, Duncan Campbell.

Speaking to Campbell in 2007, Aggie said rather prophetically: “I think it would be a lot harder, [να κάνει κανείς αυτό που άκανα τότε]. A person who tried to do what I did would face kidnapping and possibly being ‘frozen’ in a secret prison for many years.”

It is noted that Assange is serving his fifth year in Belmars maximum security prison, despite the fact that he has not been convicted of any crime.

As Fitzgerald told the court, this is “a legally unprecedented prosecution (which) seeks to criminalize the application of ordinary journalistic practices”.

American hypocrisy

British US attorney Claire Dobbin said the charges against Assange were not political, but were brought because he overstepped journalistic boundaries, simply gathering information, and that “responsible” journalists would not have acted as he did.

He even claimed that the people mentioned in Assange’s revelations were forced to leave their homes because they were in danger.

However, this is untrue, as evidence given at Manning’s sentencing hearing in 2013 revealed that a team of 120 agents could not locate a single person who could be proven to have died as a result of the WikiLeaks revelations.

American hypocrisy can also be seen in the case of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who was arrested last year in Russia, on charges of espionage on behalf of the United States. In his case the US demands his release, but for Assange imprisonment.

Certain death in his condition

Dungan Campbell also takes issue with British colleagues for their indifference to the Assange case.

“Some of the ‘responsible’ press in this country have barely covered this case when they are too busy with stories about royal family gossip or the news that footballer Wayne Rooney has applied to study law.” .

At the same time, however, in real life Assange’s lawyers are fighting for the life of a journalist who, as things show, could die in prison.

Assange may not receive a 175-year sentence, but 35-40 years in prison is very possible. “For a 52-year-old in poor health, that almost certainly means he’s going to die back in prison in irons,” Campbell said, taking aim at British politicians who don’t denounce US efforts to impeach a journalist.

So the question for the British journalist is whether British judges and politicians have the fortitude to fight this version. “Everyone who values ​​the right to freedom of speech undoubtedly should,” he concludes.