If Jemima Khan can, anybody can

jemima-khan-4I don’t know Jemima Khan. But I have an opinion of her based on her support of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. And she impresses me.

For Jemima Khan truth is what is important. She feels passionately that democracy needs strong, free media. Elected governments, big corporations, politicians, organizations, lawyers and individuals lie to us all the time. It is very important for us to have true information about what is going on. As Bradley Manning puts it “without information you cannot make informed decisions as a public”.

In a recent very interesting article in New Statesman Jemima Khan reveals “How the Wikileaks founder alienated his allies. An article that I recommend everyone to read. She writes:

The problem is that WikiLeaks – whose mission statement was “to produce . . . a more just society . . . based upon truth” – has been guilty of the same obfuscation and misinformation as those it sought to expose, while its supporters are expected to follow, unquestioningly, in blinkered, cultish devotion.

Jemima Khan is aware that Julian Assange “is no more vulnerable to extradition to the US from Sweden than he is from the UK” contrary to the claims made by WikiLeaks. In fact he is less vulnerable to extradition in Sweden. Not one person has been extradited from Sweden to the US for political or military crimes in the last 50 years. Sweden did not even extradite the CIA defector Edward Lee Howard in 1992 even though the US did its best to get him.

“I don’t regret putting up bail money for Assange but I did it so that he would be released while awaiting trial, not so that he could avoid answering to the allegations.”

“It may well be that the serious allegations of sexual assault and rape are not substantiated in court, but I have come to the conclusion that these are all matters for Swedish due process and that Assange is undermining both himself and his own transparency agenda – as well as doing the US department of justice a favour – by making his refusal to answer questions in Sweden into a human rights issue.”

Jemima Khan understands the fundamentals. It is about truth. If you are working for openness and transparency you cannot lie and deceive just like the people you are trying to expose. If you are working for openness and transparency you cannot have a lawyer like Jennifer Robinson who in a brief for Australian MPs is making 57 misrepresentations of facts.

Jemima Khan impresses me. I just wonder what Julian Assange and his supporters are going to call her now. Is she, just like every other critic of Julian Assange, someone who is paid by “dark forces” just to get Julian Assange locked up forever in the US?  Is she a traitor? A CIA-agent?

Jemima Khan has looked at the facts of the case and she has come to the conclusion that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are not telling the full truth. And since she is passionate about the truth she writes an article about it. If Jemima Khan can make this evaluation, anybody can.

9 thoughts on “If Jemima Khan can, anybody can

  1. Jemina passionate about the “truth”? Whatever the “truth” is in this case…I beg to differ. She merely parrots other critics`claims and released this hit piece to promote a WL docu that she co produced.

  2. Even if Jemima Khan was doing it for her own vanity I don’t see how it diminishes the argument she’s making. She also appears to have a personal insight into the issue which others don’t. So even if she’s your enemy in some way it’s probably wise to listen and not to just ridicule. Not unless you have another agenda that is.

  3. Whatever your view on whether Julian Assange should leave the Ecuadorian embassy and face extradition to Sweden, it seems to me that Jemima Kahn’s position is illogical.

    The reason Assange was imprisoned in England, at least for more than a few days, was because he refused to voluntarily leave Britain for Sweden. Khan put up bail money so that he could be free, while fighting extradition through the British courts. If Kahn now thinks that Assange should surrender himself to Sweden, why did she back his campaign against extradition? Her position makes no sense.

    • Ben,

      I am sorry. It is your position that does not make sense. You are not logical.

      Jemima Khan put up bail money so Julian Assange could be free on bail while fighting extradition through the English courts. She did not put up money so Julian Assange should flee to the Ecuadorian Embassy. Jemima Khan is not stupid. If she wanted to help Julian flee to the Embassy she would only pay the cab-fare to the Embassy.

      The idea behind bail is to make sure an individual is free while his case is tried in courts. Julian has had his days in court and he has lost. Now it is time to take the courts orders.

    • Yes, a taxidriver that knows more of judical systems than regular laywers. Maybe a local wine is a better pilot than a trained pilot also.
      Goran is a joke and a attention whore, nothing more

  4. When she was married to Imran Khan, Jemima was charged with smuggling antique tiles out of Pakistan. She refused to return to the country to face *actual* charges, saying they were politically motivated. She eventually returned to Pakistan when the govt changed and the charges were dropped.

    Shows the hypocrisy and sheer bloody chutzpah of her demanding that Assange goes to Sweden under similar circumstances, except with him there are not even formal charges – in her case, there were.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *