How the US government put Julian Assange’s personality on trial

How the US government put Julian Assange’s personality on trial

 On Monday Julian Assange https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/julian-assange was driven to the Old Bailey to continue his fight against extradition to the United States,https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/julian-assange-court-extradition-arrest-charges-old-bailey-b405782.html where the Trump administration has launched the most dangerous attack on press freedom in at least a generation by indicting him for publishing US government documents. Amid coverage of the proceedings, Assange’s critics have inevitably commented on his appearance, rumours of his behaviour while isolated in the Ecuadorian embassy, and other salacious details. 

These predictable distractions are emblematic of the sorry state of our political and cultural discourse. If Assange is extradited to face charges for practising journalism and exposing government misconduct, the consequences for press freedom and the public’s right to know will be catastrophic. Still, rather than seriously addressing the important principles at stake in Assange’s unprecedented indictment and the 175 years in prison he faces, many would rather focus on inconsequential personality profiles. 

Assange is not on trial for skateboarding in the Ecuadorian embassy, for tweeting, for calling Hillary Clinton a war hawk, or for having an unkempt beard as he was dragged into detention by British police. Assange faces extradition to the United States because he published incontrovertible proof of war crimes and abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan, embarrassing the most powerful nation on Earth. Assange published hard evidence of “the ways in which the first world exploits the third”, according to whistleblower Chelsea Manning, the source of that evidence. Assange is on trial for his journalism, for his principles, not his personality. 
https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/united-states

You’ve probably heard the refrain from well-meaning pundits: “You don’t have to like him, but you should oppose threats to silence him.” But that refrain misses the point by reinforcing the manipulative tropes deployed against Assange. 

When setting a gravely dangerous precedent, governments don’t typically persecute the most beloved individuals in the world. They target those who can be portrayed as subversive, unpatriotic – or simply weird. Then they actively distort public debate by emphasizing those traits. 

These techniques are not new. After Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers to journalists to expose the US government’s lies about Vietnam, the Nixon administration’s “White House Plumbers” broke into Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office in search of material that could be used to discredit him. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was falsely portrayed as collaborating with the Chinese, then the Russians. Obsession with military intelligence analyst Manning’s mental health and gender identity was ubiquitous. By demonizing the messenger, governments seek to poison the message. 

Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy - a timeline

The prosecution will be all too happy when coverage of Assange’s extradition hearing devolves into irrelevant tangents and smears. It matters little that Assange’s beard was the result of his shaving kit having been confiscated, or that reports of Paul Manafort visiting him in the embassy were proven to be fabricated. By the time these petty claims are refuted, the damage will be done. At best, public debate over the real issues will be derailed; at worst, public opinion will be manipulated in favour of the establishment. 

By drawing attention away from the principles of the case, the obsession with personality pushes out the significance of WikiLeaks’ revelations and the extent to which governments have concealed misconduct from their own citizens. It pushes out how Assange’s 2010 publications exposed 15,000 previously uncounted civilian casualties in Iraq, casualties that the US Army would have buried. It pushes out the fact that the United States is attempting to accomplish what repressive regimes can only dream of: deciding what journalists around the globe can and cannot write. It pushes out the fact that all whistleblowers and journalism itself, not just Assange, is on trial here.

This piece was written by Noam Chomsky and Alice Walker, co-chairs of AssangeDefense.org - "Source"

Post your comment below

See also

Prosecution of Julian Assange part of Donald Trump’s 'war on journalism', court hears

Assange hearing adjourned as prosecution lawyer is tested for COVID-19


By Noam Chomsky and Alice Walker


The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is supposed to prevent the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights. Ufortunatley


The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is suppose to prevent the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. Unfortunately the U.S.government through corruption of their judiciary and police state political apparatus have through legal chicanery destroyed any semblance of the tenet set out when the first amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791. The current media apparatus is totally corrupt through Zionist and political partisan control and serves only their NWO masters.


Use this as your guide with this big picture and detailed view.

January 10, 2014 *500* Years of History Shows that Mass Spying Is Always Aimed at Crushing Dissent

*It’s Never to Protect Us From Bad Guys*

No matter which government conducts mass surveillance, they also do it to crush dissent, and then give a false rationale for why they’re doing it. http://www.globalresearch.ca/500-years-of-history...


The late Robert Parry called the MSM "the Mighty Wurlitzer". In my generation, the TV was referred to as "the idiot box." Rational evidence-based arguments do not matter any more. Only VOLUME. Propaganda has saturated our culture. The masses have been sheep-dipped in it. Please stop feeding the beast, open your eyes, and spread the word. Cancel your cable TV. Read books. Stop being hypnotized by Hollywood. If the masses do not awaken, we are doomed as a species.
Share


Many within our "species' have been "taught" to read but remain functionally illiterate. That's why they watch Fox "news" 24/7.


It is not just Fox news spouting propaganda. It is also PBS, MSNBC, and all the rest. In fact, in recent years Fox has perhaps been one of the more open forums with Tucker Carlson’s shows. He had on Tulsi Gabbard when she was persona non grata for being against regime change wars, and Professor Stephen Cohen debunking “RussiaGate” and warning of its consequences. The more insidious propaganda is the narrative being sold to the Latte sippers who think they are “intellectual” because they get classical music and “smooth” jazz with the BS being spouted by NPR.


Sep 12, 2020 CN LIVE! S2E15 DRAMA IN THE COURT - Timm, Maurizi, Gosztola, Mercouris & Kim Dotcom

Now we are providing extensive coverage of the resumption of Julian Assange‘s extradition trial, beginning with last week’s webcast, “The Media Trial of the Century.”
https://youtu.be/DWRqT8bc8qU


"most beloved individuals in the world"

Manty people find Junian Assange beloved and endearing. It is those in power who are viewed as demons.