Showing posts with label Wikileaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wikileaks. Show all posts

Sunday, June 10, 2012

American Heroes

“Now let your American heroes know how grateful you are for their service as they protect our freedom!” – Heard at any sporting event in the US

The voice from the loud-speaker prompts the crowd at a sporting event as half a dozen drab-dressed soldiers walk onto center stage.  The crowd rises to its feet and cheers as the uniformed soldiers wave.

Which of our freedoms do US soldiers protect? 

Do they protect our freedom to have our crotches groped at airports, train stations, and bus stops by government agents?

Do they protect our freedom to be strip-searched by our jailers after routine traffic stops?[1]

Do they protect our freedom to be monitored as decided by secret tribunals? [2] [3]

Do they protect our freedom to be stopped at random checkpoints to be commanded to show our “papers please” or to submit to a pat-down or luggage search?[4]

Do they protect our freedom to pay for unmanned drones to kill US citizens overseas and now to watch us at home?[5] [6] [7]

Do they protect our freedom to have our cell phones monitored?[8]

Attack the Messenger

“I feel uncomfortable about the word hero because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war.” – MSNBC host Chris Hayes generated a storm of criticism for daring to doubt the heroism of soldiers fighting in the US government’s perpetual war on terrorism.[9]

“But in fact the forces aren’t ‘serving their country’ or ‘keeping us free.’ They are doing the bidding of hack politicians, well-connected economic interests, and court intellectuals who are striving to satisfy personal ambition, attain wealth, or create historical legacies.” - Libertarian writer James Bovard[10]

During Memorial Day weekend, MSNBC host Chris Hayes was castigated by many for jeopardizing their illusion that US troops “defending the Homeland” (called the Fatherland in another time and place whose heroes were honored with the Iron Cross) were not performing a heroic task.[11]

And if the charges against Bradley Manning are true, Manning did even more than just suggest US troops are not on a heroic mission: Manning showed that US government actions overseas are terrorism—which is supposed to be what the other guys do.  

Manning, currently in a US military prison, is accused of leaking information to WikiLeaks that the US government would prefer to keep secret from the American public:

  • video of US troops and contractors killing innocent civilians and two journalists in Baghdad in 2007 with an attitude similar to teenage boys playing video games[12]
  • video of the Granai airstrike in Afghanistan on May 4, 2009 which killed over one hundred civilians, mainly women and children[13]
  • numerous US diplomatic cables on torture, diplomatic relations, drone attacks in Yemen, and other matters embarrassing to the US government.

How did American public respond to these revelations?

They didn’t—it didn’t immediately affect them.

How did the US government respond?

As evidenced by Manning’s imprisonment and the charges against him: with persecution and prosecution for aiding the enemy.[14]  The US government didn’t prosecute those who killed civilians, nor did it acknowledge its mistakes.  Instead, it attacked not only the whistleblower, but also WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, who had the courage to publish the information.[15]

Blowback

"We have gone a long way down the road of creating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield. We are already there with regards to Pakistan and Afghanistan…. If you strike them indiscriminately you are running the risk of creating a terrific amount of popular anger. They have tribes and clans and large families. Now all of a sudden you have a big problem … I am very concerned about the creation of a larger terrorist safe haven in Yemen." - Robert Grenier, former CIA chief of counter-terrorism

The real danger will come from the response of those terrorized by US military actions.  Chalmers Johnson called it “blowback,” a euphemism for people in foreign countries who fight back against the oppressive foreign policies of the US.

The Obama administration has increasingly used unmanned drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas.  The drone strike campaign diverts the attention of the public and lulls Americans to sleep because the drones are remotely piloted and there are fewer US troops in the battle zone.  Dennis C. Blair, former director of national intelligence, calls the drone strikes “dangerously seductive”:

“It is the politically advantageous thing to do — low cost, no U.S. casualties, gives the appearance of toughness.  It plays well domestically, and it is unpopular only in other countries. Any damage it does to the national interest only shows up over the long term.”[16]

Former CIA chief of counter-terrorism, Robert Grenier, criticizes the US government use of drones in the Middle East.  The indiscriminate strikes kill so many civilians and so outrage the population that Grenier expects a blowback response:

“We have been seduced by them and the unintended consequences of our actions are going to outweigh the intended consequences."[17]

A Nation of Suspects

In 2010, the Obama administration wrote a secret memo to rationalize the legality of killing US citizens overseas.  Again the public outcry was minimal, limited to Ron Paul and a few others who were marginalized by the media.  Most Americans ignored the US government murder of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen, without due process. 

Now drones are not just used overseas.  While we were sleeping, the federal government brought drones home to spy on us.  Michael Donley, Secretary of the Air Force, released a memorandum on 23 April 2012 authorizing the use of drones to spy on US citizens in the US.[18] [19] America is now a nation of suspects.  Our American “heroes” spy on us.

Section 9.5 of the memo authorizes the military to release photos taken by the spy drones to others in the government if “the recipient is reasonably perceived to have a specific, lawful governmental function requiring it.”

But don’t worry: the military will be careful when it violates our constitutional rights in the name of national security.  According to page 2 of the memo:

“Intelligence oversight (IO) involves a balancing of two fundamental interests: obtaining the intelligence information required to protect national security and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws of the United States (US).”

Section 7 of the memo talks about protections against intelligence agents who break the rules while operating in the US.  This is merely lip service as we remember how the government persecuted Bradley Manning for exposing the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Despite all of the words in section 7 of the memo, the truth is: the government doesn’t really care if it breaks the rules; it just doesn’t want the public to know about it.

What will happen when the troops using spy drones in the US abuse their power?  Will another Bradley Manning step forward to be imprisoned for defending the rights of US citizens?

Heroes and Pawns

Supporters of the war make good use of the dead, who can’t speak for themselves, but they have no use for Bradley Manning, who allegedly told the world what the US government did to civilians overseas.  Unfortunately, US citizens’ response to proof of US forces killing civilians has been underwhelming.  And a collective yawn has greeted the PATRIOT Act, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allowing indefinite detention of US citizens without trial, the TSA treating travelers like farm animals, and now the use of spy drones in the US.

Who are the heroes?  Those men and women who, however well-meaning, invade and occupy foreign countries because the government hoodwinks them into believing they’re protecting their country’s freedom?  Or are the real heroes those who point out the evils done by their own government and now sit in jail because of it?

“Memorial Day should be a time to remember the government’s crimes against the people. Politicians have perennially sent young Americans to die for false causes or on wild-goose chases.” – James Bovard


[1] Supreme Court of the United States, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington et al., October Term 2011, (Accessed at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-945.pdf on June 3, 2012).

[5] “Drone Use Takes Off on the Home Front,” April 20, 2012, By ANDY PASZTOR and JOHN EMSHWILLER, Wall Street Journal, (Accessed at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304331204577354331959335276.html# on Apr 21, 2012).

Local organizations are applying to use drones:

“The more than 50 institutions that received approvals to operate remotely piloted aircraft…include not only agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security but also smaller ones such as the police departments in North Little Rock, Ark., and Ogden, Utah, as well the University of North Dakota and Nicholls State University in Louisiana.

“The information, released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, came to light as the Federal Aviation Administration gears up to advance the widespread use of the drones. By the fall of 2015, Congress wants the agency to integrate remotely piloted aircraft throughout U.S. airspace.”

[6] “Gov.: Drones over Va. 'great'; cites battlefield success,” 5/29/2012, WTOP, by Paul D. Shinkman, (Accessed at http://www.wtop.com/120/2882193/Governor-Drones-over-Va-great-right-thing-to-do on May 31, 2012).

[7] “The Age Of Drones: Military May Be Using Drones In US To Help Police,” by Charles Feldman, CBS LA, June 4, 2012, (Accessed at http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/06/04/the-age-of-drones-military-may-be-using-drones-in-us-to-help-police/ on June 5, 2012).

“The revised Air Force report is a continuation of a policy already a few years old, but is causing more alarm now as drones appear poised to soon become a ubiquitous presence in U.S. skies thanks to a federal policy to promote their use, first by law enforcement agencies, and then by commercial concerns.”

[8] “Police Are Using Phone Tracking as a Routine Tool,” By ERIC LICHTBLAU, Mar 31, 2012, NY Times, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/us/police-tracking-of-cellphones-raises-privacy-fears.html?_r=2&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=all on Apr 1, 2012).

[11] “Blogs rip MSNBC's Chris Hayes on 'heroes',” By MACKENZIE WEINGER, 5/28/12, Politico.com, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76799.html on June 3, 2012).

[18] “AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 14-104,” 23 APRIL 2012, Intelligence, OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES, (Accessed at http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi14-104.pdf on June 9, 2012).

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Newsflash from Politicians: “Violence is Not the Answer”

“We know violence isn’t the answer.  When we take up our arms, we’re talking about our votes.” – Sarah Palin

Violence is not the answer—so says Sarah Palin (R), the proud “mother of a soldier” and supporter of the “War on Terror,” while sitting against a backdrop of an American flag.[1][2]  The recent shooting of 19 people in Tucson by a disturbed individual on January 8, 2011 led to the usual political platitudes and a renewed call for more regulation of the mob.  Congressman Robert Brady (D) said:

"The president is a federal official, you can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator, or federal judge."[3] 

In the Tucson shooting, six were murdered and 13 wounded.  Survivors and first responders described blood everywhere at the scene.  The horror and loss of innocent lives shocked Americans.  It wouldn’t have shocked victims of the US government’s “War on Terror”:

  • Mohammed Kinani, who opened a car door to see the brains of his nine-year-old son, Ali Kinani, fall between his feet after the Nisoor Square massacre in Baghdad, where 17 were murdered and over 20 wounded by US-employed Blackwater mercenaries in 2007.[4]
  • The thousands of civilian residents of Fallujah, Iraq, who suffered through two US-led assaults in 2004 that included shelling with white phosporous.  The November 2004 assault was preceded by eight weeks of aerial bombardment, during which civilians were not allowed to leave the city.[5]
  • The man in the picture which shows US smart bombs aren’t as smart as our leaders would have us think.

image

A Young Girl is an Innocent Victim of US bombing of Basra, Iraq 2003 During the Bush administration

Lessening Violence in the Future…Except Overseas

“So yes, we must examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.” -  President Obama, January 12, 2011 eulogy for Tucson victims [6]

In the first two years of the Obama (D) administration, the US government increased missile attacks in Pakistan.  According to a Pakistani group monitoring news reports of missile attacks (pdf), over 100 US missile attacks in Pakistan in 2010 targeted “militants,” but killed over 900 civilians.[7]  According to Daniel Byman, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, for every “militant” killed, “10 or so civilians also died.”[8]

While our political leaders mouth words eschewing violence, their audience—the American people—may have missed the following news stories where our political leaders’ actions indicate a different philosophy in Afghanistan and Pakistan:

  • On December 17, 2010, US missiles killed 54 people in northwest Pakistan according to Pakistani officials.  “US officials do not acknowledge firing the missiles, much less comment on whom they are targeting. It is impossible to independently report on the aftermath of the attacks because outsiders are not allowed to visit the tribal regions. Human rights groups say there are significant numbers of civilian casualties in the attacks.”[9]
  • On December 27, 2010, US missiles killed 25 people and injured four in Pakistan.[10]
  • On January 12, 2011, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) commented on Afghanistan: "As difficult as it may be to accept, we must prepare ourselves for more violence and more casualties in coming months.”[11]
  • On January 21, 2011, “thousands of tribesmen marched in Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal region on Friday against the U.S. drone strikes, which they said killed innocent people.”[12]
  • On January 23, 2011, US missiles killed six more people in Pakistan.[13]

The US is not at war with Pakistan, but the CIA regularly launches drone missiles to kill militants in that nation.  How does bombing Pakistan “challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future” as the President eulogized in Tucson? 

Increasing the Prospects for Future Violence

“Our overarching goal remains the same: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qa’ida in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.” - President Obama, West Point, December 1, 2009[14]

According to the White House, US policy in the region is supposed to keep al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, where the US government estimates there to be 50-100 al Qaeda operatives of an estimated total of 500 in the AfPak region.[15][16]  But the US government acknowledges none of this violence in Pakistan. 

In Pakistan, where there is no declared war, over 2000 are estimated to have been killed by US drones since 2006.  Wikileaks leaked US  embassy cables  showing the Pakistani government is complicit in the US drone attacks, and that the US military is targeting opponents of the Pakistani government—not al Qaeda.[17]

The current administration is using violence in a place it has no lawful right to do so, targeting people other than al Qaeda—its stated goal in the region, and is killing civilians in the process. 

Remember: Violence is Not the Answer

American politicians tell us that violence is not the answer.  Is this some new understanding they have derived from the tragedy in Tucson?

Pakistanis, Iraqis, Afghans, and Yemenis caught between domestic terrorists and US government invaders will be glad to hear the news.

__________________________________

[1] “Palin Joins Debate on Heated Speech With Words That Stir New Controversy,” By JEFF ZELENY and MICHAEL D. SHEAR, NY Times, Jan 12, 2011, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/us/13palin.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24 on Jan 13, 2011).

[2] “Ex-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin rips President Obama on budget, war on terror at Tea Party Convention,” BY Tina Moore, DAILY NEWS, Feb 7, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/02/07/2010-02-07_sarah_thunders_during_tea_party.html on Jan 29, 2011).

[3] “Dem planning bill that would outlaw threats to lawmakers,” By Peter Schroeder, The Hill, 01/09/11, (Accessed at http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/136895-dem-planning-bill-that-would-outlaw-threatening-lawmakers on Jan 24, 2011).

What many in the mob apparently do not realize is that in our democracy, where we all have “equal” rights, some are more equal than others, as Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.

[4] “Video and Transcript: EXCLUSIVE...Blackwater’s Youngest Victim: Father of 9-Year-Old Killed in Nisoor Square Gives Most Detailed Account of Massacre to Date,” (Accessed at http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/29/exclusiveblackwaters_youngest_victim_father_of_9 on Jan 29, 2011).

[5] “A name that lives in infamy,” Mike Marqusee, The Guardian, 10 November 2005, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/nov/10/usa.iraq on Jan 29, 2011).

This describes the April 2004 seige:

“EXCLUSIVE: Al Jazeera Reporters Give Bloody First Hand Account of April ’04 U.S. Siege of Fallujah,” Democracy Now, Feb 22, 2006, (Accessed at http://www.democracynow.org/2006/2/22/exclusive_al_jazeera_reporters_give_bloody on Jan 29, 2011).

[6] “Obama’s Remarks in Tucson,” NY Times, Jan 12, 2011, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/us/politics/13obama-text.html?pagewanted=all on Jan 13, 2011).

[7] “2010, The Year of Assassination by Drones,” Conflict Monitoring Center, Jan 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan, (Accessed at http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com/download/DronesAnnualReport.pdf on Jan 27, 2011).

[8] “Do Targeted Killings Work?” Brookings, Daniel L. Byman, July 14, 2009, (Accessed at http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0714_targeted_killings_byman.aspx on Jan 27, 2011).

[9] “US missiles kill 54 in Pakistan,” By Riaz Khan, AP, Dec 17, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/us-missiles-kill-54-in-pakistan-2163393.html on Jan 24, 2011).

[10] “Missile strikes inside Pakistan kill 25 suspected insurgents,” By Zulfiqar Ali and Laura King, LA Times, Dec 28, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pakistan-drone-strike-20101228,0,5698217.story on Jan 26, 2011).

[11] “US military chief Mike Mullen in Afghan warning,” Jan 13, 2011, BBC News, (Accessed at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12178913 on Jan 27, 2011).

[12] “Thousands demonstrate against U.S. drone strikes,” Xinhua, Xiong Tong, Jan 21, 2011, (Accessed at http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-01/21/c_13701881.htm on Jan 26, 2011).

[13] “Suspected US Drone Strikes Kills 6 in NW Pakistan,” Voice of America, Jan 23, 2011, (Accessed at http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Suspected-US-Drone-Strikes-Kills-6-in-NW-Pakistan-114444804.html Jan 26, 2011).

[14] “Overview of the Afghanistan and Pakistan Annual Review,” The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Dec 16, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/12/16/overview-afghanistan-and-pakistan-annual-review on Jan 25, 2011).

[15] “New Estimate of Strength of Al Qaeda Is Offered,” By DAVID E. SANGER and MARK MAZZETTI, NY Times, June 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/world/asia/01qaeda.html?_r=1 on Dec 7, 2010).

[16] “President Obama's Secret: Only 100 al Qaeda Now in Afghanistan,” By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS, ABC News, Dec. 2, 2009, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/president-obamas-secret-100-al-qaeda-now-afghanistan/story?id=9227861 on Dec 7, 2010).

[17] “US embassy cables: Pakistan backs US drone attacks on tribal areas,” Guardian, Nov 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/167125 on Jan 27, 2011).

The leaked cable is from Aug 23, 2008.  PM is Prime Minister Gilani, and Malik is Interior Minister Rehman Malik.  The relevant paragraph, after discussions of cooperation between the US and Pakistani governments where the US supplies upgrades to Pakistani F-16 fighter jets in return for Pakistani government protection of former US puppet Musharaff after his impeachment:

11. (C) Malik suggested we hold off alleged Predator attacks until after the Bajaur operation. The PM brushed aside Rehman,s remarks and said "I don’t care if they do it as long as they get the right people. We’ll protest in the National Assembly and then ignore it." (Note: The strike has been front page news, but the media is reporting that the targets were nests of Arab fighters.)

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Doublethink (Part 8)

“The result of this classification mania is the division of the public into two distinct groups: those who are privy to the actual conduct of American policy, but are forbidden to write or talk about it, and the uninformed public, which becomes easy prey for the official lies exposed in the WikiLeaks documents…” – David Samuels in the Atlantic

Transparency and Accountability

"Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing." –President Obama (D)[1]

In a world of Doublethink, we’re conditioned to admire the emperor’s new clothes.  In America, unlike in the children's fairy tale, if someone dares to shout that the emperor really is naked, the response isn’t laughter.  Instead, cries of treason and calls for prosecutions and executions in the name of national security fill the airwaves.

Transparency promotes accountability, but in the national security state there is no transparency.  The Obama administration, like each of its predecessors, never intended an open administration for citizens.  Public ignorance of government operations keeps our rulers in power.  Our ignorance is their strength. 

By leaking classified US government documents, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, in cooperation with various news organizations, seem to have shined some revealing light on US government operations.[2][3]  Instead of a US government-sponsored “transparency,” WikiLeaks has promoted the kind of transparency which President Obama says “provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.”

Only The Government May Spill Blood 

“Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen[4]

According to US government estimates, one hundred thousand US troops oppose, at most, 100 al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan.[5][6]  That’s one thousand US soldiers (not counting mercenaries) for each al Qaeda member.  Most of the killings in the war in Afghanistan are not of al Qaeda members—the purported reason for the war.  Most of the Afghan family blood spilled, for which the chairman of the JCS professes so much concern (video), is not from those 100 al Qaeda members, either. 

On April 5, 2010, via WikiLeaks, Julian Assange dared to release secret footage from 2007 of  US helicopters killing more than 12 Iraqi civilians, including children.  The cavalier attitude of the US forces shown in that video, as they treated the killings like a video game, spoke volumes of the banality of evil.  Assange has since released an additional several hundred thousand classified US documents on the Afghan war, the Iraq war, and US diplomatic cables.

Assange has enraged those who worship the state by daring to reveal US government treachery.  Wearing a chest full of decorations, high priest of the national security state and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen warned Assange not to leak secrets that could spill the blood of soldiers who willingly participate in the war.  The admiral thinks only the state has the right to sacrifice individuals on the altar of the state.

Many Americans are offended by Assange—he upsets their worship of the state as god.  The US government hates Assange—his revelations end the ignorance that is its strength.

Naked Apes

"Back in the old days when men were men and countries were countries, this guy would die of lead poisoning from a bullet in the brain..." – Rush Limbaugh, “limited-government” advocate[7]

Like the scene in “2001 A Space Odyssey” (4:30 into this video) where a collection of apes mimic their leader by clubbing an already fallen, harmless opponent, others joined in, bashing Assange:

  • Rush Limbaugh, a pretend, limited-government conservative, called Assange names before calling for his assassination.  Limbaugh described Assange as a sissy: “No, I just don't like the guy in general principles.  I don't like the name. I don't like the way he looks. I don't like the way he sounds. He's a sissy; he's a waif, purely and simply an Internet creation.”  Limbaugh then hoped for Assange’s life to be wrecked: “…I asked them two questions: ‘Is there a way that it can be arranged that the identity of Julian Assange could be stolen and then with that identity we wreck his life?’"
  • Nouvelle, pretend,  limited-government conservative Sarah Palin asked “Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?”[8]
  • Did pretend, limited-government conservative Senator Jon Kyl (R) suggest making an ex post facto law to target Assange?  According to Kyl: "Ben Cardin and I are going to be working on some legislation I think that would enable us to more broadly be able to charge people even if they’re not handing over information to an enemy, for example."
  • Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) called Assange a “high-tech terrorist.”
  • Senator Dianne Feinstein (D) wants Assange prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act, ignoring the First Amendment to the US Constitution as she has ignored the rest of the Constitution throughout her career.
  • Referring to a US government legal creation to avoid the Geneva conventions, neo-conservative Newt Gingrich said Assange “should be treated as an enemy combatant.”

Former candidate for the R-presidential nomination, Mike Huckabee, clamored for the blood of the source of the leaks (video).

Avert Your Gaze as the Naked Emperor Passes

“Because they don't lie in diplomatic cables. The odds are that what we're getting here is the raw truth.” – Rush Limbaugh while decrying “evil Julian Assange” who dared give Americans the raw truth.

The US government, embarrassed by the leaks, has strong-armed the Domain Name Server for WikiLeaks, Amazon, and Paypal in an effort to cut off the funding and operation of WikiLeaks (see list of WikiLeaks mirrors).  The US government warned federal employees not to read WikiLeaks.[9]  Columbia University warned students that they endanger future job prospects if they download the publicly available material.[10]  Raytheon, as did other military contractors, warned employees:

"U.S. Government agencies are releasing guidance to contractors. Reviewing information on WikiLeaks or subsequent disclosures is strictly prohibited. As a contractor to the Federal Government, this means ... personnel are prohibited from accessing WikiLeaks whether on company-issued or on personal equipment."[11]

The emperor has commanded that people must pretend that the emperor’s new clothes are marvelous, when all the world should know: “The emperor has no clothes.”

President Obama (D) and his open administration (Doublethink translation—he lied to you, he didn’t close Guantanamo, he didn’t end the war in Iraq, and he doesn’t have an open administration) threaten to prosecute Assange:

“Published reports suggest that a joint Justice Department-Pentagon team of investigators is exploring the possibility of charging Assange under the Espionage Act, which could lead to decades in jail. "This is not saber-rattling," said Attorney General Eric Holder, commenting on the possibility that Assange will be prosecuted by the government.”[12]

The US government pressured other countries to expel Assange:

“…American ambassador to Switzerland, Donald S. Beyer Jr., responded to signs that Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks might seek refuge in that country, warning in the weekly magazine NZZ am Sonntag that the Swiss ‘should very carefully consider whether to provide shelter to someone who is on the run from the law.’”[13][14]

On December 7, 2010, Assange appeared before a magistrate in London and faced extradition to Sweden for rape charges.  He is being held without bail.  According to Swedish authorities, the charges had nothing to do with the WikiLeaks website.[15][16]

On the same day Assange was jailed, the US Department of State released a press statement about hosting a planned World Press Freedom Day event May 1-3, 2011 in Washington, D.C.:

“We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.”[17]

The US government mocks us by pretending to support the free flow of information while the government:

  • Forces businesses to refuse service to those who disagree with it
  • Warns employees and contractors not to read the leaked information on company or personal equipment
  • Threatens students not to read the leaked information at the price of future job prospects
  • Threatens nations harboring individuals who reveal the dirty laundry of the US government
  • Threatens the individuals who reveal classified information—information classified only because it embarrasses the US government.

Classified Documents No Longer Hidden From Our Prying Eyes

“The prying eyes that caused Dulles most concern belonged not to the president, Congress, or the press—all of whom, if for different reasons, tended to defer to the CIA—but to the American people.” – Andrew Bacevich describes the formation of the CIA–one-third of the US national security state[18]

Assange has not given in to the threats of prosecution or assassination.[19]  WikiLeaks distributed an encrypted “insurance file”  over the internet containing more than 250,000 US diplomatic cables.[20]  In a news conference, Assange warned that if he is imprisoned or killed, “the key parts will be released automatically.”[21]

In a world of Doublethink, our ignorance is the government’s strength.  Releasing information to end that ignorance gives power back to the people.

Why else would Assange be such a danger to the state?

________________________________________

[1] “Transparency and Open Government,” Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, (Accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/ on Dec 7, 2010).

[2] “Respected media outlets collaborate with WikiLeaks,” AP News, Dec 3, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0Vruimmvy8loGklsz34QyGDKMDA?docId=120c7bf5d3a34dbaadf1280dace2e456 on Dec 7, 2010).

[3] “WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Tells TIME: Hillary Clinton 'Should Resign',” By Howard Chua-Eoan, Time, Nov. 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2033771,00.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[4] “Gates Calls on FBI to Join Leak Investigation,” By Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service, July 29, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.jcs.mil/newsarticle.aspx?ID=341 on Dec 7, 2010).

[5] “New Estimate of Strength of Al Qaeda Is Offered,” By DAVID E. SANGER and MARK MAZZETTI, NY Times, June 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/world/asia/01qaeda.html?_r=1 on Dec 7, 2010).

[6] “President Obama's Secret: Only 100 al Qaeda Now in Afghanistan,” By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS, ABC News, Dec. 2, 2009, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/president-obamas-secret-100-al-qaeda-now-afghanistan/story?id=9227861 on Dec 7, 2010).

[7] “Rush Analyzes the WikiLeaks Waif,” Nov 29, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_112910/content/01125107.guest.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[8] “Exclusive: Sarah Palin Under Cyber-Attack from Wikileaks Supporters in 'Operation Payback'*,” Jake Tapper, ABC News, Dec 8, 2010, (Accessed at http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/12/exclusive-palin-under-cyber-attack-from-wikileaks-supporters-in-operation-payback.html on Dec 9, 2010).

“’No wonder others are keeping silent about Assange's antics,’ Palin emailed ABC News. ‘This is what happens when you exercise the First Amendment and speak against his sick, un-American espionage efforts.’”

Palin is a mistress of Doublethink.  She cries about her First Amendment rights, but had no problem seeing them denied to Australian Assange.

[9] “Don’t Look, Don’t Read: Government Warns Its Workers Away From WikiLeaks Documents,” By ERIC LIPTON, NY Times, December 4, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/world/05restrict.html?ref=world on Dec 6, 2010).

[10] “Columbia students told job prospects harmed if they access WikiLeaks cables,” Ewen MacAskill, guardian.co.uk, 5 December 2010, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/05/columbia-students-wikileaks-cables on Dec 6, 2010).

[11] “Raytheon forbids employees to access WikiLeaks website,” By Muhammed El-Hasan, Daily Breeze, 12/03/2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailybreeze.com/latestnews/ci_16762048?source=email on Dec 6, 2010).

[12] “The Shameful Attacks on Julian Assange,” Dec 3 2010, David Samuels, The Atlantic, (Accessed at http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/12/the-shameful-attacks-on-julian-assange/67440/ on Dec 6, 2010).

If Obama has an open administration, it is only due to Assange:

“For his part, Assange has not been shy about expressing his contempt for the failure of traditional reporting to inform the public, and his belief in the utility of his own methods. ‘How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined?’ he told The Sydney Morning Herald. ‘It's disgraceful.’"

[13] “Hundreds of WikiLeaks Mirror Sites Appear,” By RAVI SOMAIYA, NY Times, December 5, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/world/europe/06wiki.html?hp on Dec 5, 2010).

[14] “Homeland Security seizes domain names,” By Sara Jerome, The Hill, 11/26/10, (Accessed at http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/130763-homeland-security-dept-seizes-domain-names- on Dec 7, 2010).

Each time the government arrogates power to protect people from some abuse, they also gain power to inflict their own abuse.  This is part of Freedom is Slavery double-thinking.

[15] “The Wikileaks sex files: How two one-night stands sparked a worldwide hunt for Julian Assange,” By Richard Pendlebury, 7th December 2010, Daily Mail, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html?ito=feeds-newsxml on Dec 7, 2010).

[16] “Assange Vows To Fight On After Bail Refusal,” Alison Chung and Richard Williams, Sky News Online, Dec 07, 2010, (Accessed at http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Julian-Assange-WikiLeaks-Founder-Meets-Police-In-Britain-Over-Sexual-Assault-Claims-In-Sweden/Article/201012115849036?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15849036_Julian_Assange%3A_WikiLeaks_Founder_Meets_Police_In_Britain_Over_Sexual_Assault_Claims_In_Sweden on Dec 7, 2010).

[17] “U.S. to Host World Press Freedom Day in 2011,” US Department of State Press Statement, Philip J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs, Washington, DC, Dec 7, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm on Dec 7, 2010).

[18] Washington Rules, Andrew Bacevich, Holt and Company, NY, NY, 2010, p. 42.

[19] “WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange 'will release poison pill of damaging secrets if killed or arrested',” By Ian Drury, 6th December 2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1335888/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-release-damaging-secrets-killed-arrested.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[20] “WikiLeaks Ready to Release Giant 'Insurance' File if Shut Down,” Foxnews, Dec 05, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/05/wikileaks-ready-release-massive-insurance-file-shut/ on Dec 7, 2010).

[21] “WikiLeaks Founder Warns About More Dispatches,” By SCOTT SHANE, NY Times, Dec 6, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/world/europe/07assange.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a22 on Dec 7, 2010).