Ian Fantom – Aug 1, 2022

Dear Holly,

Click to enlarge

This is not a fast-moving case; it is very slow-moving, and it seems to me and to others, too, that it is being unnecessarily dragged out, and that a likely consequence of this is that Julian Assange will die in prison. For a remand prisoner to be held for so long and in such circumstances is I hope unprecedented in British legal history. If it isn’t, then our legal system is more corrupt that I suspect it is.

I am aware of the high reputation that the British legal system has earned in years past. But it can only deserve such a high reputation on a case-by-case basis. If a case is argued only by virtue of the past reputation, then that in itself undermines that reputation.

I do not share in your confidence in the impartiality and independence of the British legal system to give Mr Assange a fair hearing as he exercises his rights. There is obviously something very wrong in the handling of this case. The decision was ultimately handed to the Home Secretary, and she is in a political role in the Cabinet, for which you are partly responsible. It is the duty of Parliament to hold the Cabinet to account. The argumentation that you have obviously been handed by your party superiors is obviously flawed.

I once attended a seminar at the National Union of Journalists on the truthfulness of the press. At the bookstall at the back were two new books on falsehood in the press: ‘Flat Earth News’ and ‘A Century of Spin’. At the meeting a BBC reporter told us that they had received instructions not to check the validity of reports if they came from official sources. That means that the BBC would simply reprint whatever falsehoods the government were to give them. Most people nowadays believe that the government tells lies. Those like myself who have taken considerable effort over the years to do what the BBC should have been doing but isn’t doing, realise that what the public is perceiving is only the fibs, not the whoppers.

Another journalist pointed out that if it hadn’t been for their reporting, there would have been no Iraq war.

One of the contributors to the seminar was recently outed by the authors of ‘A Century of Spin’ as an MI6 agent. Another contributor gave me such an evasive answer to a simple question of mine on how he knew that his captors in Lebanon were Islamic Terrorists, that I had to wonder why. He replied, “I, too have heard conspiracy theories”. I answered that with: “I haven’t; I just asked an obvious question”. That was a question that ALL journalists present at that meeting should have been asking, but weren’t.

I recently heard in an interview on GBNews that half of professional journalists were educated at Oxbridge. I found that amazing. Oxbridge is well know for its loyalty above all to the political elite. That seems to reflect the situation in the Cabinet. The press in this country is no longer holding government to account, and neither is Parliament.

George Orwell pointed this out in the introduction to his Animal Farm novel, which was censured out. John Pilger more recently pointed out that the situation now is far worse than that.

All those in that journalists seminar knew what was going on. We live in extremely dangerous times. We don’t know where the loyalties of political parties lie. Your own leader is a member of the Neoconservative think tank The Trilateral Commission.

I think it is time that every MP should consider his or her position. Is their primary loyalty to the party or to the electorate? I recommend that you read The Light newspaper, particularly the July edition, No 23 (https://thelightpaper.co.uk/assets/pdf/Light-23-Final-Web.pdf) where you will find my article on page 9 on who actually is running Britain and the Cabinet.

On the Julian Assange case, it would be inappropriate to stay silent, when the future of journalism is at stake in this country, and in much of the Western World. Every decent journalist must by now feel threatened.

Ian