Are Britain and Sweden helping the USA Target Assange? Part 3 of the Truth on Assange

Australian journalist Julian Assange believes he's the subject of a witch-hunt by the USA. Assange fears that submitting to the controversial Arrest Warrant issued by the fourth and latest Swedish prosecutor will lead to him being illegally extradited to America. He has been granted asylum by Ecuador in their embassy in Britain.

Are the allegations of rape and sexual assault against Assange real? Is he being hunted by the American oligarchy, with the active cooperation of Britain and Sweden? What's the truth of the matter?

How do you find the truth? By examining the evidence and coming to your own conclusions. Don't uncritically believe what anybody says, the truth needs you to check out the facts yourself so you can derive your own conclusions.

This last article continues to investigate the facts. The first in this series looked at the evidence underlying the rape allegations of Anna Ardin and Sophia Wilen, Assange's two accusers. The second explored the International Arrest Warrant and the damning yet ignored forensic evidence it omits.

All the articles about this matter name Julian Assange, although some do not name Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen. But like his two accusers, Assange is also innocent until proven guilty. Equality demands that either all names or no names be mentioned.

Is Assange already found Guilty without being Charged?
26. Since Swedish law protects the innocent, releasing Assange's name to the press was an illegal crime. Yet no one - neither Ardin, nor Wilen, nor Claes Borgstrom, nor Marianne Ny - have been charged for this very real crime.

27. Sweden has refused to abide by common international practice and confirm Assange will be allowed to walk free before being charged once he has been questioned. There is a bilateral agreement between the United States and Sweden which allows Assange to be extradited to the USA as soon as he arrives in Sweden.

28. Assange has already been tried by the media, his name and international reputation have been destroyed, although he's not been charged with any crime. Daniel Ellsberg suffered similarly when he released the Pentagon papers, yet America now views Ellsberg as a journalistic hero.

29. In a 2012 article, US Congressman Ron Paul refers to the "lies dished out by the American government," and chastises

"the government of Sweden for truckling to alleged American demands that the Aussie [Assange] be extradited to the U.S. for prosecutions."

The UK's Top Expert is hired to Extradite Assange
30. Britain has hired Clare Montgomery QC, the UK's top extradition expert, to ensure Assange would be successfully extradited to Sweden. The long-suffering British tax-payers are paying the costs which will no doubt run into hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why would the UK engage the country's top legal expert if the only reason was a dubious "sex by surprise" charge?

31. The extradition proceedings are handled by Britain's "Serious Organized Crime Agency" who instructed Scotland Yard to arrest Mr Assange. But what has being wanted for "sex by surprise" questioning got to do with the Serious Organized Crime Agency? How do Ardin and Wilen's allegations of "sex by surprise" count as "serious?" How do sexual crime allegations ever count as "organized crime?"

The UK Threaten to Invade the Ecuadorean Embassy
32. The UK stationed dozens of police at the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where Assange has been awarded political asylum. Such enormous costs in cash-strapped Britain suffering from severe "austerity" for such a minor charge? Or is there an ulterior motive?

33. In blatant disregard of the Vienna convention, Britain threatened to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the Ecuadorean embassy in London in order to arrest Assange. Would they really make such an outrageously "blunt" threat if there were not some ulterior motive behind the arrest warrant? Despite the threat having been made in writing, Britain later deny it, yet also decline to rescind the threat.

34. Center for Economic and Policy Research Director Mark Weisbrot notes that:

"The U.K. government would not resort to such extreme threats if this case were really just about a foreign citizen who was wanted for questioning – not criminal charges or a trial – in a neighboring country. Clearly there are other motives involved."

"Who is Assange to provoke such an overreaction? He is merely wanted for questioning in Sweden, yet the Swedish authorities have rejected numerous opportunities, including Ecuador's recent offer, to question him in London... without even offering a reason."

Further Developments for Assange and WikiLeaks
35. The America press reports that Assange, an Australian, has already been found guilty in a secret US court.

36. The UK and Sweden cooperate very closely with America. These are the only two European countries who chose to block a 2013 European Union investigation into the USA's NSA wiretapping European officials and industries by the USA.

37. WikiLeaks relies on online donations from a worldwide network of supporters to fund its work. Yet Mastercard and Visa suspended all payments to the website, including the author's, while informing me that my payment had been completed and the payee had received my donation. This is untrue, Mastercard have not delivered my donation and, since they have not refunded my money, could they actually be charged with theft? The good news is that the Icelandic Supreme Court have now ruled that it's illegal for Mastercard and Visa to refuse to service WikiLeaks donations

38. The enormous American pressure has had a severe effect on Assange. The 14-month investigation by Juan Mendez, the United Nations special rapporteur on torture, found that whistle-blower Bradley Manning was being tortured in an American prison. While far less severe than torture, being cooped up in the small Ecuadorean embassy in London would negatively influence most people. His relationships have suffered even among those helping WikiLeaks and its disclosures.

39. Unsurprisingly, Assange has made some questionable decisions, such as dumping all the US emails on the internet without redacting any names. Yet the USA refused to cooperate with WikiLeaks when they offered to mitigate any damage by redacting truly sensitive information such as names. So America shares equal responsibility for any subsequent fall-out, no matter how unfortunate.

For the previous article in this series, see: Three Swedish Prosecutors Dismiss All Charges. Part 2 of the Truth on Assange

© Copyright worldwide Cris Baker, www.LifeStrategies.net All rights reserved. Republishing welcomed under Creative Commons noncommercial no derivatives license preserving all links intact, so please +1 and share this widely!

Food for Thought
"In 1773, Benjamin Franklin leaked confidential information by releasing letters between the Governor of Massachusetts and the British prime minister's office. Franklin was then dismissed as colonial Postmaster General and endured an hour-long censure from British Solicitor General Wedderburn who branded him a liar and a thief. So slanderous was Wedderburn’s diatribe that no London paper dared to print it!

"Like Edward Snowden, Benjamin Franklin was called a traitor for whistleblowing the truth about what the government was doing."

- http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-10-10/edward-snowden-benjamin-...