The Empire Files: ‘This Ship is Sinking’ Says Former Bush Official 22:59 Aug 28 0 comments
Milosevic exonerated, as the NATO war machine moves on 00:46 Aug 25 2 comments
Russian Diplomat Drops a Bombshell: US Expected ISIS to Seize Damascus by October 23:13 Feb 18 0 comments
“Humanitarian Lies”: Evidence Proves US Afghan Hospital Attack Was Deliberate 22:06 Oct 19 1 comments
Dublin protest against Suruc massacre and support to ISIS by Turkey outside Turkish embassy 22:49 Jul 27 0 commentsmore >>
Why is my rent so high? Mon Oct 31, 2016 18:51 | Gavin Mendel-Gleason
Review of Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises by Anwar Shaikh Sun Oct 30, 2016 16:21 | Gavin Mendel-Gleason
Electoralism vs Abstentionism (Or: Why You Should Run For Office) Fri Aug 26, 2016 17:07 | Slyvia Smith
Centrism extremism: how horseshoe-politics silences brutality Sat Jul 02, 2016 18:25 | yeksmesh
Of Tankies, Trots and Social Democrats Thu May 12, 2016 23:41 | Gavin Mendel-Gleason
Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Brian Cowen: A political idiot Anthony
A bird's eye view of the vineyard
Sheikh Imran Hosein about Donald Trump elected US president Sun Dec 04, 2016 13:07 | The Saker
Who are the Sunnis? A Lamentation Sun Dec 04, 2016 13:04 | The Saker
From ?grandmas separatists? in Mariupol to students in Donetsk the relay race of Russian patriotic s... Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:54 | Scott
Until Forever, Commander!/¡Hasta siempre, Comandante! Sat Dec 03, 2016 12:48 | mod editor
Hollande was the ultimate patsy Fri Dec 02, 2016 23:46 | The Saker
Notes on Judge Harding-Clark?s Report on the Symphysiotomy Payment Scheme. Thu Nov 24, 2016 17:50 | Máiréad Enright
The Practical Implications of Miller v SSEEU for Brexit: Nine Reflections Thu Nov 03, 2016 16:30 | Fiona de Londras
Having Our Voices Heard ? the Official Languages Act foreshadowing the Recognition of Irish Sign Lan... Wed Nov 02, 2016 09:35 | admin
Benefit Sanctions and Coercion Within the Irish Welfare System Thu Sep 22, 2016 13:38 | Cliodhna Murphy
The rights of the unborn: a troubling decision from the High Court? Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:42 | Máiréad Enright
British High Court rules that Assange can seek Appeal to Supreme Court
Today, Veterans for Peace, Catholic Workers, Occupy London and other anti-war activists gathered outside the High Court in London in solidarity with WikiLeaks activist Julain Assange. Julian has spent the past 363 days in England under house arrest without charge. A secret U.S. Grand Jury continues to sit in Virginia pursuing indictments. Leading U.S. Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gringrich has stated "Julian Assange is engaged in terrorism. He should be treated as an enemy combatant." We believe the U.S., British, Swedish and Australian governments are planning to do just that! We are all weary of the war which has now entered its second decade. We need to question the lies of our war making governments, defend the human rights and offer solidarity to those resisters like Julian Assange and Bradley Manning who are being defamed and pursecuted for exposing the nature of these wars in which our governments remain complicit
"Democracy Now": Julian Assange’s Attorney Gareth Peirce Speaks about Imminent British Court Decision on Sweden’s Request to Extradite Assange
***UK Indymedia Dec 5th. High Court rules that Assange can seek Appeal to Supreme Court
Julian Assange was back at the Royal Courts of Justice in London
today seeking permission - from the High Court judges who dismissed his
appeal against extradition in November - to take his case to the
Supreme Court. They haven't actually allowed this, but they're allowing
him to ask the Supreme Court directly for leave to appeal, on one of the
two points raised.
THE ISSUES AND COURT RULING
The two points on which Assange's case was being made - that there are issues of 'general public importance' - are as follows:
1) Whether a European Arrest Warrant issued by a partisan prosecutor working for the executive (i.e. not an independent judge or investigating magistrate in the civil law system) is a valid Part 1 Warrant issued by a "judicial authority" within the meaning of sections 2(2) & 66 of the Extradition Act 2003?
* This point argues that the decision goes against parliamentary intent in the 2003 Extradition Act (see High Court Ruling).
2) Whether a person in respect of whom no decision to prosecute has been taken can be said to be ’accused’ within the meaning of sections 2(3)(a) of the Extradition Act 2003?
My understanding is that the second of these points was dismissed by the judges, but that they have allowed Assange to try to seek a ruling from the Supreme Court on the first point.
***More footage of support outside of court