If the High Court knew that Julian Assange suffered a stroke on Oct. 27, the first day of the U.S. appeal hearing, would it have altered the court’s decision to allow his extradition?, asks Joe Lauria.
Julian Assange’s High Court judges offered no mitigation, no suggestion that they had agonised over legalities or even basic morality, writes John Pilger.
The establishment figures on the bench took American promises as “solemn undertakings from one government to another” because Assange is too important to let go, writes Joe Lauria.
The U.S. and its allies don’t care about press freedom beyond the extent it can be used to conduct propaganda, writes Caitlin Johnstone after the High Court’s ruling against Julian Assange.
The High Court allowed the U.S. appeal to reverse an order not to extradite Julian Assange and to send the case back to magistrate’s court.
The Nobel awarders will present the peace prize on Friday with full confidence they will once again get away with the betrayal of the antimilitarist purpose at the heart of Alfred Nobel’s testament in 1895, writes Fredrik S. Heffermehl.
The ruling by the High Court in London on the U.S. appeal in the case of Julian Assange will come in court at 10:15 am London time Friday, WikiLeaks said.
Certain things set Consortium News apart from the independent media landscape that are worth noting as we launch our Winter Fund Drive.
If the U.S. wins its appeal, Julian Assange will face prosecution under a severe espionage law with roots in the British Official Secrets Act that is part of a history of repression of press freedom, reports Joe Lauria.
