Dec 022010

Julian Assange is now Interpol’s most wanted man. Not most wanted ‘criminal’, just ‘man’.
Clearly, he’s not a criminal because he’s not been charged with any offence, merely had allegations made against him. Those allegations – “probable cause of suspected rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion” – he has apparently offered twice to discuss with Swedish police and twice been rebuffed, so the question begs, why issue a red notice now?
Assange’s legal representatives in the UK and Sweden have dismissed the charges, claiming the allegations are “false and without basis”… even the substance of the allegations, as revealed to the press through unauthorized disclosures do not constitute what any advanced legal system considers to be rape” and “very meager. It’s not enough to get him convicted for crime.” It should also be noted that Interpol’s red notice notice is not an international arrest warrant, but requests that the public contact local police with any information about Assange’s whereabouts.
Now, I’m not one for conspiracy theories in the main, but I feel I need to ask this question. Had the latest activities of Wikileaks in releasing United States diplomatic cables not embarrassed the government of that nation, would Assange be subject to Interpol’s red notice today?
As an aside, reader, were you aware that Wikileaks was listed on the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s blacklist until 30 November 2010? Supposedly on the basis that Wikileaks contains internet addresses of sites connected with sex crimes against minors and terrorism activists. Wikileaks has since revealed that the list of sites planned to be banned by ACMA are unrelated to crimes against minors, and does itself not list websites or addresses of those responsible for sex crimes against minors. The planned ban has now been lifted by Senator Conroy’s department. How refreshing. Equally fascinating are the two Wikipedia references noted above. The link to the Wikileaks article is highly contested as not being entirely factual or neutral. The link to Assange himself, is not.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.