Report comment

Martin, I am going to spoil it. Because Jonathon's rule of law is only half the story. He ignores the common law. If one knows of harm being caused to another living man or woman one has more than a right to expose it. One has a duty. Everything Jonathon argues is correct under statute law, but if you know anything about statute law it depends on the use of the legal fiction. Are you Martin and Jonathon stating, by ignoring mention of it, that common law does not apply here? If so then you are ignoring one of our most basic freedoms. OK! I do similar things (on a smaller scale) to Julian Assange. Also I do realise the dilemma in which I place myself. I act like judge and jury and place myself in a god like position. But I have duties as a living man towards my fellow men and women. If the statute law is abused by men in power then I have a duty to help those being abused by the state silencing those who wish to expose corruption by the state. I use the common law to help people who refuse to consent to being responsible for the legal fiction; Their name in capital letters which started a corporation before they were able to read write or speak.
Julian Assange is exposing corruption. He is doing so in a most detrimental way to himself.He should use the common law to protect himself, but, I'm guessing here, he does not know how powerful the common law is if you know how to use it.
So Jonathon and Martin, is it better to use the so called rule of law that depends on the deceit of the legal fiction or is it better to follow the real but hidden rule of law? The Common law. We all need the statute law for a safe existence on this planet, but it is being abused by our governments. Julian is exposing this abuse. Using the argument that he is breaking the rule of law is a false argument unless one includes the common law. Julian Lasange has broken no common law which as the supreme court will confirm is superior to statute law.