Let the character assassination, conspiracy theories and press circus continue. Amid what is perhaps one of the most controversial debates over human rights in a generation, some remain more interested in Julian Assange’s ugly behavior, like how he crashed at the home of former WikiLeaker and friend Daniel Domscheit-Berg uninvited, abused his cat and never flushed the toilet (The NYTimes has since quietly removed those paragraphs). He’s also “depressed.” According to his mother, “friends have encouraged him to put on music and dance as a way of getting physical activity and that they had also brought sunlamps.” And, of course, the rape charges.No one ever said being hunted by the U.S. government was a good time. And no one ever said Assange was a very likable person. But for all of his arrogance, histrionics and grandstanding, such sideshows distract from the U.S.’s intense and controversial pursuit of Assange. Whether or not the Swedish rape charges against him are legitimate, what punishment he faces in the U.S. have been presaged during a single presidential term, which has invoked the Espionage Act as a tool of prosecution more than all past previous presidents combined. Choosing Ecuador for political asylum is less an indication of the type of folk Assange chooses to befriend but more of a testament to the kind of dwindling options that remain for a man who has angered the wrong people and is now simply looking for a fair shake.That the UK would consider storming the Ecuadorian embassy – thus violating the Vienna Convention – isn’t just a worry for the Austrialian “hacker,” but for anyone that appreciates democracy and freedom and fairness. These are extraordinary actions over a man facing alleged rape charges in Sweden, though the country has thus far refused to forward their case by questioning Assange in the UK. And by some accounts, the U.S. has already prepared an indictment if and when Assange is extradited to Sweden, prompting a final extradition back to the States where he could very well face the death penalty. To build its case against him, the U.S. is eager to prove that Bradley Manning was Assange’s source; but even before trial, Manning’s punishment has begun. Michael Arria wrote about the controversial legal proceedings and treatment of Manning, which have been under tighter secrecy than even the hearings for the Sept. 11 masterminds, and proven cruel to the 24-year-old Army private:According to an Article 13 motion published Friday on the website of Manning's civilian lawyer David Coombs, the soldier was held in solitary confinement, in a 6×8 ft cell for 23 to 24 hours a day for nine months while at Quantico. When not sleeping, Manning was allegedly prevented from lying down, or even using a wall to support him. The motion also claims that Manning was punished through "degradation and humiliation," notably by forcing him to stand outside his cell naked during a morning inspection. This, Coombs claims, was "retaliatory punishment" for speaking out over his treatment.In March, Juan Mendez, the UN special rapporteur on torture, concluded a 14-month investigation into Manning’s treatment, finding it cruel and unusual. Mendez wrote, “Imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity as well as of his presumption of innocence.”Where the U.S. for decades has been the home of the politically oppressed and an international beacon for upholding human rights, it now looks increasingly like Big Brother, turning guys like Kim DotCom into internet heros, allowing countries like Ecuador (which has its own history of freedom of speech violations) to take a moral high ground, and keeping a man in prison for over 800 days without trial.
Advertisement