So the accusations surfacing months after the fact, and coinciding with the start of the current revelations? The international arrest warrant for someone who is only wanted for questioning? The denial of bail ("flight risk") for someone who voluntarily turned himself in? The week of solitary confinement? The appeal of the court ruling granting bail? All that was Assange making himself a poster boy and a martyr?

I understand you've looked into his albino eyes and he creeps you out, David. But how does your gut feeling translate into a defense of an extrajudicial attack on an individual not yet charged with any crime? And it is extrajudicial, even if it's wrapped in legalisms. Claims that the Swedish, Swiss and British legal processes are not being shaped by American pressure are laughable.

One small example (though it is ostensibly not aimed directly at Assange): Visa, MasterCard and Paypal simultaneously block funds sent to WikiLeaks. Now, there exists an executive order that lets the White House block (even seize) funds. But it requires a State Dept. finding that the money would materially aid terrorism. For now, the U.S. hasn't dared make that claim about WikiLeaks, so it has simply strong-armed American-based companies to do what it can't legally oblige them to do.

"This is all political," you say. Obviously. And you've made very clear which side you stand with politically. We disagree quite profoundly.