Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Uncle Joe

(58,389 posts)
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 11:57 AM Jan 2023

Jeremy Corbyn on Freeing Julian Assange, the Working Class, Brazil, Peru & Ending Ukraine War



In Washington, D.C., human rights and free speech advocates gather today for the Belmarsh Tribunal, focused on the imprisonment of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Assange has been languishing for close to four years in the harsh Belmarsh prison in London while appealing extradition to the United States on espionage charges. If convicted, Assange could face up to 175 years in jail for publishing documents that exposed war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Five major news organizations that once partnered with WikiLeaks recently called on the Biden administration to drop charges against Assange. We speak to British MP and former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is in Washington, D.C., to participate in the Belmarsh Tribunal, about Assange and freedom of the press. We also cover the state of leftism around the globe, from labor rights in the U.K. and Europe to the war in Ukraine, to political unrest in Brazil and Peru.


6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jeremy Corbyn on Freeing Julian Assange, the Working Class, Brazil, Peru & Ending Ukraine War (Original Post) Uncle Joe Jan 2023 OP
Assange is not a good guy. Never was. harumph Jan 2023 #1
Whether you like his/their politics or not, publishing is not a crime, Uncle Joe Jan 2023 #2
Exactly. Magoo48 Jan 2023 #3
Corbin in the interview: Gaugamela Jan 2023 #5
Ressa vs Duterte: publisher vs political power cbabe Jan 2023 #4
I believe that's a direct product of the Philippines' Uncle Joe Jan 2023 #6

harumph

(1,910 posts)
1. Assange is not a good guy. Never was.
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 12:59 PM
Jan 2023
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/julian-assange-got-what-he-deserved/587008/

...

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 12 cyberoperatives for Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate for the General Staff (GRU) suggests that Assange was, at best, an unwitting accomplice to the GRU’s campaign to sway the U.S. presidential election in 2016, and allegedly even solicited the stolen Democratic correspondence from Russia’s military intelligence agency, which was masquerading as Guccifer 2.0. Assange repeatedly and viciously trafficked, on Twitter and on Fox News, in the thoroughly debunked claim that the correspondence might have been passed to him by the DNC staffer Seth Rich, who, Assange darkly suggested, was subsequently murdered by the Clintonistas as revenge for the presumed betrayal."

Corbyn is a Russian stooge.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/02/jeremy-corbyn-urges-west-to-stop-arming-ukraine

"Jeremy Corbyn has urged western countries to stop arming Ukraine, and claimed he was criticised over antisemitism because of his stance on Palestine, in a TV interview likely to underscore Keir Starmer’s determination not to readmit him to the Labour party.

“Pouring arms in isn’t going to bring about a solution, it’s only going to prolong and exaggerate this war,” Corbyn said. “We might be in for years and years of a war in Ukraine.”

So let's stop with this tripe.

Uncle Joe

(58,389 posts)
2. Whether you like his/their politics or not, publishing is not a crime,
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 02:34 PM
Jan 2023

nor is there a law requiring a publisher to disclose their source (s).



(snip)

President Nixon at first planned to do nothing about publication of the study, since it embarrassed the Johnson and Kennedy administrations rather than his; however, Henry Kissinger convinced the president that not opposing the publication set a negative precedent for future secrets.[11] The administration argued Ellsberg and Russo were guilty of a felony under the Espionage Act of 1917, because they had no authority to publish classified documents.[29] After failing to persuade The New York Times to voluntarily cease publication on June 14,[11] Attorney General John N. Mitchell and Nixon obtained a federal court injunction forcing The New York Times to cease publication after three articles.[11] The New York Times publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger said:

These papers, as our editorial said this morning, were really a part of history that should have been made available considerably longer ago. I just didn't feel there was any breach of national security, in the sense that we were giving secrets to the enemy.[30]

The newspaper appealed the injunction, and the case New York Times Co. v. United States (403 U.S. 713) quickly rose through the U.S. legal system to the Supreme Court.[31]

On June 18, 1971, The Washington Post began publishing its own series of articles based upon the Pentagon Papers;[11] Ellsberg had given portions to The Washington Post reporter Ben Bagdikian. Bagdikian brought the information to editor Ben Bradlee. That day, Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Rehnquist asked The Washington Post to cease publication. After the paper refused, Rehnquist sought an injunction in U.S. district court. Judge Murray Gurfein declined to issue such an injunction, writing that "[t]he security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know."[32] The government appealed that decision, and on June 26 the Supreme Court agreed to hear it jointly with The New York Times case.[31] Fifteen other newspapers received copies of the study and began publishing it.[11]

(snip)

"Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell."

—?Justice Black[33]

(snip)

As the press rooms of the Times and the Post began to hum to the lifting of the censorship order, the journalists of America pondered with grave concern the fact that for fifteen days the 'free press' of the nation had been prevented from publishing an important document and for their troubles had been given an inconclusive and uninspiring 'burden-of-proof' decision by a sharply divided Supreme Court. There was relief, but no great rejoicing, in the editorial offices of America's publishers and broadcasters.

—?Tedford and Herbeck, pp. 225–226.[34]

(snip)

Les Gelb reflected in 2018 that many people have misunderstood the most important lessons of the Pentagon Papers:

... my first instinct was that if they just hit the papers, people would think this was the definitive history of the war, which they were not, and that people would, would think it was all about lying, rather than beliefs. And look, because we'd never learned that darn lesson about believing our way into these wars, we went into Afghanistan and we went into Iraq... You know, we get involved in these wars and we don't know a damn thing about those countries, the culture, the history, the politics, people on top and even down below. And, my heavens, these are not wars like World War II and World War I, where you have battalions fighting battalions. These are wars that depend on knowledge of who the people are, with the culture is like. And we jumped into them without knowing. That's the damned essential message of the Pentagon Papers.[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers#



Gaugamela

(2,496 posts)
5. Corbin in the interview:
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 03:06 PM
Jan 2023
I absolutely and totally condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the brutality that goes with it. And the destruction of life in Ukraine, the loss of lives of conscripted Russian soldiers is awful and appalling. This war could drag on and on and on. More and more arms could be thrown into the conflict. More and more people would die, and you would end up with destruction all around.

Surely to goodness, here we are in the 21st century watching in real time a conflict going on. Can we not do better than that, call a halt to the conflict, have negotiations and agree on a viable future? If Russia and the Ukraine can negotiate, albeit under the auspices in that occasion of Turkey, to ensure that grain supplies flowed out of Russia and the Ukraine through the Black Sea, which are very important to feed people in the Middle East and North Africa, then they can come together on lots of other issues itself. And so, can we stop having armchair generals in all of our studios discussing how this could happen, that could happen, this could go on and that could go on, and this could be destroyed? Instead, raise the voice for peace, and raise the voice for hopes and justice.

I support the Russian peace campaigners. I support the religious leaders that are calling for a more rational process. And I call upon the leaders of the countries that are closely involved in this to heed those calls and find a way out of it. All wars end with some kind of peace conference. Let’s jump to that stage.


Many people around the world agree with this, as do many with expertise in foreign relations. I know it’s hard to believe, but there are actually legitimate opinions that fall outside the DU echo chamber. Negotiation is not necessarily capitulation.

cbabe

(3,549 posts)
4. Ressa vs Duterte: publisher vs political power
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 03:04 PM
Jan 2023
https://www.voanews.com › a › press-freedom_journalist-maria-ressa-were-losing-battle-our-rights-philippines › 6208492.html

Journalist Maria Ressa: 'We're Losing the Battle for Our Rights' in ...

Jul 20, 2021And Ressa — with her lawsuits and spats with Duterte — is not spared. Threatening and demeaning posts scrutinize her professional credibility and attack her personally. Ressa describes the...

Uncle Joe

(58,389 posts)
6. I believe that's a direct product of the Philippines'
Fri Jan 20, 2023, 03:18 PM
Jan 2023

massive wealth inequality.



In case you were wondering just how massive economic inequality in the Philippines is, here’s a stat: the nine richest billionaires in the Philippines have more wealth than half of the entire country’s population, or 55 million Filipinos, Oxfam International said in its latest Survival of the Richest report.

The report said that in the Philippines, the poor are unable to recover from the lingering impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the high prices of goods such as red onions.

(snip)

“It is quite disheartening to see many are dying due to lack of health care or are experiencing hunger amid high cost of food while the rich increased their wealth during the pandemic,” she said.

Geronimo argued that this disparity should serve as proof that the rich should be taxed more. The country could raise about US$3.8 billion annually if a wealth tax is imposed on millionaires — a figure that could be enough to increase the country’s health budget by two-fifths, she said.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/9-richest-billionaires-philippines-more-050325128.html



I believe when a very few people have that kind of concentrated wealth and power, dictatorship is inevitable as the oligarchs fight to increase or maintain their status as shoes become more important people.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Jeremy Corbyn on Freeing ...