It's almost one year since Julian Assange was granted asylum by the republic of Ecuador. Newspapers often incorrectly report that he sought political asylum to avoid those disturbing rape allegations (they are not charges). The real basis of his claim to asylum, which is the foundation that asylum law is based on, is that Mr Assange is not safe from political persecution in his own country.
It's often difficult for men to talk about this subject without putting their foot in their mouth. In this case, it may be easier to understand by trying to put it in context.
Just last week, our Government announced plans to expand their program of dumping poor coloured people into random countries around the Asia-Pacific region. On Monday they broke every rule in the UN's book of human rights by using the Internet to distribute gut wrenching youtube videos of a woman suffering at the hands of our immigration officers. They hope this degradation will scare away other migrants who do not meet the right economic criteria.
It makes me wonder, if Mr Assange is genuinely guilty of rape despite his alleged victim boasting about her experience on Twitter, what has happened to this other woman in the care of Kevin Rudd's scorched-Earth immigration policy?
Maybe because she's not a Swedish blonde, nobody cares.
More racist videos from the immigration department fail to correctly inform migrants of their right to seek asylum under international law - is it possible that this offensive and misleading propaganda violates Youtube's terms of service?
Former employees of the Manus Island concentration camp have stepped forward and revealed what the Government naturally doesn't want us to know. According to one former security manager, vulnerable migrants had suffered virtually every form of physical abuse, including rapes, and under orders from management in Australia, the victims were simply locked up with their abusers and no formal complaints were documented.
All of a sudden, those pictures of the woman crying in the degrading video made by immigration officials take on a new meaning: she is next in line for the same destination, PNG. I somewhat suspect she would enjoy greater dignity and safety confined to Ecuador's London embassy with the so-called rapist that everybody has been distracted with. Can anybody imagine the widely discussed expression on her face improving after 20 months enforced confinement with rapists under the protection of Australia's refugee program?