>
What Happens If We Don't Change Course: Earth Day 2050?
Port Of Baltimore Partially Reopens, Allowing Trapped Cargo Ships To Exit
"Stand Back and Let It Fall": Jonathan Turley Says Alvin Bragg's Case Against Trump Is
Nearsightedness is at epidemic levels
Blazing bits transmitted 4.5 million times faster than broadband
Scientists Close To Controlling All Genetic Material On Earth
Doodle to reality: World's 1st nuclear fusion-powered electric propulsion drive
Phase-change concrete melts snow and ice without salt or shovels
You Won't Want To Miss THIS During The Total Solar Eclipse (3D Eclipse Timeline And Viewing Tips
China Room Temperature Superconductor Researcher Had Experiments to Refute Critics
5 video games we wanna smell, now that it's kinda possible with GameScent
Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight
Wyoming A Finalist For Factory To Build Portable Micro-Nuclear Plants
The court ruled that Assange may appeal only on the grounds that his freedom of speech might be restricted in the US, and that there is a possibility he could receive the death penalty. If the US provides "assurances" that neither of these things will happen, then the trial moves to another phase where Assange's legal team may debate the merits of those assurances. If the US does not provide those assurances, then the limited appeal will move forward.
Absurdly, the court determined that Assange's lawyers may not argue against extradition on matters as self-evidently critical as the fact that the CIA plotted to assassinate him, or on the basis that he is being politically persecuted for the crime of inconvenient journalism.
The mass media are calling this a "reprieve", even "wonderful news", but as Jonathan Cook explains in his latest article "Assange's 'reprieve' is another lie, hiding the real goal of keeping him endlessly locked up," that's all a bunch of crap.
"The word 'reprieve' is there?—?just as the judges' headline ruling that some of the grounds of his appeal have been 'granted'?—?to conceal the fact that he is prisoner to an endless legal charade every bit as much as he is a prisoner in a Belmarsh cell," writes Cook. "In fact, today's ruling is yet further evidence that Assange is being denied due process and his most basic legal rights?—?as he has been for a decade or more."
Cook writes the following:
"The case has always been about buying time. To disappear Assange from public view. To vilify him. To smash the revolutionary publishing platform he founded to help whistleblowers expose state crimes. To send a message to other journalists that the US can reach them wherever they live should they try to hold Washington to account for its criminality.
Assange's Fate Awaits US 'Assurances' https://t.co/tpbQZHgw1L
— Consortium News (@Consortiumnews) March 26, 2024
The High Court on Tuesday rejected five Assange grounds for a new appeal, agreeing he had only three legitimate arguments but that the U.S. could nullify them with new "assurances," reports Joe Lauria. pic.twitter.com/IHkQZWZLEL