The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, has warned that Julian Assange could end up being charged for “acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries.”
On Sunday, Melzer tweeted a blog post from a WikiLeaks supporter who was expressing her concerns about the issue.
Will US try #Assange for #terrorism? How can he be charged in 2018 for conduct in 2010, subject to 5yrs statute of limitation? @AngelFox71 may be right: Penal Code Sct 2332b extends limitation to 8yrs for “acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries”https://t.co/COOKlJL6cJ
— Nils Melzer (@NilsMelzer) June 24, 2019
Melzer noted that Assange was charged in 2018 for conduct that allegedly occurred in 2010, which would normally be subject to a five year statute of limitations. The exception for this would be if the US government was using Penal Code Section 2332b which extends the statute of limitations to eight years for international terrorism cases.
The post that Melzer linked to was written by an ardent Assange supporter who writes under the nom de plume “Angel Fox.” She wrote that “the only way legally to charge Assange is by calling the documents Wikileaks released an act of terrorism. This will set a precedent for any publisher to be indicted for terrorism if they publish classified documents that are of public interest.”
Her concern was based on an article from National Review in which Andrew McCarthy noted that the Justice Department is prosecuting Assange on an indictment filed three years after the prescribed limitations period. He wrote that “it appears that the Justice Department is relying on an exception, in Section 2332b of the penal code, that extends the statute of limitations to eight years for ‘acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries.'”
If this is true, it will open a can of worms that we may not be able to close.
The charges against Assange currently all stem from the war logs leaked by Chelsea Manning under the Bush administration. Newspapers and media companies from around the world assisted WikiLeaks in reading through the documents, confirming them, working to redact them and reporting the stories out. If Assange’s actions are branded as terrorism, will the editors of the New York Times and the Guardian be charged with providing support for terrorism?
Under the Patriot Act the four types of support are described as “training,” “expert advice or assistance,” “service,” and “personnel.” There is no question that dozens of reporters worked with WikiLeaks directly assisting them with the leak.
This was the basis for the Obama administration’s decision not to pursue charges against the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize nominee. They referred to it as the “New York Times Problem,” acknowledging that going after Assange and his associates would open up major mainstream outlets to similar legal troubles.
While the mainstream and establishment media bicker and cry about the Trump administration waging war on the press by mocking CNN on Twitter or calling Jim Acosta names, they appear to be ignoring the clear and present danger right in front of them.
Assange is currently imprisoned in HMP Belmarsh in London awaiting a five day trial set to begin on February 25 to determine if he will be extradited to the United States — where he faces severe charges under the controversial Espionage Act. If he is convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 175 years in prison for the award-winning publications.
Last month the UN issued a scathing report in which Melzer warned that Assange could face the death penalty if he is extradited.
“I am particularly alarmed at the recent announcement by the US Department of Justice of 17 new charges against Mr. Assange under the Espionage Act, which currently carry up to 175 years in prison. This may well result in a life sentence without parole, or possibly even the death penalty, if further charges were to be added in the future,” Melzer wrote.
Melzer and two medical experts on torture who visited Assange in prison on May 9 concluded that Assange has been subjected to years of psychological torture.
“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” Melzer said. “The collective persecution of Julian Assange must end here and now!”
MUST WATCH: California Restaurant Owner Blocks Health Inspector’s Car, ‘If We Can’t Work, You Can’t Work’
A GoFundMe campaign to support the restaurant has raised over $20,000.
A heroic California restaurant owner blocked in a Los Angeles County health inspector’s car after he attempted to shut his business down for allowing outdoor dining, asserting that “if we can’t work, you can’t work.”
Carlos Roman, the owner of Bread & Barley in Covina, did not back down even after police arrived.
“He wants to come in here and say that no one can work, so he can’t work either,” Roman told the officer. “He decided to come today and take photos of the people outside and say that he was going to fine us,” he explained.
Roman refused to move his truck, telling the officer to go ahead and get her supervisor.
“This is what happens when people get desperate. I’m desperate. Who is going to pay her car payment? Who is going to pay my cook’s rent?” Roman asked the officer. “I want it to be hard on everyone. I want everyone to see how hard this sh-t is.”
The outraged owner demanded to know if the inspector and the officer got paychecks last week, asserting that his employees haven’t.
“You’re just doing your job right, we’re all in this together?” Roman asked the inspector. “When I go to the bank, can I tell the bank the health department said it’s ok and that I don’t have to pay you?”
“What do I tell my employees?” Roman shouted.
Roman is now facing two $500 fines for failure to comply and interfering with the health officer.
A GoFundMe campaign to support the restaurant has raised over $20,000.
Hunter Biden’s Ex-Wife, Kathleen, Tells Him He is a Better Father Than Joe Biden Was
In an email to her ex-husband Hunter Biden, Kathleen Biden told her troubled former spouse that he is a better father than Joe Biden was.
The cryptic email was found in a trove of documents currently being reviewed in a joint effort by District Herald and the Nationalist Review, provided to us on Friday by a source who obtained them from former Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
“I want you to know that you are a great father – a better father than your dad. Your girls love you because you love them for who they are. You haven’t judged them, you have loved them for who they are. You listen and you make them and their problems important to you. You make them great because you allow them to be who they are without unfair expectations. You are patient, caring, and loving,” Kathleen Biden wrote. “I know you and I have struggled but your love for the girls hasn’t waivered. Remember how we use to joke that the girls didn’t have anything to survive to make them strong and interesting? Well, we gave it to them! They did survive it and they are stronger. Through it all they never questioned your love or commitment.”
Kathleen Biden asserted that the former Vice President “wasn’t perfect” as a father.
“I know you love your dad and I do too but he wasn’t perfect,” the mother of Hunter’s children continued. “No one is perfect. At your core, you taught our girls what was important. They are kind, thoughtful, open, curious, funny, compassionate and hard working. You were as much a part of that as I was in helping them grow. Don’t ever question whether you were as good a father as your dad. You were better, in every way.”
In response, Hunter wrote that he worries he has failed them. “Thank you for this it means everything to me. I worry so much that I have failed you all in so many ways,” he said.
Hunter also acknowledged that he will need to earn his children’s trust and respect back, though the reason is unclear.
“I know the girls love me- but I often wonder if they trust and respect me. I know it’s something I have to earn back. And I know that you are the best mother I have ever known. You have raised three incredible young women. We are so lucky to have them, and I am so lucky to have met you 23 years ago. Thank you,” he wrote.
High School Football Players Suspended for Carrying Thin Blue, Thin Red Line Flags Before 9/11 Game
High School football players in Florida have been suspended from their team for carrying Thin Blue Line and Thin Red Line flags during their football game on 9/11 to honor the first responders who died during the attack on the World Trade Center.
One of the young men on the Little Miami High School football team is the son of a police officer, another, the son of a firefighter.
“Were you trying to make some kind of a political statement here?” a Local 12 reporter asked Brady Williams, a senior cornerback, who carried the Thin Blue Line flag.
Two Little Miami football players pay the price for civil disobedience. They were told not to carry onto the field thin blue line and thin red line flags at their 9/11 game. They did anyway. The school has now suspended them from the team indefinitely. #ThinBlueLine #ThinRedLine pic.twitter.com/19y9GAvaxr
— David Winter (@DavidWinterTV) September 14, 2020
“No,” he answered quickly. “Not at all. I was just doing it to honor the people that lost their lives 19 years ago.”
Jarad Bentley, whose father is a firefighter, carried the Thin Red Line flag.
“I was all for it,” he said. “Because my dad is a firefighter, and if it had been him killed on 9/11, I would have wanted someone to do it for him.”
The young men had asked the school for permission to carry the flags on to the field before the game, and the school refused. They were told that if they did, there would be consequences.
Still, the boys did it anyways.
“Listen,” Williams said. “I don’t care what my consequences are. So long as my message gets across, I’ll be happy.”
Local 12 reports that “Williams and Bentley heard from the athletic director Monday afternoon and received an indefinite suspension.” The station said that they had called the superintendent about the boys a few hours prior.
Superintendent Gregory Power claimed that they denied the boys’ request because they don’t want to “set a precedent” for “political” flags being carried out on the field.
“We did not want to place ourselves in a circumstance where another family might want a different flag to come out of the tunnel, one that may be [one that] many other families may not agree with from a political perspective,” Power claimed.