Julian Assange should not be given a voice by the Oxford Union

[struggle4progress]

Sebastian Salek believes that such a controversial figure should not be allowed a platform
Sebastian Salek
Wednesday 23 January 2013

... It’s a complicated situation, so let's start off with a bit of background: on a visit to Sweden, Assange slept with two women who both later expressed concerns, alleging that he had not used a condom despite having been asked to. Fearing for their sexual health, they later went to a police station together to see if they could compel him to take an STD test. Based on what they were told, the police arrested Assange and questioned him about possible minor rape and molestation.

This is clearly not conclusive evidence that Julian Assange is a rapist, even of the 'minor' sort, but he’s certainly not helping himself by hiding in the only safe place in the world that will have him (his mum’s house probably doesn’t have similar political immunity), instead of just proving to us all that he’s not the criminal that a lot of the world currently thinks he is ...

This is not free speech. This is a platform. Giving one of those to someone with a bloody great question mark over his head, and for the Oxford Union to ignore that is pretty insulting to the millions of women (and men) who have suffered sexual violence. And this is before you consider the nature of the ceremony. It celebrates prominent whistleblowers. The man is being praised. It doesn’t matter whether he’s talking about his work with Wikileaks or how many tiles are on the ceiling in the Ecuadorian embassy, the allegations cannot and must not be ignored ...

... as far as his visit to Oxford is concerned, it doesn’t really make a difference whether Assange’s alleged persecution is a top secret operation plotted by world leaders or not. The allegations against him didn’t appear out of thin air, someone was brave enough to speak out. Rape conviction rates are incredibly low as it is, so it goes without saying that any allegation must be taken very seriously ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/julian-assange-should-not-be-given-a-voice-by-the-oxford-union-8461577.html

[avaistheone1]

1. The author has an obvious bias against Julian Assange, and I strongly disagree with the author.

There is nothing more liberating than the free expression of ideas and thought. Let Assange speak.

And have a time for those who disagree with Assange speak. That will empower people to think and to decide for themselves.

[Igel]

2. I agree. Sort of.

However, the world is full of ad hominem attackers, those who would deny others the chance to speak (on another's dime) because of their past acts or some unrelated moral stand.

There are also those who believe that the proper kind of speech to rebut something they disagree with is to shout it down and silence it. I've seen that too often on college campuses.

However, the OP also has the right to engage in free speech to try to convince those inviting Assange to change their minds. They are free to ignore him. Others are free to rebut the attempt at persuasion.


The Union's also free to do with their time as they see fit.

[jerseyjack]

3. I would agree with the o.p. if there was guarantee

that Assange would not be occupying a bunk next to Bradley Manning.

Given Obama and Holder, would you trust either of these guys even if they gave such assurance?

[struggle4progress]

5. Since Assange is not subject to the UCMJ, under which Manning is prosecuted, there is no chance that

Assange and Manning could share a cell if Assange were prosecuted

[fasttense]

4. Strange

Sebastian Salek objects NOT to Assange speaking, just to his platform to speak.

I wonder if the author has the same objection to Fox, so called news? Who gave the Australian citizen Rupert and a Saudi Prince the right to a platform to spew their lies? They have no right to own a cable news show in America. No matter how much money they were born into and stole they have no right to the platform of a cable fake news show in order to distort and corrupt our political system. And yet the author of this piece objects to the very small voice of Assange.

It must mean that Assange has hit a nerve.