Finally bowed to the United States, this poor man

If I were to choose the most legendary Australian of the past 40 years, I think it would be Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

This poor man was hunted down by the United States around the world for 14 years just because he disclosed American secrets and scandals. He lived in the Ecuadorian Embassy for 7 years and was imprisoned in a British prison for 5 years.

Finally, on June 24, the story took a dramatic turn. The 51-year-old Assange pleaded guilty and admitted to leaking US military secrets. The United States "let him off the hook" and sentenced him to 62 months in prison, equivalent to the time he spent in prison in the UK.

Assange then boarded a plane and flew back to Australia.

When he left, he was still in his prime and full of confidence; when he returned, he was already gray-haired and covered with scars.

But Assange is destined to leave his own page in history, about the shamelessness of the United States, the cowardice of Australia, and the helplessness of his own destiny.

The WikiLeaks website founded by Assange disclosed a large amount of US defense secrets about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars provided by American Manning.

The one that impressed me the most was an unprovoked ground attack by a U.S. Apache helicopter in Baghdad on the battlefield in Iraq, which killed 11 people, including two Reuters reporters.

Without Assange, we would have no way of knowing the truth. The two Reuters journalists were probably also killed by terrorists as described by the United States.

The truth made the United States uneasy. Then, it was all about hunting down.

According to the 18 charges in the United States, Assange will be sentenced to a maximum of 175 years in prison. He will spend the rest of his life in prison in the United States.

Assange had to flee. He fled to Sweden and the UK, but he could not escape the clutches of the United States.

Among them, there is a very bizarre thing: in 2010, at the request of Sweden, Interpol issued a red warrant, seeking Assange's global arrest warrant on the charge of sexually assaulting two Swedish women.

On the road to escape, there is still this kind of "sexual" desire?

Assange categorically denied it, and with nowhere else to go, he took refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. At that time, Ecuador and the West had always been at odds.

Assange lived in the cramped embassy for seven years.

During this period, Sweden suddenly dropped the rape charges against him.

Rape or not rape, it turns out it is so dramatic?

But Assange's story is just the beginning.

International politics is ever-changing. Seven years later, Ecuador's political situation changed and under pressure from the United States, it revoked Assange's asylum.

In 2019, Assange had to walk out of the embassy, ​​and the British police immediately arrested him and locked him in a 3X2 meter cell.

Assange naturally refused extradition, and the whole world was outraged.

After all, Assange is not an American. The website he founded only published internal materials disclosed by Americans. This is completely in line with the definition of Western press freedom. What crime is there?

Looking at it from another perspective, if Assange had exposed Russia, the United States would 100% believe that he was a hero, but unfortunately, he exposed the United States.

Here, we have to mention Australia’s cowardice.

Several Australian governments have always claimed to be protecting the rights of Australians, protesting against this country today and that country tomorrow. But Assange is a thorough Australian, and the truth he revealed shocked the world. Did Australia protect Assange?

Australia remained silent and allowed the United States to hunt down Assange, even using despicable means through Sweden and other countries.

Australians are angry. I saw a recent poll that showed 71% of Australians support the acquittal of Assange.

It has to be said that compared with previous prime ministers, the current Australian Prime Minister Albanese is still more capable.

Under domestic pressure, Albanese publicly appealed to the United States to let Assange go.

Finally, after a series of bargaining, an agreement was reached.

If Assange returns to Australia, the United States will still find him guilty, but the time he serves will be deducted from his time in London prison.

An interesting point is that Assange still needs to go to a US court to plead guilty, but this court is not in the mainland United States, but on Saipan Island in the Pacific.

It's very simple. Assange still doesn't trust the United States. According to the American media, he is worried that if he goes to the United States, he may be detained again, spend the rest of his life in prison, or even die mysteriously.

Saipan is a U.S. overseas territory, close to Australia, so the U.S. would not attack there. I saw CNN's final comment: "This is a clever solution."

In order to go home and for freedom, Assange finally bowed his head. But many Australians are more angry and sad.

Australian Greens Senator Shoebridge said, "Let us be clear, Assange should not have been charged with espionage and should not have been forced to reach this agreement."

"Assange was imprisoned for many years simply for showing the world the horrors of the United States during the Iraq War and its complicity with governments like Australia, and that's why he was punished."

I noticed that some international political leaders also expressed their views.

Colombian President Petro Petro said, "The permanent imprisonment and torture of Assange is an attack on press freedom on a global scale."

But the United States clearly knows that it has double standards, but it still continues to hunt down Assange. Why?

It's very simple. Assange has violated the interests of the United States, especially by exposing too many scandals in the United States. If Assange is not punished, the United States is afraid that more Assanges will appear.

CNN quoted Alan Rusbridger, editor of the British Prospect magazine, as saying that Assange's release is naturally good news, but "enough is enough. His experience is a warning to journalists and whistleblowers to keep silent. I doubt it will work."