Nov 30, 2015

The strange case of Julian Assange

It's become clear that the Swedish and UK governments will do virtually anything to ensure the investigation of Julian Assange never proceeds.

Bernard Keane — Politics editor

Bernard Keane

Politics editor

Julian Assange faces very serious allegations, politicians like to say. That was the description from UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s office three years ago, defending the UK’s determination to extradite him to Sweden. And that was the description early this year from then-UK deputy PM Nick Clegg, too — “he should go to Sweden to face very serious allegations and charges of rape,” said Clegg, not long before leading his party to annihilation in this year’s general election. Clegg, of course, was peddling the oft-repeated lie that there are charges against Assange.

But for very serious allegations – sexual molestation, unlawful coercion, sexual assault — the UK and Swedish governments have displayed zero interest in investigating them. In fact, the history of the case against Assange is a history of increasingly bizarre efforts by authorities to avoid questioning him.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

16 thoughts on “The strange case of Julian Assange

  1. CML

    Thank you, Bernard for that bizarre account.
    I do hope Julian Assange does NOT have dual citizenship. If so, he could be in danger of losing the Aussie half…with Bishop, Dutton and this putrid government on the case!

  2. Rortydog

    Thank you for highlighting the various red herrings and bandwagons around this story. To defend Assange in most corners of the media has become tantamount to apologising for rape, misogyny, belittling of rape victims, for displaying mistrust in Western European legal systems, support for tinpot South American dictators, supporting leaks that endanger the troops, un-Americanism, un-Britishism un-Australianism, pro-Occupy, blind extreme Leftism etc. You name it. The Assange circus has been orchestrated to split the broad Left, be it Occupy, Feminism or advocates for better democracy and transparency. The personal attacks on Assange have been vicious and beyond count. Whatever the outcome of future trials or enquiries he has been tainted for life, mud has stuck, which is a most desirable outcome for the US authorities. This will serve to lower the public outcry and lower Assange’s sympathy value when they finally, inevitably, fit him for the orange jumpsuit.

  3. klewso

    A confected excuse to try to flush Assange to US hands – how dare anyone try to tell everyone what government is actually doing, paid for by $tax.

  4. Norman Hanscombe

    When you’ve been away in the land of the intellectually living and suddenly come across the intellectually non-dead, you know you’re probably once more in Crikey Land. Assange makes an ideal Anti-Saint for such devotees as those haunting the Crikey Caverns.

  5. Kevin Herbert

    James O’Neill:

    On the day after 22 November last anniversary, I revisited the assembled publicly available evidence for the first time in many years.

    And for the first time I heard JKF’s address to the US Press Council in DC in which he made direct reference to the real dangers associated with a secret society which had infiltrated US public life.

    A chilling reminder that the same secret society to this day controls the US Federal Reserve Bank, the US Congress/President & military & most recently, the MSM.

  6. James O'Neill

    Kevin, it goes by a number of names, and it is more than just one group. Eisenhower warned against the “military-industrial” complex in his farewell address in January 1961. People have taken on board Eisenhower’s phrase, but ignored the dangers he was pointing to; dangers that are more apparent than ever.
    I have found the work of Peter Dale Scott to be particularly illuminating on some aspects of this. He writes of the “deep state” by which he means the disparate unelected groups working to their own agendas. Their power is such that they are able to dictate policy to the elected representatives. The cross ownership of the media and the companies that profit from endless war means that there is very little critical scrutiny of the decisions made, by whom they are made, and to whose benefit.
    In some respects, eg the concentration of print media ownership, Australia is even worse than the US. Bernard Keane’s current series on The Dismissal illustrate other dark elements in our body politic. Future historians will puzzle, for example, over the extraordinary obeisance paid by our politicians to the Americans in matters of foreign policy, when those policies are often clearly contrary to Australia’s national interests.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details