Thread by @MurdochCadell

There will never be any significant help for Assange as long as Aust in part of ‘Five Eyes’.

Under its provisions ‘their information’ is ‘our information’, such that we have to consider Assange a criminal as well, no matter what crime he uncovered.

The Five Eyes ruling concept, that ‘once you are in, there is no difference between individual int services, just diff nationalities serving the same goal’, means that the US were even consulted in my prosecution, as if it was ‘their information’.
They pushed for prosecution.

‘Five Eyes’ is a misleading name because it implies a collective but it’s actually simply four nations collecting Int for the US. We get to see their stuff, if it suits them. But there is only one ‘decision maker’. and it’s not us.

When @AlboMP and @SenatorWong say things like ‘legally our hands are tied’ they are not being genuine, but the truth is even worse: even if they desperately wanted to help Assange they could do nothing. It would be like a State Govt complaining about a Fed arrest: not their lane.

While it sounds reasonable to say ‘we do a lot for the US, they should do something for us’ that’s not how ‘Five Eyes’ works. ‘Five Eyes’ assumes that whatever they want is also what we want:
“You must hate this guy too, he released our Secrets!”
“Our war crimes?”
“Our Secrets!”

There will never be justice in Aust for war crimes whistleblowers while we are part of ‘Five Eyes’. It’s not a ‘benign collective of friends’. The US calls all the shots. The rest of us just take orders, and pass on information. We have joined the US’s ‘mafia’. There’s no leaving

If you read the Talking Points of both the UK and Aust closely they are like the answers of hostages, or people under duress. We say ‘it’s what we want’ but those answers make no sense when scrutinised against the national laws we also say we uphold.

Again, don’t take my word for it. Research ‘Five Eyes’ yourself. And ask the question, if Aust or the UK want something, but the US doesn’t, what happens? I’m pretty sure you’ll find that it’s always the US position that is followed. The only alternative is to leave Five Eyes.

The next question for the research would be ‘how does a nation leave Five Eyes?’. While there will be a possible way, follow through the steps logically and see if it is really possible.
If the Greens were elected they could do it, perhaps, as NZ did once.
But the ALP? Nope.

To show I know what I’m talking about, here’s a prediction:
We know the PM is broadly supportive of Assange because of comments he made before he was elected.
Yet despite this, now all we will here is ‘hands are tired’ ‘Justice must take its course’ ‘can’t interfere etc’

At the same time as Assange is forgotten by them, the military ties with the US will grow stronger and stronger until there is no discernible difference between US and Aust Navys (Five Eyes Military) . The US doesn’t even pay for its bases in Aust. Strange, no? (FOI it).

While we like to talk up the (salesman BS) that under ANZUS ‘an attack on Aust is an attack on the US’ in the reality it’s always the other way around. We’ll let Assange die in a US prison, because by embarrassing them, he has (under Five Eyes) he has embarrassed us.

All the senior Aust in the ADF knew that the ISAF mission was doomed to fail, but no one said anything, because ‘success’ wasn’t our mission ‘bolstering the strategic relationship’ was (again, feel free to fact check).

The problem with ‘hitching our wagon’ 💯 behind the US, is that it assumes that the US will always behave in a reasonable way that is in line with our values and beliefs.
You don’t have to be a communist to know that would be a ‘stretch’.

The great irony of Aust politics is that there is only one truly ‘national and authentic’ Australian party, and it’s the Greens. The other two both belong to the US, Corps, Five Eyes. Anyone but you and me. Oh, but they talk a good game. Right. Like that will help.
#FreeAssange