¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡Êº£Æü¤Î¿´¤Ï»ç¡Ë

¡¡¡Ê¥µ¥¤¥É¥ß¥é¡¼¤«¤é¸«¤¨¤ë¸½¼Â¡Ë
¥Ä¥¤¥¿¡¼¤ò¸«¤ë¤È¸¶È¯´Ø·¸¤ÎUP¤¬Â¿¤¤¡£¤·¤«¤·¡¢¤Ä¤Ê¤ß¤Ë¤·¤Æ¤âÃϿ̤ˤ·¤Æ¤âÊ¡Åç¤Ë¤·¤Æ¤â¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¥Æ¥í¹Ô°Ù¤À¤È¤¹¤ë¥Ä¥¤¡¼¥È¤â¤¢¤ë¤¬¡¢ÆüËܿͤϿ¿¼Â¤òÃΤäƤ¤¤Æ¤â¸«¤Ê¤¤¤Õ¤ê¤ò¤·¤Æ»ö¤òºÑ¤Þ¤¹·¹¸þ¤Ë¤¢¤ë¤Î¤«¤È»×¤¨¤ë¡£»þ´Ö¤¬¤¹¤®¤ì¤ÐÄˤߤâϤ餰¤µ¡¼¤Ç¤Ï¤¹¤Þ¤Ê¤¤¸½¾õ¤¬¿ë¹ÔÃæ¤Ç¡¢4¹æµ¡¤â¤«¤Ê¤ê´í¤Ê¤¤¤è¤¦¤Ç¡¢¤½¤³¤Çºî¶È¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ë¿Í¤Î¥Ê¥Þ¤ÎÀ¼¤â¥Í¥Ã¥È¤Çɽ¼¨¤µ¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£¿ÍºàÇɸ¯²ñ¼Ò¤ÎÇÆ¸¢¤Î¿Í´Ö¤Ï»ñºà²Ý´É³í¤Ë¤¢¤ê¡¢¿Í´Ö¤Ç¤Ï¤Ê¤¯Êª¡¢»ñºà¤È¤·¤Æ¿Í´Ö¤¬°·¤ï¤ì¤ë¸½¼Â¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£»ý¤Æ¤ë¼Ô¤¿¤Á¤È»ý¤Æ¤Ê¤¤Êª¡¢¼ýÃ¥¤µ¤ì¤ë¼Ô¤¿¤Á¡¢¾Ã¤µ¤ì¤ë¿¤¯¤Î¼Ô㤬¤¤¤ë¡£¼åÆù¶¯¿©¤ÏÂçîí¤ò¹ß¤Ã¤Æ¿¶¤ê²¼¤í¤µ¤ì¤ë»þÂå¡¢¥°¥í¡¼¥Ð¥ë¤È¤¤¤¦Ì¾¤ÎÍŲø¤¬ÁíÞ´¤¤¤·¤Æ¤¤¤¯¤è¤¦¤À¡£
¤½¤ÎÃæ¤Ç²øÊª¤ÎÆâ¢¤ËÆ®¤¤¤òÄ©¤ó¤À¥¦¥£¥¯¥ê¡¼¥¯¥¹¤ÎÂåɽ¤¬À¯¼£Åª¤Ê櫤ˤè¤Ã¤Æ¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¡¢¤½¤·¤Æ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Ø¤È°ÜÁ÷¤µ¤ì¤ë¤«¤â¤·¤ì¤Ê¤¤¤è¤¦¤Ê»þÀª¡©CIA¤Î櫤ˤè¤ëSEX TRAP¤À¤ÈÊÛ¸î»Î¤ÏƯ¤¤«¤±¤ë¤¬¡¢¸Ä¿ÍŪ¤Ê¥»¥¯¥·¥å¥¢¥ê¥Æ¥£¤ÈÀ¯¼£¤Îæ«¡¢¤½¤Î¥¹¥Ñ¥¤±Ç²è¤ò¸«¤ë¤è¤¦¤Ê¥É¥é¥Þ¤ÎÅоì¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¤É¤¦Ëë¤ò²¼¤í¤¹¤Î¤«¡¢¶½Ì£¤ò»ý¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£
¥ª¡¼¥¹¥È¥é¥ê¥¢¤Ï¤Ê¤¼¥¢¥µ¥ó¥¸¤ò³°¸òÎϤǽõ¤±¤è¤¦¤È¤·¤Ê¤¤¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¤«¡©¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Ë¼óº¬¤Ã¤³¤òµí¼ª¤é¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¤â¤Þ¤¿US¤Î¤ªÉ¨¸µ¤Ë¤¢¤ë¡£¤Ä¤Þ¤ê»Í³¤¡¢°Ç¤â¤¢¤ê¤¨¤ë¤Î¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£Â礤ʸ¢ÎϤϸ¢ÎϤËÂÐÖµ¤¹¤ëÁÈ¿¥¤ä¸Ä¿Í¤òÉõ¤¸¹þ¤á¤è¤¦¤È¤¹¤ë¡£
¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¿Íµ¤¤Î¤¢¤ë¥é¥¸¥ª¥È¡¼¥¯¥·¥ç¡¼radio host¡§ Rush Limbaugh¡¡¥é¥Ã¥·¥åŽ¥¥ê¥ó¥Ü¡¼¤¬¥ì¥¤¥×¥Á¥ã¡¼¥¸¤Ç±Â¿©¤Ë¤¹¤ë¤¿¤á¤ËÂÔ¤Á¹½¤¨¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤È¤Îʸ¾Ï¤â¸«¤é¤ì¤ë¡£¤È¤³¤í¤Ç¤³¤ÎÃøÌ¾¤Ê¥é¥¸¥ª¥È¡¼¥¯¥·¥ç¡¼¤Ï²Æì¤ÎFEN¡ÊAFN)¥é¥¸¥ª¡Ê¸½ºß¤Ï̾¾Î¤¬ÊѤï¤Ã¤¿¤è¤¦¤À¡£AFN¤ÎǤ̳¤Ï³¤³°´ðÃϺ߽»¤Î·³¿Í·³Â°¤È¤½¤Î²È²¸þ¤Ø¥Æ¥ì¥Ó¤È¥é¥¸¥ª¤ÈÄ̤¸¤Æ¾ðÊó¤ä¥¨¥ó¥¿¡¼¥Æ¥¤¥á¥ó¥È¤ÎÄ󶡤Ǥ¢¤ê¡¢¥â¥Ã¥È¡¼¤ÏWe Bring You Home¡Ë¤Ç¤âή¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎÊݼé¤ÎÂåɽ¤Ç²¿½½Ëü¿Í¡¢¤¤¤ä¤½¤ì°Ê¾å¤¬Ê¹¤¤¤Æ¤¤¤ëÈÖÁȤǤ¢¤ë¡£¤¿¤Þ¤Ë±¿Å¾Ãæ¤Ëʹ¤¯¤¬¥ª¥Ð¥Þ¤ÎÈãȽ¤Ð¤«¤ê¤ä¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë´¶¤¸¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¥ª¥Ð¥Þ¤â´Þ¤á¤Æ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤¬¤ä¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤³¤È¤Ï¡¢¤â¤¦Ì¤Íè»Ö¸þ¤Ç¤Ê¤¤¤È»×¤¨¤ë¤æ¤¨¤Ë¡¢¤É¤¦¤Ç¤â¤¤¤¤¤È¤â»×¤¨¤ë¤¬¡¢¸½ºß²¿¤¬µ¯¤³¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤«¡¢¤òÃΤ뤳¤È¤¬¤Ç¤¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦¤«¡¢¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎÊݼéÇɤΰոþ¤¬¤ï¤«¤ëÈÖÁȤÀ¤È¤¤¤¨¤è¤¦¤«¡©¥Ö¥Ã¥·¥å¤Î¶¦ÏÂÅÞ¤òÂ硹Ū¤Ë»Ù»ý¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ëÃˤǤ⤢¤Ã¤¿¡£º£¤Ç¤â¤½¤¦¤Ê¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¡£½¡¶µÂç¹ñ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¡Ê±¦ÇÉ¡¢Êݼé¡Ë¤òÂåɽ¤¹¤ë¥é¥¸¥ª¥Û¥¹¥È¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£
¤ä¤ì¤ä¤ì¡¢¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¹ñ±×¤ËÈ¿¤¹¤ë¹Ô°Ù¤ò¤¹¤ë¥¦¥£¥¥ê¡¼¥¯¥¹¤ò¤ä¤ê¶Ì¤Ë¾å¤²¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤âÁÛÁü¤Ç¤¤ë¡£
¤³¤Î½÷À¥¯¥ì¥¤¥¢¤µ¤ó¤ÎÏÀÄ´¤Ï¿¿¤Î¥Ò¡¼¥í¡¼¤Ë¤Ê¤ë¤Ë¤Ï¡¢¤Ä¤Þ¤ê±Ê±ó¤Î̾À¼¤òÆÀ¤ë¤¿¤á¤Ë¤¢¤¨¤ÆÊµ¤Ë¤Þ¤ß¤ì¤¿¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¤ä¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎË¡Äî¤Ç¼«Ê¬¤Î¼çÄ¥¤ò¤·¤Æ¤ß¤¿¤é¡©¤È¤±¤·¤«¤±¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤è¤¦¤ËÆÉ¤á¤Ê¤¯¤â¤Ê¤¤¡£²¿¤ò¶²¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¡©¤ÎÉû¥¿¥¤¥È¥ë¤Ë¤â¤½¤ì¤Ï´¶¤¸¤é¤ì¤ë¡£
¤½¤ì¤Ï¤É¤¦¤Ê¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¡©°ìö·Ù»¡¹ñ²È¸¢ÎϤμê¤ËÍî¤Á¤¿¤é»¦¤¹¤âÀ¸¤«¤¹¤âÍÆ°×¤Ç¤Ï¤Ê¤¤¤À¤í¤¦¤«¡©
Âè°ì¹ñ²ÈÇ˲õºá¤Çµ¯Áʤµ¤ì´Æ¹ö¤ËÊĤ¸¹þ¤á¤é¤ì¤ë²ÄǽÀ¤ÏÂç¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£
¡ÚJulian guilty of sexing up case for martyrdom ¡Û
Claire Harvey
The Sunday Telegraph
June 03, 201212:00AM
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Print
Email
Share
If Assange had not persuaded so many intelligent people to his cause, it would be laughable. Source: Supplied
JULIAN, what are you really afraid of?
There's a strange notion afoot that Julian Assange, the Australian founder of website Wikileaks, is an oppressed freedom fighter and Australia has failed to protect him from his persecutor, the Great Satan America.
If Assange had not persuaded so many intelligent people to his cause, it would be laughable.
Assange is a privileged and spoilt polemicist not a journalist who is ready to fling himself on the flames of sacred martyrdom, as long as it doesn't involve any actual suffering.
For two years he has fought, with all the expense and pomposity a team of English barristers can provide, extradition on Swedish sexual misconduct charges.
But he, and his supporters, don't want you to focus on those charges, which relate to two women with whom Assange had allegedly part-consensual sexual encounters while visiting Sweden in 2010. The women allege sexual encounters with Assange turned nasty when he either refused to wear - or tampered with - condoms.
Assange denies it all, with the most unsophisticated of arguments.
The girls were up for it. They were groupies. They wanted the undivided sexual attention of this pasty web god and then they cooked up their jealous lies. No, wait. They were CIA plants.
Those are the claims of Assange and his lawyers. "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan," said lawyer Mark Stephens in 2010.
Barrister Geoffrey Robertson this week called them "these unpleasant charges" before alleging -with no proof - a US grand jury had a sealed indictment to trap Assange. Robertson seems to fear they'll feed him feet-first into the flaming maw of radio host Rush Limbaugh.
That's the tactic: forget the 'rape', this is an evil global conspiracy.
Back in 2010 Swedish police initially decided no case could be made, but the women appealed to Sweden's prosecutor, which reopened the preliminary investigation.
Assange appointed lawyers and fled Sweden, and in November 2010 prosecutors got a domestic detention order in absentia from the Stockholm District Court. Assange's lawyers appealed that order but prosecutor Marianne Ny issued a European Arrest Warrant for his extradition to Sweden.
Assange's lawyers are arguing Ms Ny is not a "judicial authority" - she is just a prosecutor. But, as the UK Supreme Court president Lord Nicholas Phillips pointed out in his judgment this week, the Swedes did go through a judicial process to issue the warrant: the Stockholm District Court's original detention order, which demonstrated a judge's belief there was a case to answer.
Now, Assange's lawyers are appealing again, this time because they say they didn't get a fair chance to make submissions on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which the Supreme Court judges relied upon in their reasoning. The lawyers have 14 days to make those submissions - and if they lose, Assange and his lawyers will doubtless appeal straight to the European Court of Justice in Strasbourg.
Assange's mother Christine is now accusing the Australian government of abandoning her son. She wants our Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to demand Sweden give Assange bail if he is extradited, or guarantee him "safe passage" home to Australia if the extradition bid fails. "When the plane refuels in Singapore, can someone from the Australian government be there to prevent US marshals from pulling him off the plane and whisking him off to the US? They (DFAT) refused that," Mrs Assange said.
Of course they refused it. Why should Assange get more help than every other Australian who gets in trouble overseas? DFAT provides advice and succour, but not diplomatic pressure to bail out unwary Aussies, whether they allegedly punched a cop in Bali or stole some secret American military files.
Assange's martyr routine, complete with posing and fist-pumping, would cause real political prisoners - like Nelson Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi - to blush at his shameless carry-on.
His ego is propped by a global fan-club of gullible teenagers and leftover Trots from the Occupy 'movement'.
(It's odd, by the way, to hear the supposed 'left' - the cradle of women's rights - dismissing alleged sexual assault victims as spymasters' sluts.)
The only person so far suffering for the sake of Wikileaks' work is former United States military officer Bradley Manning, who is in prison awaiting court-martial for his part in allegedly stealing US cables for Assange. Both of them knew publishing the cables was prohibited by American law and they did it anyway.
Was Wikileaks a brave act of publishing heroism? Well, only if Assange is prepared to stand up. It's not brave to take bold action if you run away and hide behind your mum while someone else takes the rap.
If Assange really wanted to stand up for his beliefs, wouldn't he go to the United States and ask to be imprisoned in Manning's place? Wouldn't he fly to Stockholm and denounce his accusers from the dock? Wouldn't he dare this US Grand Jury to just try it?
What better triumph - what greater chance at immortality - than to truly be unjustly punished for one's cause, to be sent down by a crooked judge for daring to challenge the corrupt regime?
Assange just doesn't want to face up to what he has done. He is happy to be the avenging hero of Wikileaks, just as long as he doesn't face any actual consequences for his actions.
He wants to conflate an embarrassing sex charge with a global conspiracy.
¡¡¡ÊÈà¤Ï¥°¥í¡¼¥Ð¥ë¤Ê±¢ËŤȤФĤतSEX¤Îµ¯ÁʤòÍ»¹ç¤µ¤»¤¿¤¬¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡Ë
And he angrily denies reports that Wikileaks' publication of confidential US cables has endangered America's informants - many of whom are really oppressed - in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan. So far, Assange makes an unconvincing martyr.
¡¡¡¡¡¡ºÇ¸å¤Îʸ¡á¡Êº£¤Þ¤Ç¤Î¤È¤³¤í¡¢¥¢¥µ¡¼¥¸¤ÏǼÆÀ¤Î¤¤¤«¤Ê¤¤¥Þ¥Æ¥£¥¢¡Êµ¾À·¡Ë¤Ë¤Ê¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡Ë
¡¡¡Ê¥µ¥¤¥É¥ß¥é¡¼¤«¤é¸«¤¨¤ë¸½¼Â¡Ë
¥Ä¥¤¥¿¡¼¤ò¸«¤ë¤È¸¶È¯´Ø·¸¤ÎUP¤¬Â¿¤¤¡£¤·¤«¤·¡¢¤Ä¤Ê¤ß¤Ë¤·¤Æ¤âÃϿ̤ˤ·¤Æ¤âÊ¡Åç¤Ë¤·¤Æ¤â¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¥Æ¥í¹Ô°Ù¤À¤È¤¹¤ë¥Ä¥¤¡¼¥È¤â¤¢¤ë¤¬¡¢ÆüËܿͤϿ¿¼Â¤òÃΤäƤ¤¤Æ¤â¸«¤Ê¤¤¤Õ¤ê¤ò¤·¤Æ»ö¤òºÑ¤Þ¤¹·¹¸þ¤Ë¤¢¤ë¤Î¤«¤È»×¤¨¤ë¡£»þ´Ö¤¬¤¹¤®¤ì¤ÐÄˤߤâϤ餰¤µ¡¼¤Ç¤Ï¤¹¤Þ¤Ê¤¤¸½¾õ¤¬¿ë¹ÔÃæ¤Ç¡¢4¹æµ¡¤â¤«¤Ê¤ê´í¤Ê¤¤¤è¤¦¤Ç¡¢¤½¤³¤Çºî¶È¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ë¿Í¤Î¥Ê¥Þ¤ÎÀ¼¤â¥Í¥Ã¥È¤Çɽ¼¨¤µ¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£¿ÍºàÇɸ¯²ñ¼Ò¤ÎÇÆ¸¢¤Î¿Í´Ö¤Ï»ñºà²Ý´É³í¤Ë¤¢¤ê¡¢¿Í´Ö¤Ç¤Ï¤Ê¤¯Êª¡¢»ñºà¤È¤·¤Æ¿Í´Ö¤¬°·¤ï¤ì¤ë¸½¼Â¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£»ý¤Æ¤ë¼Ô¤¿¤Á¤È»ý¤Æ¤Ê¤¤Êª¡¢¼ýÃ¥¤µ¤ì¤ë¼Ô¤¿¤Á¡¢¾Ã¤µ¤ì¤ë¿¤¯¤Î¼Ô㤬¤¤¤ë¡£¼åÆù¶¯¿©¤ÏÂçîí¤ò¹ß¤Ã¤Æ¿¶¤ê²¼¤í¤µ¤ì¤ë»þÂå¡¢¥°¥í¡¼¥Ð¥ë¤È¤¤¤¦Ì¾¤ÎÍŲø¤¬ÁíÞ´¤¤¤·¤Æ¤¤¤¯¤è¤¦¤À¡£
¤½¤ÎÃæ¤Ç²øÊª¤ÎÆâ¢¤ËÆ®¤¤¤òÄ©¤ó¤À¥¦¥£¥¯¥ê¡¼¥¯¥¹¤ÎÂåɽ¤¬À¯¼£Åª¤Ê櫤ˤè¤Ã¤Æ¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¡¢¤½¤·¤Æ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Ø¤È°ÜÁ÷¤µ¤ì¤ë¤«¤â¤·¤ì¤Ê¤¤¤è¤¦¤Ê»þÀª¡©CIA¤Î櫤ˤè¤ëSEX TRAP¤À¤ÈÊÛ¸î»Î¤ÏƯ¤¤«¤±¤ë¤¬¡¢¸Ä¿ÍŪ¤Ê¥»¥¯¥·¥å¥¢¥ê¥Æ¥£¤ÈÀ¯¼£¤Îæ«¡¢¤½¤Î¥¹¥Ñ¥¤±Ç²è¤ò¸«¤ë¤è¤¦¤Ê¥É¥é¥Þ¤ÎÅоì¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¤É¤¦Ëë¤ò²¼¤í¤¹¤Î¤«¡¢¶½Ì£¤ò»ý¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£
¥ª¡¼¥¹¥È¥é¥ê¥¢¤Ï¤Ê¤¼¥¢¥µ¥ó¥¸¤ò³°¸òÎϤǽõ¤±¤è¤¦¤È¤·¤Ê¤¤¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¤«¡©¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Ë¼óº¬¤Ã¤³¤òµí¼ª¤é¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¤â¤Þ¤¿US¤Î¤ªÉ¨¸µ¤Ë¤¢¤ë¡£¤Ä¤Þ¤ê»Í³¤¡¢°Ç¤â¤¢¤ê¤¨¤ë¤Î¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£Â礤ʸ¢ÎϤϸ¢ÎϤËÂÐÖµ¤¹¤ëÁÈ¿¥¤ä¸Ä¿Í¤òÉõ¤¸¹þ¤á¤è¤¦¤È¤¹¤ë¡£
¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¿Íµ¤¤Î¤¢¤ë¥é¥¸¥ª¥È¡¼¥¯¥·¥ç¡¼radio host¡§ Rush Limbaugh¡¡¥é¥Ã¥·¥åŽ¥¥ê¥ó¥Ü¡¼¤¬¥ì¥¤¥×¥Á¥ã¡¼¥¸¤Ç±Â¿©¤Ë¤¹¤ë¤¿¤á¤ËÂÔ¤Á¹½¤¨¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤È¤Îʸ¾Ï¤â¸«¤é¤ì¤ë¡£¤È¤³¤í¤Ç¤³¤ÎÃøÌ¾¤Ê¥é¥¸¥ª¥È¡¼¥¯¥·¥ç¡¼¤Ï²Æì¤ÎFEN¡ÊAFN)¥é¥¸¥ª¡Ê¸½ºß¤Ï̾¾Î¤¬ÊѤï¤Ã¤¿¤è¤¦¤À¡£AFN¤ÎǤ̳¤Ï³¤³°´ðÃϺ߽»¤Î·³¿Í·³Â°¤È¤½¤Î²È²¸þ¤Ø¥Æ¥ì¥Ó¤È¥é¥¸¥ª¤ÈÄ̤¸¤Æ¾ðÊó¤ä¥¨¥ó¥¿¡¼¥Æ¥¤¥á¥ó¥È¤ÎÄ󶡤Ǥ¢¤ê¡¢¥â¥Ã¥È¡¼¤ÏWe Bring You Home¡Ë¤Ç¤âή¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎÊݼé¤ÎÂåɽ¤Ç²¿½½Ëü¿Í¡¢¤¤¤ä¤½¤ì°Ê¾å¤¬Ê¹¤¤¤Æ¤¤¤ëÈÖÁȤǤ¢¤ë¡£¤¿¤Þ¤Ë±¿Å¾Ãæ¤Ëʹ¤¯¤¬¥ª¥Ð¥Þ¤ÎÈãȽ¤Ð¤«¤ê¤ä¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë´¶¤¸¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£¥ª¥Ð¥Þ¤â´Þ¤á¤Æ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤¬¤ä¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤³¤È¤Ï¡¢¤â¤¦Ì¤Íè»Ö¸þ¤Ç¤Ê¤¤¤È»×¤¨¤ë¤æ¤¨¤Ë¡¢¤É¤¦¤Ç¤â¤¤¤¤¤È¤â»×¤¨¤ë¤¬¡¢¸½ºß²¿¤¬µ¯¤³¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤«¡¢¤òÃΤ뤳¤È¤¬¤Ç¤¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦¤«¡¢¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎÊݼéÇɤΰոþ¤¬¤ï¤«¤ëÈÖÁȤÀ¤È¤¤¤¨¤è¤¦¤«¡©¥Ö¥Ã¥·¥å¤Î¶¦ÏÂÅÞ¤òÂ硹Ū¤Ë»Ù»ý¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ëÃˤǤ⤢¤Ã¤¿¡£º£¤Ç¤â¤½¤¦¤Ê¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¡£½¡¶µÂç¹ñ¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¡Ê±¦ÇÉ¡¢Êݼé¡Ë¤òÂåɽ¤¹¤ë¥é¥¸¥ª¥Û¥¹¥È¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£
¤ä¤ì¤ä¤ì¡¢¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤Î¹ñ±×¤ËÈ¿¤¹¤ë¹Ô°Ù¤ò¤¹¤ë¥¦¥£¥¥ê¡¼¥¯¥¹¤ò¤ä¤ê¶Ì¤Ë¾å¤²¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤âÁÛÁü¤Ç¤¤ë¡£
¤³¤Î½÷À¥¯¥ì¥¤¥¢¤µ¤ó¤ÎÏÀÄ´¤Ï¿¿¤Î¥Ò¡¼¥í¡¼¤Ë¤Ê¤ë¤Ë¤Ï¡¢¤Ä¤Þ¤ê±Ê±ó¤Î̾À¼¤òÆÀ¤ë¤¿¤á¤Ë¤¢¤¨¤ÆÊµ¤Ë¤Þ¤ß¤ì¤¿¥¹¥¦¥§¡¼¥Ç¥ó¤ä¥¢¥á¥ê¥«¤ÎË¡Äî¤Ç¼«Ê¬¤Î¼çÄ¥¤ò¤·¤Æ¤ß¤¿¤é¡©¤È¤±¤·¤«¤±¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤è¤¦¤ËÆÉ¤á¤Ê¤¯¤â¤Ê¤¤¡£²¿¤ò¶²¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¡©¤ÎÉû¥¿¥¤¥È¥ë¤Ë¤â¤½¤ì¤Ï´¶¤¸¤é¤ì¤ë¡£
¤½¤ì¤Ï¤É¤¦¤Ê¤Î¤À¤í¤¦¡©°ìö·Ù»¡¹ñ²È¸¢ÎϤμê¤ËÍî¤Á¤¿¤é»¦¤¹¤âÀ¸¤«¤¹¤âÍÆ°×¤Ç¤Ï¤Ê¤¤¤À¤í¤¦¤«¡©
Âè°ì¹ñ²ÈÇ˲õºá¤Çµ¯Áʤµ¤ì´Æ¹ö¤ËÊĤ¸¹þ¤á¤é¤ì¤ë²ÄǽÀ¤ÏÂç¤Ç¤¢¤ë¡£
¡ÚJulian guilty of sexing up case for martyrdom ¡Û
Claire Harvey
The Sunday Telegraph
June 03, 201212:00AM
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Share
If Assange had not persuaded so many intelligent people to his cause, it would be laughable. Source: Supplied
JULIAN, what are you really afraid of?
There's a strange notion afoot that Julian Assange, the Australian founder of website Wikileaks, is an oppressed freedom fighter and Australia has failed to protect him from his persecutor, the Great Satan America.
If Assange had not persuaded so many intelligent people to his cause, it would be laughable.
Assange is a privileged and spoilt polemicist not a journalist who is ready to fling himself on the flames of sacred martyrdom, as long as it doesn't involve any actual suffering.
For two years he has fought, with all the expense and pomposity a team of English barristers can provide, extradition on Swedish sexual misconduct charges.
But he, and his supporters, don't want you to focus on those charges, which relate to two women with whom Assange had allegedly part-consensual sexual encounters while visiting Sweden in 2010. The women allege sexual encounters with Assange turned nasty when he either refused to wear - or tampered with - condoms.
Assange denies it all, with the most unsophisticated of arguments.
The girls were up for it. They were groupies. They wanted the undivided sexual attention of this pasty web god and then they cooked up their jealous lies. No, wait. They were CIA plants.
Those are the claims of Assange and his lawyers. "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan," said lawyer Mark Stephens in 2010.
Barrister Geoffrey Robertson this week called them "these unpleasant charges" before alleging -with no proof - a US grand jury had a sealed indictment to trap Assange. Robertson seems to fear they'll feed him feet-first into the flaming maw of radio host Rush Limbaugh.
That's the tactic: forget the 'rape', this is an evil global conspiracy.
Back in 2010 Swedish police initially decided no case could be made, but the women appealed to Sweden's prosecutor, which reopened the preliminary investigation.
Assange appointed lawyers and fled Sweden, and in November 2010 prosecutors got a domestic detention order in absentia from the Stockholm District Court. Assange's lawyers appealed that order but prosecutor Marianne Ny issued a European Arrest Warrant for his extradition to Sweden.
Assange's lawyers are arguing Ms Ny is not a "judicial authority" - she is just a prosecutor. But, as the UK Supreme Court president Lord Nicholas Phillips pointed out in his judgment this week, the Swedes did go through a judicial process to issue the warrant: the Stockholm District Court's original detention order, which demonstrated a judge's belief there was a case to answer.
Now, Assange's lawyers are appealing again, this time because they say they didn't get a fair chance to make submissions on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which the Supreme Court judges relied upon in their reasoning. The lawyers have 14 days to make those submissions - and if they lose, Assange and his lawyers will doubtless appeal straight to the European Court of Justice in Strasbourg.
Assange's mother Christine is now accusing the Australian government of abandoning her son. She wants our Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to demand Sweden give Assange bail if he is extradited, or guarantee him "safe passage" home to Australia if the extradition bid fails. "When the plane refuels in Singapore, can someone from the Australian government be there to prevent US marshals from pulling him off the plane and whisking him off to the US? They (DFAT) refused that," Mrs Assange said.
Of course they refused it. Why should Assange get more help than every other Australian who gets in trouble overseas? DFAT provides advice and succour, but not diplomatic pressure to bail out unwary Aussies, whether they allegedly punched a cop in Bali or stole some secret American military files.
Assange's martyr routine, complete with posing and fist-pumping, would cause real political prisoners - like Nelson Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi - to blush at his shameless carry-on.
His ego is propped by a global fan-club of gullible teenagers and leftover Trots from the Occupy 'movement'.
(It's odd, by the way, to hear the supposed 'left' - the cradle of women's rights - dismissing alleged sexual assault victims as spymasters' sluts.)
The only person so far suffering for the sake of Wikileaks' work is former United States military officer Bradley Manning, who is in prison awaiting court-martial for his part in allegedly stealing US cables for Assange. Both of them knew publishing the cables was prohibited by American law and they did it anyway.
Was Wikileaks a brave act of publishing heroism? Well, only if Assange is prepared to stand up. It's not brave to take bold action if you run away and hide behind your mum while someone else takes the rap.
If Assange really wanted to stand up for his beliefs, wouldn't he go to the United States and ask to be imprisoned in Manning's place? Wouldn't he fly to Stockholm and denounce his accusers from the dock? Wouldn't he dare this US Grand Jury to just try it?
What better triumph - what greater chance at immortality - than to truly be unjustly punished for one's cause, to be sent down by a crooked judge for daring to challenge the corrupt regime?
Assange just doesn't want to face up to what he has done. He is happy to be the avenging hero of Wikileaks, just as long as he doesn't face any actual consequences for his actions.
He wants to conflate an embarrassing sex charge with a global conspiracy.
¡¡¡ÊÈà¤Ï¥°¥í¡¼¥Ð¥ë¤Ê±¢ËŤȤФĤतSEX¤Îµ¯ÁʤòÍ»¹ç¤µ¤»¤¿¤¬¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡Ë
And he angrily denies reports that Wikileaks' publication of confidential US cables has endangered America's informants - many of whom are really oppressed - in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan. So far, Assange makes an unconvincing martyr.
¡¡¡¡¡¡ºÇ¸å¤Îʸ¡á¡Êº£¤Þ¤Ç¤Î¤È¤³¤í¡¢¥¢¥µ¡¼¥¸¤ÏǼÆÀ¤Î¤¤¤«¤Ê¤¤¥Þ¥Æ¥£¥¢¡Êµ¾À·¡Ë¤Ë¤Ê¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡Ë





















