As the embedded YouTube video below shows, yesterday, on 30 November 2022, in the House of Representatives, during question time , Dr Monique Ryan, the independent member for the north-eastern Melbourne metropolition seat of Kooyong, pointed out to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese that only political intervention will free Julian Assange. She the asked the Prime Minister, "Will the government intervene to bring Mr Assange home?" Albanese then gave an answer as unclear and as ambiguous as in the few other public discourses about Julian Assange in which he has engaged. The transcript from Hansard is below.
Dr Monique Ryan (Kooyong) (14:14): My question is for the Prime Minister. Journalists obtaining and publishing sensitive information in the public interest is essential to democracy. Australian citizen Julian Assange is still contained in Belmarsh prison, charged by a foreign government with acts of journalism. Mr Assange's freedom will only come from political intervention. Will the government intervene to bring Mr Assange home?
Mr Anthony Albanese (Grayndler—Prime Minister) (14:14): I thank the member for Kooyong for her question. She raises an issue that is of great interest to many Australians and of interest to people, it must be said, as well across this chamber. I particularly note the member for Bruce, the member New England, for example, people who have raised this question.
I, sometime ago, made my point that enough is enough. It is time for this matter to be brought to a conclusion. In that, I don't express any personal sympathy with some of the actions of Mr Assange. I do say though that this issue has gone on for many years now, and when you look at the issue of Mr Assange and compare that with the person responsible for leaking the information, Bradley Manning, now Chelsea Manning, she is now able to participate freely in US society.
The government will continue to act in a diplomatic way, but can I assure the member for Kooyong that I have raised this personally with representatives of the United States government. My position is clear and has been made clear to the US administration that it is time that this matter be brought to a close. This is an Australian citizen. As I said, I don't have sympathy for Mr Assange's actions, on a whole range of matters. But, having said that, you have to reach a point whereby what is the point of this continuing, this legal action, which could be caught up now for many years into the future? So I will continue to advocate, as I did recently in meetings that I have held. I thank the member for her question and for her genuine interest in this, along with so many Australian citizens who have contacted me about this issue.
The member for Bruce that Albanese referred to is Julian Hill, a member of the "Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Support Group." The member for New England is Baranaby Joyce.
Twice in this brief speech, Albanese stated that he "[doesn't] don't express any personal sympathy with some of the actions of Mr Assange," but he omitted to say, here or on any one of the very few other occasions, on which he has said anything whatsoever about Assange, which precise actions on the part of Julian Assange he had no sympathy for. This appears to be an attempt by Albanese to smear Julian Assange by implying that some unspecified actions on Assange's part were, somehow, unethical.
Those who are knowledgable about Julian Assange would know that, prior to his illegal arrest in April 2020, he worked very hard and selflessly for years for the good of all of humankind. Contrast this with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's servility to the global mass-murdering United States' empire .
Comments
Sheila Newman
Thu, 2022-12-01 16:02
Permalink
The purpose of Albanese's gratuitous slurs on Assange
I note that Prime Minister Albanese abused his position in Australia's parliament yesterday to cast more gratuitous slurs on Julian Assange.
What, for instance, does 'Enough is enough' mean in the context of someone being held illegally even for one minute? What does 'enough is enough' mean in the context of someone being held in solitary confinement, whose only crime was to jump bail in order to seek asylum to save his life - a misdemeanor for which he served out his full unreasonable sentence years ago?
What purpose does it serve for the Australian Prime Minister to mention and repeat again that he does not 'express any personal sympathy with some of the actions of Mr Assange'? What actions? The action of exposing US war crimes? The action of seeking asylum? What is the purpose of this totally unspecific slur, except to abuse a public platform in order to throw yet more mud on the courageous Assange? And what is the purpose of that?
And, what's this statement about 'leaking the information' - you mean exposing massive war-crimes?? And then noting that 'the person responsible' - Bradley Manning - is now able to participate freely in US society. In this way, Albanese implies that Assange is guilty because Manning was guilty and obviously Albanese thinks people should be punished for exposing war-crimes. His position seems to be that the US should not be punished for its war-crimes, and that we should not even know about them. What on earth does the Prime Minister stand for then?
Any British or American hearing the PM's weasle-words on Assange would rightly derive the idea that Albanese does not give a stuff about Assange, or truth, or justice, or false imprisonment, or torture, or asylum, or democracy, or war-crimes. Albanese delivers this message loud and clear, through the parliamentary megaphone.
Source of excerpts in Albanese's full response to Dr Monique Ryan:
"I, sometime ago, made my point that enough is enough. It is time for this matter to be brought to a conclusion. In that, I don't express any personal sympathy with some of the actions of Mr Assange. I do say though that this issue has gone on for many years now, and when you look at the issue of Mr Assange and compare that with the person responsible for leaking the information, Bradley Manning, now Chelsea Manning, she is now able to participate freely in US society.
The government will continue to act in a diplomatic way, but can I assure the member for Kooyong that I have raised this personally with representatives of the United States government. My position is clear and has been made clear to the US administration that it is time that this matter be brought to a close. This is an Australian citizen. As I said, I don't have sympathy for Mr Assange's actions, on a whole range of matters. But, having said that, you have to reach a point whereby what is the point of this continuing, this legal action, which could be caught up now for many years into the future? So I will continue to advocate, as I did recently in meetings that I have held. I thank the member for her question and for her genuine interest in this, along with so many Australian citizens who have contacted me about this issue."
Sarolta E Kérészy (not verified)
Fri, 2022-12-02 00:18
Permalink
Weasley words that cover deception
Add comment