The Lies About Assange Must Stop Now
对于阿桑吉的抹黑必须终止
原文：Consortium News
https://tinyurl.com/sbecjus
译文：巴勒网
http://palinfo.habago.org/Entry?Command=Information_PrintHome&iFlowNo=1573
John Pilger 作
李鉴慧 译；陈真 校订
原始刊登日期：2019.11.25
Newspapers and other media in the United States and Britain have recently
declared a passion for freedom of speech, especially their right to publish
freely. They are worried by the “Assange effect”.
It is as if the struggle of truth-tellers like Julian Assange and Chelsea
Manning is now a warning to them: that the thugs who dragged Assange out of
the Ecuadorean embassy in April may one day come for them.
美国与英国媒体近来总爱高唱言论自由，特别是他们信口开河的“自由”。事实上，他们
十分担心“阿桑吉效应”。他们显然认为，朱利安阿桑吉（Julian Assange）与雀喜‧曼
宁（Chelsea Manning）这类真相挖掘者的下场，无非就是一场杀鸡儆猴的警告；他们担
心，那些把阿桑吉硬拖出厄瓜多尔大使馆的恶棍，也许有一天也会找上他们。
A common refrain was echoed by The Guardian last week. The extradition of
Assange, said the paper, “is not a question of how wise Mr. Assange is,
still less how likable. It’s not about his character, nor his judgement. It’
s a matter of press freedom and the public’s right to know.”
英国《卫报》上周的报导就是一例，当他们提到阿桑吉引渡美国一事时，竟说道：“这跟
阿桑吉有多聪明或他是否让人喜欢无关，这也无关乎他的品格与言论；这仅仅关乎新闻自
由与大众‘知’的权力。”
What The Guardian is trying to do is separate Assange from his landmark
achievements, which have both profited The Guardian and exposed its own
vulnerability, along with its propensity to suck up to rapacious power and
smear those who reveal its double standards.
《卫报》之所以这么说，目的就是要将阿桑吉的里程碑贡献〔指维基解密〕一笔抹煞，故
意避而不谈，尽管《卫报》曾经因之大获其利。当然，《卫报》也因维基解密一事而暴露
出他自身的脆弱以及对于残暴权力的攀附，还有对揭露其双重标准者的诸多污蔑。〔校注
：《卫报》曾与维基解密合作，揭露美军在伊拉克的不当作为，但之后就变了调，开始诬
蔑阿桑吉。〕
The poison that has fueled the persecution of Julian Assange is not as
obvious in this editorial as it usually is; there is no fiction about Assange
smearing faeces on embassy walls or being awful to his cat.
Instead, the weasel references to “character” and “judgement” and “
likeability” perpetuate an epic smear which is now almost a decade old.
Nils Melzer, the United Nations Rapporteur on Torture, used a more apt
description. “There has been,” he wrote, “a relentless and unrestrained
campaign of public mobbing.” He explains mobbing as “an endless stream of
humiliating, debasing and threatening statements in the press”. This “
collection ridicule” amounts to torture and could lead to Assange’s death.
在《卫报》的一则社论中以一种比过去更加恶毒的含沙射影手法，进一步妖魔化阿桑吉。
也许，阿桑吉真的曾经在大使馆中以粪便涂墙抗议，也可能未善待他的猫，但这篇社论却
很狡猾地借此影射阿桑吉的“人格”与“思想”之“令人难以恭维”等等，延续一个长达
将近十年的媒体重大抹黑戏码。
联合国“刑求调查专员” Niles Melzer 倒是讲出了公道话。他说，阿桑吉长久以来所遭
受的，其实就是“一系列残酷无情而且毫无节制的媒体公审”，包括“各式各样的羞辱抹
黑与人格谋杀及威胁”，无异于刑求，而且可能间接导致阿桑吉之死。
Having witnessed much of what Melzer describes, I can vouch for the truth of
his words. If Julian Assange were to succumb to the cruelties heaped upon
him, week after week, month after month, year upon year, as doctors warn,
newspapers like The Guardian will share the responsibility.
我可担保并亲眼见证联合国“刑求调查专员”Melzer 所描述的大部分情况，其所言不虚
。如果阿桑吉最终承受不住日复一日、经年累月对他所做的公众酷刑，那么，诸如《卫报
》这样一些媒体，就应为此负起责任。
A few days ago, The Sydney Morning Herald’s man in London, Nick Miller,
wrote a lazy, specious piece headlined, “Assange has not been vindicated, he
has merely out-waited justice.” He was referring to Sweden’s abandonment
of the so-called Assange investigation.
几天前，雪梨《晨锋报》驻伦敦记者 Nick Miller 写了一篇信口开河、似是而非的报导
，标题是“阿桑吉并未证明一己清白，他只是以拖待变，企图延迟司法制裁”。Miller
指的是瑞典法院最后决定放弃侦办所谓的阿桑吉案件。
Miller’s report is not untypical for its omissions and distortions while
masquerading as a tribune of women’s rights. There is no original work, no
real inquiry: just smear.
There is nothing on the documented behaviour of a clutch of Swedish zealots
who hi jacked the “allegations” of sexual misconduct against Assange and
made a mockery of Swedish law and that society’s vaunted decency.
Miller的抹黑手法司空见惯；一方面假装是个为女权捍卫者，一方面则刻意疏漏真相、扭
曲事实；不但没有从事任何第一手新闻调查工作，也没有任何事实探究，从头到尾就是
一味地抹黑。而且，他完全没有提到一群瑞典狂热者如何操弄对于阿桑吉不实的性侵“指
控”。这些人之所作所为，无疑是对于瑞典法律及瑞典社会向来所自恃的“正直”之最大
讽刺。
He makes no mention that in 2013, the Swedish prosecutor tried to abandon the
case and emailed the Crown Prosecution Service in London to say it would no
longer pursue a European Arrest Warrant, to which she received the reply: “
Don’t you dare!!!” (Thanks to Stefania Maurizi of La Repubblica)
此外，Miller 也没有提到在 2013年瑞典检察官打算放弃起诉，并电邮给伦敦的“皇家检
察署”（Crown Prosecution Service），告知此案并不需要发布欧洲逮捕令。对此，这
位女性检察官收到的回复竟然是：“妳有胆就试试看！！！”（Don’t you dare!!!）〔
感谢意大利《共和国报》的Stefania Maurizi提供这项资讯〕
Other emails show the CPS discouraging the Swedes from coming to London to
interview Assange – which was common practice – thus blocking progress that
might have set him free in 2011.
其它电邮则显示，“皇家检察署”阻止瑞典派人前来英国当面访问阿桑吉。在阿桑吉的司
法遭遇上，类似作法很常见，从而阻止了原本在2011年就可能还给阿桑吉的司法清白。
There was never an indictment. There were never charges. There was never a
serious attempt to put “allegations” to Assange and question him –
behaviour that the Swedish Court of Appeal ruled to be negligent and the
General Secretary of the Swedish Bar Association has since condemned.
事实上，瑞典方面从来就没有起诉过阿桑吉，不曾提出任何控告，甚至从来不曾认真想要
对阿桑吉提出指控及问讯。瑞典的上诉法庭认为此举“怠忽职守”，瑞典律师协会总秘书
长随后并提出谴责。
Both the women involved said there was no rape. Critical written evidence of
their text messages was willfully withheld from Assange’s lawyers, clearly
because it undermined the “allegations”.
至于两位女性证人，始终表明并没有所谓强暴一事。她们的书面短信这项关鉴证据，检方
却刻意不让阿桑吉的律师取得，因为这将完全否决对于阿桑吉的一切所谓“指控”。
One of the women was so shocked that Assange was arrested, she accused the
police of railroading her and changing her witness statement. The chief
prosecutor, Eva Finne, dismissed the “suspicion of any crime.”
其中一位涉案女性甚至非常震惊阿桑吉被捕，她指控警方窜改笔录，捏造事实，嫁祸阿桑
吉。总检察官 Eva Finne 事实上也驳回了任何对于阿桑吉的相关指控。
The Sydney Morning Herald man omits how an ambitious and compromised
politician, Claes Borgstrom, emerged from behind the liberal facade of
Swedish politics and effectively seized and revived the case.
这位雪梨《晨锋报》的记者先生，并且故意避而不谈一位长袖善舞野心勃勃的政客
Claes Borgstrom，如何在瑞典政治的开明假像底下，取得此案主导权，欲使该案败部复
活，藉以兴风作浪。
Borgstrom enlisted a former political collaborator, Marianne Ny, as the new
prosecutor. Ny refused to guarantee that Assange would not be sent on to the
United States if he was extradited to Sweden, even though, as The Independent
reported, “informal discussions have already taken place between the US and
Swedish officials over the possibility of the WikiLeaks founder Julian
Assange being delivered into American custody, according to diplomatic
sources.” This was an open secret in Stockholm. That libertarian Sweden had
a dark, documented past of rendering people into the hands of the CIA was not
news.
Borgstrom 召唤先前的一位政治伙伴 Marianne Ny，担任该案新任检察官。然而，尽管英
国《独立报》已明白揭露，“根据外交资讯来源，美国和瑞典官方之间早已展开非正式对
话，讨论将朱利安阿桑吉交由美方拘押的可能性。”然而，Ny 依旧拒绝保证阿桑吉倘若
被引渡到瑞典，将不会被进一步引渡到美国。
事实上，斯德哥尔摩早已流传一项公开秘密，一段黑暗历史，亦即所谓自由派的瑞典政府
，长久以来不断协助将 CIA 所要猎捕的人士送交美国手上。此事由来已久，并非新闻，
并且证据确凿。
The silence was broken in 2016 when the United Nations Working Party on
Arbitrary Detention, a body that decides whether governments are meeting
their human rights obligations, ruled that Julian Assange was unlawfully
detained by Britain and called on the British government to set him free.
直到 2016年，沉寂方才打破：专门负责裁决各国政府是否遵守人权义务的国际组织