Julian Assange, Asylum, And The Delusion Of Taking Sides

The recent media coverage of the row regarding asylum granted to Julian Assange by the Ecuadorian government was to be expected.  Expected though not by the general public, but by the minority of Assange supporters and those watching the case carefully.  When the media coverage begins, a very selective picture emerges, a scene of distorted viewpoints and false facts, and a few extremists on either side of the fence thrown in for good measure.  To an outsider listening in on the latest, I’m sure it’s not difficult to quickly form an opinion strongly supporting one side or the other without regard to question whether the information presented by the mainstream media has any real factual basis whatsoever.

This side taking is what has not only divided the public, politicians and the media alike (although the general press has taken the stance against Assange), it is also the very thing which has distracted attention away from what is actually going on, or at the very least, the reasons why Ecuador has granted asylum to the Wikilleaks founder.  Follow the conversation on Twitter, and you will notice a constant battle going on between those who support Julian Assange’s claims, and those who believe heart-rate-racingly strongly that the alleged victims (the women who have made the allegations against Assange) are the ones who deserve to have their case heard, now, in Sweden, despite any asylum plea which has been granted by a sovereign state.

Ignorance is a dominant thing, perhaps the thing most responsible for all the misunderstandings which result in so many of the problems we face in all aspects of society and our personal lives.  In this case, the emotional heart strings have been pulled on sharply resulting in a majority which honestly believes this is all about women’s rights to justice and Julian Assange trying to escape questioning by the Swedish prosecutors.  I’ll note for any that don’t know, that he is yet to be charged with an offense in any country in the world, and has agreed to be questioned inside the Ecuadorian embassy.  This has been done before and could be done again, if it were not for the stubborn officials who refuse to operate outside of their terms, even if it means getting exactly what they want.  And whether you agree they should question him inside the embassy or not, the fact remains he is there, he is not moving, and could be there for a very long time.

If I was a prosecutor who had the choice between breaking protocol, and losing a bit of my ego to be able to question the person I need to question inside an embassy of another country, or to wait and see if I can break international law by raiding an embassy I know which one I would choose. The fact that they flatly refuse to even consider this speaks volumes that for one, they are unrealistic about their chances of getting him to Sweden and too, there is more going on than the simple need to question him.  It doesn’t take a biased view to come to that conclusion, although many will convince you it does.

The great thing for the anti-Assange brigade is that they have successfully managed to convince so many that this is all about protecting women and that it has nothing to do with the United States of America.  How naive for anyone to really believe this, but it is understandable considering the way and selective nature of the arguments put forward.  Most interestingly though, Naomi Wolf, the prominent feminist has written an extremely detailed piece about why the allegations against Assange are very dubious to say the least.  If you haven’t read it yet, check it out here.  I’ve responded to many anti-Assange twitterers with this link, who have since thanked me for giving them the real facts, and not those presented by the mainstream media, as well as those who attempt to gain the moral high ground and publicity off the back of the subject by writing about the need to protect rape victims and so on – Louise Mensch I’m looking at you.

So where are we now?  The hoopla has died down a bit and things will likely be quieter now that those desperate to air their opinion have done so, and Assange doesn’t look set to be going anywhere anytime soon.  What will be interesting is to see how long the US can resist getting publicly involved.  There’s no doubt that behind the scenes he is causing some serious aggravation to those who do not like to have their power interfered with  Incidentally, one of my favourite counter arguments is the one of their being no evidence that the US plans to extradite Assange.  Do we need evidence to be concerned?  Is it not a good idea that despite what anyone may believe regarding the case, the easiest way to make Assange face questioning is to give him a guarantee that he will not be passed onto the US?  Is it not worth writing a new law in order to make this happen if it needs to be done?  Many will say no, and it is for that reason that we should be worried.  When a perfectly logical solution is shunned by law makers, we know for sure that either they do not want him enough, or Julian Assange’s claims are entirely true.

“Damn Right I Like The Life I Live, Coz I Went From Negative To Positive”

As I write, I’m listening to the classic, and one of the best Hip-Hop tracks ever, by the Notorious B.I.G – Juicy.  I’ve long been a true fan of Hip-Hop.  It can be powerfully motivating when you need it most, and the lyrical genius from the likes of Jay-Z, Nas, Proof, Eminem, and of course Biggy, can always provide inspiration to overcome any challenge you might face.

Image of Jay-Z performing by whittlz's on Flickr

I was going to start with something topical, something current, important and news-worthy.  But then I thought that today I am just going to write.  I don’t know what I’m going to write about, but it doesn’t matter.

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve devoted considerable attention to campaigning on Twitter regarding UK extradition law, and how it has affected Chris Tappin, Richard O’dwyer and their families.  It has been very disappointing to see the public and mainstream media devote their time, interest and attention to other, comparatively unimportant issues.  This has always been the case and probably always will be, but I feel that this time something so fundamental to British Citizens’ human rights has been completely overlooked.

When we look at the other issues that dominate mainstream media, it’s easy to see why the general public have little interest in a subject such as extradition treaties – it doesn’t effect them personally.  This is a luxury the vast majority of us share.  It may not feel like a luxury because we take freedom for granted, but we are now living in a time when you do not have to break a UK law to face a trial and lengthy prison sentence in a foreign land.  If everybody actually knew that this was true, the government would have been pressurised into changing the law as rapidly as possible.  The negative press though has not been significant enough to scare the government.

Anyway, I’ve discovered that I must devote my spare time to good causes, in a way which promotes awareness and action.  It’s easy to talk about things, feel strongly about things, but it’s another to actually take action and try and do something about them.  The challenge is in finding ways to do things that make a real difference, even if in a small way.  I often wonder and ask myself what the purpose is of writing this blog, and I usually end up with the same answer.  Even if there’s one reader who enjoys their time spent here, then it is worth it.

I’d also like to welcome any new readers and encourage anyone who wants to get involved, or has something they’d like to say to get in touch with your contribution.  I’d like to feature new content, ideas and conversation on the blog so that it can become a bit more interactive than it is currently.  Again, it seems to me that there is little purpose in writing about things unless it can actually help promote change in the are of concern.

So I’ve drifted quite far from my opening topic.  But the truth is, the title of this post: ”Damn Right I Like The Life I Live, Coz I Went From Negative To Positive” holds great significance to me.  I’ve changed a lot over the last few years, from someone who liked to blame the system, groups of people and individuals for the things that I didn’t agree with, or felt were unjust to someone who only believes in positive action as a method for instigating change.  As Ghandi said: “We must become the change we want to see”.  This is so important, and it’s something that English culture does not encourage we do.  Most people seem to think that complaining that something is unfair and backing a certain political leader is enough to get the ball rolling and solve the problem – it’s not.  Sometimes doing this can make you feel like you have taken the moral high-ground, but in reality morality depends on people like you making a stand and taking action as your reaction to the things you don’t agree with or dislike.  On that note, I hope The 1 Month Project will achieve something fruitful through following this ethos.

Email Reply From Dominic Grieve’s Office

Just thought I’d give you all an update on the response I received following my contact with the Attourney General’s office:

Dear Mr Mitchell

Thank you for your email below.

The matter of Christopher Tappin’s extradition is handled by the Home Office and your email has been transferred to that Department for a reply.

The date of transfer was 6 March and the address for any further correspondence is:

Home Office

2 Marsham Street

London SW1P 4DF 

Yours sincerely

Jeffrey Care 

Correspondence Unit
Attorney General’s Office

The delay in reply suggests that there must have been a significant amount of contact and complaint via Dominic Grieve’s office, so at least there’s been enough public concern to warrant a template response. I encourage everyone to continue making their voices heard – make it clear that the extradition situation is unacceptable and needs to be changed urgently.  Of course, despite the reply saying that “Christopher Tappin’s extradition is handled by the home office”, it was Grieve who advised the Home Secretary on what decision she can/should make.

A very lawyer/politician style collection of answers given by Dominic Grieve in Parliament can be viewed here: http://www.londontv.net/ag-commons.html

Link to Julia O’dwyer’s blog “The Fight Of Our Lives” 

If you haven’t already, please vote in our poll on how you would change UK extradition laws here

First Tappin, then Richard O’dwyer, who’s next?

The speed at which the Home Secretary is now okaying the extradition of British Nationals to the US is extremely worrying, and gives the impression that Teresa May is responding more akin to a computer than a human being – i.e she is doing tick box exercises rather than making considered judgements.  Is it right that someone in such a powerful cabinet position as Home Secretary, is seemingly so insensitive to this now major issue over which she yields so much power?

Media Coverage

Thankfully it’s an issue which is finally attracting the attention it deserves from the British media, as of yesterdays announcement to allow the extradition of Richard O’dwyer, who has not committed any criminal offense under UK law.  Despite this fact, our government is quite happy, against the wishes of the people who elected it, to subject its citizens to the laws of the “world police”, Team America.

Should Teresa May Resign?

For the first time ever, I truly believe that a resignation is due.  I tend to believe that calls for resignations are mostly over-reactions by a zealous, mis-informed public.  In the case of Teresa May though, and the extradition cases of Christopher Tappin and Richard O’dwyer, the harsh conclusions and insensitive approach she has shown in both cases do not live up to the standards that all of us expect of a Home Secretary, whose job it is to help protect the public.  There is clearly no dispute here that she has done entirely the opposite, and for that she surely cannot expect the support of the public.  I’d like to think that once the mainstream media finally sinks their teeth in, it will only be a matter of time.  I hope for this not out of malice, but so that Teresa May will realise that she has made a huge mistake – a mistake which we cannot, for the sake of all our collective freedom, forgive her for.

What Will Happen Next?

Now that Cameron has apparently, at long last raised the issue during his meetings with Obama this week, we can at the very least expect more discussion on the matter, and more comment from Downing Street.  Following this, once the extradition treaty becomes the major concern of the general public (if it hasn’t already), and once people realise that they are subject to US law for an offence they commit on UK soil, the only option will be to amend the treaty.  It is fundamental to our human rights in the British democracy, that we live under the laws of our land, and have a government that recognises this basic requirement.  In fact, it’s something that most people will have thought was already the case, yet the Blair era agreement dates all the way back to 2003, and the huge pitfalls of it have only recently been brought into the public eye.  The decision to agree to the treaty was a complete disaster.  You have to ask yourself, what was Blair thinking at the time?  Yes, it was intended for the extradition of terrorists, but there was nothing in the treaty that limited it for this exclusive purpose, leading it open to abuse by trigger happy US authorities.

We must continue the discussion, petition signing, government office emailing that the minority of us have been taking part in over the last few weeks if we are to have any hope of getting the huge public support we need to force fast, decision, balsy action by the government that must not forget: is there to do right by its people.  That is the nature of democracy.

Please show your support by commenting on this post, and answering the poll below, on how you would change UK extradition laws.

UK Extradition Law Poll

Christopher Tappin In Solitary 23/24, Lights Never Turned Off

As I write, following the devastating decision yesterday by a US judge to deny Chris Tappin bail, he remains in the remote Texan jail with no reading materials, and lights on 24/7.

The 65 year old, who was extradited from the UK without a shred of presented evidence has received no support from the British government (elected to protect the interests of its citizens).  After a quiet week on Twitter (we’ve been involved in the conversation), the case is thankfully gaining more interest from the general public, who are outraged at stance the No. 10 has taken as well as the way the US has paraded the pensioner around as a danger to US society.

I usually try and stay out of ‘politics’ as much as possible – attaching yourself to an ideology usually trips you up in the end.  In this case though, I am sickened by the behaviour of the Attourney General, and the Home Office.  In a case like Tappin’s, intervention by senior people in government (I’m looking at you Teresa May), is essential for fair treatment, and a fair trial to happen.

Why is this hitting people hard?

It’s simple.  If any of us were accused of a crime that we allegedly committed on our own soil, we expect to be tried on our own soil.  If any of us were denied bail, the least we would expect is for our lights to be turned off so that we can sleep.  If any of us were in solitary confinement 23/7, we would expect to be allowed reading materials.  If any of us were accused of a crime, we expect the basic premise of innocent until proven guilty.  America has abused all of these things, and can join China and Russia as a country with questionable human rights issues.

What can we do?

We can raise awareness about the Chris Tappin case by aiming to make #christappin a super-trend on Twitter – the last couple of weeks have been disappointing with the amount of people getting involved in the conversation very small considering the importance of the issue.  You can click on the links below to raise awareness by e-petitions and joining the Facebook group.  Social media is proving a hugely powerful way to raise public awareness of important issues, especially when traditional media has shunned the topic, interesting…

Justice back to the dark ages

Whether or not Chris Tappin is found guilty, he will have been punished severely nonetheless.  The treatment he has received so far, whilst in the eyes of the law he is still an innocent man, would never have happened in the UK, even if he was found guilty!  This highlights how crazily wrong the US-UK treaty is, and how it works in practice.  Essentially, if you are suspected of a crime that America accuses you of, you can be extradited without any evidence being presented and then subjected to inhumane treatment by the US justice system.  Strangely, this is the very justice system that American’s believe is the ‘best on earth’.  Frightening.

Join the Convo on Twitter #christappin Free Chris Tappin Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Free-Chris-Tappin/356963087669471 You can sign the e-petition for David Cameron to debate the extradition treaty with Obama here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/30569

Please post any comments below.

Written by Henry Mitchell

Founder of The 1 Month Project

Kickstarting Crowdsourced Funding

It’s clear that projects of any type need to be funded. The best ideas can remain unrealised due to lack of available funds, and this is what inspired a group of entrepreneurs in the US to form the Kickstarter project. It’s an inspired idea, and one you may consider, particularly for creative projects you have in mind. Set up as a funding platform for creative entrepreneurs, it is not unlike the age-old system of ‘subscriptions’ which used to drive publications by everyone from James Joyce, Charles Dickens and William Blake. It has provided a new form of commerce, not based on lending per se, or even investment, since each project creator retains control of their own work and the ability to take it forward from its Kickstart. Other people pledge money to help them realise the product or project, with some sort of pay off, usually in the form of a product, such as a signed book or print. In effect they are ‘paying up front’ for a product, which is delivered after their collected monies have seen it realised. Typical projects are from the world of film, art, music, technology, design, food and publishing. But the sky is the limit, in effect. If you can sell your idea to others and set a realistic goal, who knows what you can achieve.

Now or Never

One aspect of the contract with funders is that the goal you set must be reached before time runs out on the clock. You decide how much you want to raise, how much time it will take you, and the cost of each subscription. If you don’t reach your target then no money is exchanged, which means you are never expected to develop something without adequate funding. It’s also a great way to test concepts before you launch them. Can you sell your idea to others? Are you onto something, or does it need a bit more thought?

Rabbit Island

Just to prove you can think out of the box, here’s an example of a successful Kickstarter project, which has gone from strength to strength since it’s Kickstart. Outlined on the Kickstarter blog is the origin of the project:

“While on jury duty last year, Rob Gorski bought an island off of Craigslist, a pristine 91-acre stretch of untouched land in Lake Superior called Rabbit Island. It was a simple decision, made with a very simple plan in mind: to protect the land’s unblemished qualities while creating an artist’s residency program there, a place where creative types could explore concepts of development and civilization through their absence.”

In order to fund the island’s development into a sustainable, ecologically-conscious place for artists and others, funds were clearly needed. The island was totally untouched and needed some basic necessities to get up and running. Soon enthusiasm for the project began to cause a buzz, generated by word of mouth and social media promotion. Rob reached his target. Rabbit island is now up and running, with basic shelter, solar energy and a vibrant community of backers who have actually gone beyond their initial investment through Kickstarter and continue to support the project in both financial and practical ways – donating camping equipment and books for the library for example. It’s a great example of how one person’s vision has been realised by the collective contribution of others.

The Sky’s The Limit

Kickstarter was founded in 2008 by Perry Chen, Yancey Strickler, and Charles Adle and has been incredibly successful, helping set up a wide range of civil projects as well as creative ones. They have raised over $125 million pledged for projects in just three years. Derelict sites have been turned into city farms, a ‘hackerspace’ has been created for citizen scientists, and open air reading rooms appeared in New York. Any ideas you can create excitement about has the potential to be funded. The only limit is your imagination. The only requirement is planning and enthusiasm. Any sort of project, such as the ones outlined above, needs a great deal of thought, and forming working groups to discuss all the possible pitfalls and problems is essential. The 1MonthProject is the perfect forum to find other like-minded individuals to thrash out ideas with. Think about the expertise you will need to make the best decisions possible to bring your plans to fruition. And then push it forward with the help of Kickstarter.

Imogen A. Reed discovered crowdfunding when doing some research for a writing project into a popular UK artist who had used a balance transfer to fund an art project. It blew her away and she has written about it for a number of leading blogs and art sites.