Just a follow-up on the book mentioned above, The Good Soldiers, written by an embedded mainstream journalist:

[www.amazon.com]

from the reviews of this much praised book, (my emphasis):

'This review is from: The Good Soldiers (Kindle Edition)
I see some of the other reviewers have been embedded with different units, some of whom were soldiers and journalists in units very much like the one portrayed in the book. I bought this book a couple of weeks ago and i thought it gave a very good and honest picture of daily life in Iraq. I empathised with the troops going out of the wire every day scared shitless that they would be horribly injured or killed. I know that the focus of the book was the soldiers themselves and that the interaction between troops and Iraqis was a secondry feature. I noticed how often officers and men in this unit would complain about how the Iraqi citizens were totally ungrateful to the American troops who put their lives on the line every day for them........AND THEN Wikileaks came out with the leaked testimony of hundreds of soldiers from dozens of units who had murdered iraqi civilians on a daily basis. So it totally destroyed my faith in "The good Soldiers". Either the book is a one sided self regarding tome, where one of the most active units Baghdad were so different from most other units in that their interaction with Iraqi civilians was comprised of handing out soccer balls and candy, or the testimony of hundreds of soldiers on WIKILEAKS was just a lie. Im sorry guys, the good soldiers they may have been, but only as seen by one side, and that.s not what the whole thing was supposed to be about. Shame on the reviewers who were imbeded, or were soldiers on the ground , and ignored the hundreds of soldiers who gave testimony in the opposite direction. The soldiers who gave their lives and left their limbs on the battlefield are to be commended and honored, but please let,s have all the facts of the horrors of war.'

and another that makes a pertinent point re the bigger picture and those who profit from 'a bit of psychological easement' by identifying with one set of victims:

'That's the good part. As for the bad, or what I take to be bad. First, as a minor quibble, the writing is pedestrian. Competent, yes, but not much above it. This only matters because of the rave reviews it got. Second, and more important, I see the lavish praise on this book similar to the enormous praise showered on a Vietnam-war novel, "The Things they carried." Indeed, despite one being a novel and this one non-fiction, they both have the same approach: describe, minutely, the life of the American soldier in the field, the physical and psychological toll that war takes. War, though, is more than what soldiers see; it's also about innocent victims, civilians, about leaders who choose to go to war or to stay in it; about enemy prisoners, about strategy and the way the world is impacted by a war. All of this is absent from this - and I believe that is so because the reality is too shameful. The bigger picture is that of an aggressive war undertaken against a megalomaniac dictator that didn't threaten the US. Everybody knows this, so let's not rehash it here; but the thing is, I think the reason this book has been praised so much is because it ignores all that, and focuses on the fact that, indeed, most US soldiers were decent people, and that they suffered enormously in the war. But if you look at the larger picture, all the hurrahs indicate something that stinks to high heaven: the desire to claim victim status as well - not the desire of the soldiers, who, Lord knows, deserve every ounce of sympathy one has; no, the desire of the media, who pushed and sold the war, and now needs a bit of psychological easement, a bit of solidarity with one set of victims. I wanna know - has there been a book about Iraqi civilians that has garnered a Pulitzer and rave reviews from literary mags and newspapers of record? Just askin'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/10/2010 05:07PM by Stoic.

An update, Assange was granted bail today but not released as the Swedish government lodged an appeal. His lawyers think that this is a delaying tactic to keep him in isolation in pokey over Christmas and the New Year.

According to Swedish law, the alleged crime for which he has been arrested would not even command a custodial sentence should he be found guilty. A fine is the likely outcome for any other person found guilty of the charges Assange has surrendered to answer. His bail was set at £200,000, cash only, almost as much as the original bail demanded from James Arthur Ray for 3 manslaughter charges and 4 times as much as the final JAR bail amount, which is likely only payable if JAR flees the country.

There were a number of prominent supporters ready to provide the cash bail on the spot and an ex-Guards officer turned journalist who got police approval for his country estate to be used as the 'bail hostel', where Assange could await his extradition, electronically tagged. All was in place for his release.

Then Sweden lodged the appeal against bail. And has point blank refused to question Assange in Britain, in fact has point blank refused to discuss anything at all about the charges with Assange's lawyers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2010 06:54AM by Stoic.

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

First news reports, with pictures, of the court proceedings.

Just to make mention that Sweden, along with the UK, has a history of being involved in extraordinary renditions at the behest of the US.

[en.wikipedia.org]


'Ahmed Agiza and Muhammad al-Zery, two Egyptians who had been seeking asylum in Sweden, were arrested by Swedish police in December 2001. They were taken to Bromma airport in Stockholm, had their clothes cut from their bodies, suppositories inserted in their anuses and in diapers, overall, handcuffs and chains put on an executive jet with American registration N379P with a crew of masked men. They were flown to Egypt, where they were imprisoned, beaten, and tortured according to reports by Swedish investigative pogramme "Kalla fakta" The Swedish ambassador visited them only six weeks later. Agiza was previously charged and sentenced in absentia with being an Islamic militant and was sentenced to 25 years, a sentence that was reduced to 15 years due to the political pressure after the Rendition became known. Al-Zery wasn't charged, and after two years in jail withouth ever seeing a judge or prosecutor he was sent to his village in Egypt. In 2008 AL Zery was awarded 500 000 dollars in damages by the Swedish government for the wrongful treatment he received in Sweden and the subsequent torture in Egypt.'

Not suggesting that the same fate awaits Assange, but........who knows, when the law-makers no longer abide by their own laws?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2010 08:59AM by Stoic.

richiekgb

I disagree and I can't believe you posted this.

Assange deserves to be imprisoned. What he did was wrong. Why aren't you mentioning the fact he is being charge with 2 counts of rape?!
No this isn't me being brainwashed from the media, this is me realizing this scum bag admitted to having sex with 2 women without condoms after they requested he use them. Innocent until proven guilty but the puzzle pieces fit.

He may have gotten away with the rape too if he wasn't stupid enough to leak those documents and put many lives in danger.
Of course he's being accused of rape now. When you are a jackass and do something like that people are going to take a hard look at you and show you for what you really are. They're not letting him walk away clean from it because he is a scum bag.
I'm not just talking about American safety. I'm talking about foreign safety and people who are trying to protect lives from dictatorship and violence.

He is far from good and far from being a valid topic for this forum.

This is about cults. He's become popular for leaking classified documents. where are you relating the two?!

alyb45, you do not appear to be a victim of media brainwashing; you appear uninformed. Do you seriously not know the vital role WikiLeaks has played in the anti cult movement? That information appears in this thread; you don't even have to Google for it.

If the US government is sincerely concerned for the safety of Iraqi and Afghan nationals who collaborate with them, why have they made it so difficult for those nationals to obtain US entry visas?

[www.nytimes.com]

And if Assange is such a dangerous rapist, why did Swedish prosecutors drop all charges against him last August?

[articles.cnn.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2010 03:53PM by Christa.

as well, Wikileaks was always more than one person. There was/is a whole group of wikileaks editors who worked on material related to many issues, including cults.

Update.
Assange is out on bail in his rather superior 'bail hostel' in the country. His hearing regarding the extradition order to Sweden is scheduled for February.
There is speculation that he may be better protected from extradition to the US in Sweden than in the UK which has closer ties to the US. Assange states that he has no fears of answering any charges against him in court.

There are rumours of 'further charges' being leaked from the Swedish prosecutors office.

Seems its open season on leaking stuff now, everyone is getting in on it.

Regarding the possibilities of extradition from Europe to the US, taken from a report on the problems of solitary confinement currently being experienced by Private Manning who has yet to be tried for his actions:

[www.salon.com]

(the entire article is worth a read)

'The inhumane treatment of Manning may have international implications as well. There are multiple proceedings now pending in the European Union Human Rights Court, brought by "War on Terror" detainees contesting their extradition to the U.S. on the ground that the conditions under which they likely will be held -- particularly prolonged solitary confinement -- violate the European Convention on Human Rights, which (along with the Convention Against Torture) bars EU states from extraditing anyone to any nation where there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment. The European Court of Human Rights has in the past found detention conditions violative of those rights (in Bulgaria) where "the [detainee] spent 23 hours a day alone in his cell; had limited interaction with other prisoners; and was only allowed two visits per month."

and:

'Moreover, because Manning holds dual American and U.K. citizenship (his mother is British), it is possible for British agencies and human rights organizations to assert his consular rights against these oppressive conditions. At least some preliminary efforts are underway in Britain to explore that mechanism as a means of securing more humane treatment for Manning. Whatever else is true, all of this illustrates what a profound departure from international norms is the treatment to which the U.S. Government is subjecting him.'

10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange:

[www.guardian.co.uk]