Summary: The Affair Assange provides a mirror in which we can see ourselves and our institutions. It’s not a pretty picture. Today we look at our journalists. Their reaction to the opportunity provided by WikiLeaks, the competition provided by WikiLeaks, and the challenge to their triple loyalties (to us, to their guild, and to their careers).
And when he remembered his old life he would congratulate himself on the change, and pity those still in the cave. Those in the cave confer honors among themselves on those who could best observe the passing shadows, identify their sequence; and guess which came next. Would he care for such glories? Or would he say with Homer, “Better to be the servant of a poor master and to endure anything, rather than think as they do and live like them.”
Imagine this man taken suddenly out of the sun and replaced in his former chains. It would take time for him to be re-accustomed to the shadows. His fellow prisoners would say it was better not to try to ascend; and if he tried to loose another and lead him to the light, they would catch him and put him to death.
— Chapter 2 of The Republic by Plato
Contents
- Introduction
- About Journalists
- Some are credulous, with their minds blinkered
- Some see the world more clearly
- For more information
- Other posts about the affair Assange
(1) Introduction
The reaction of US journalists to the Affair Assange tells us much about the decay of the news media. Their jealousy, as Assange reminds them what a real journalist does. Their overriding obedience to the government, lining up on command like a marching band to play the designated tune. Their dying print business, as people grow reluctant to pay for government, corporate, and NGO press releases. And above all, their role as blinkers for America’s vision — so that we see no heterodox insights.
We can only guess at what’s transformed our journalists from a professional guild that boldly covered the Vietnam War, defied the government to publish the Pentagon Papers, and broke the Watergate burglary and coverup — to become the lap-dogs of our ruling elites. I suspect it’s just good sense.
.
A strong people get good leaders and journalists. A weak, foolish people become led by some form of oligarchy (for us, a plutocracy), centered on a court (for us Washington, our Versailles-on-the-Potomac). Our best and brightest respond to these changed incentives by becoming courtiers. Life is short, and smart people take the fast smooth road to worldly success.
(2) A clear look at Journalists
The oddly-apt portrayal is from here.
Let’s start with this analysis from one of America’s most incisive reporters and analysts (who should be at the top of every citizen’s reading list): “The bizarre, unhealthy, blinding media contempt for Julian Assange“, Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian, 22 August 2012 — Excerpt:
{L}et us pause to reflect on a truly amazing and revealing fact, one that calls for formal study in several academic fields of discipline. Is it not remarkable that one of the very few individuals over the past decade to risk his welfare, liberty and even life to meaningfully challenge the secrecy regime on which the American national security state (and those of its obedient allies) depends just so happens to have become – long before he sought asylum from Ecuador – the most intensely and personally despised figure among the American and British media class.
… When it comes to the American media, I’ve long noted this revealing paradox. The person who (along with whomever is the heroic leaker) enabled “more scoops in a year than most journalists could imagine in a lifetime” – and who was quickly branded an enemy by the Pentagon and a terrorist by high U.S. officials – is the most hated figure among establishment journalists, even though they are ostensibly devoted to precisely these values of transparency and exposing serious government wrongdoing. (This transparency was imposed not only on the US and its allies, but also some of the most oppressive regimes in the Arab world).
… Many journalists (and liberals) like to wear the costume of outsider-insurgent, but are, at their core, devoted institutionalists, faithful believers in the goodness of their society’s power centers, and thus resent those (like Assange) who actually and deliberately place themselves outside of it. By putting his own liberty and security at risk to oppose the world’s most powerful factions, Assange has clearly demonstrated what happens to real adversarial dissidents and insurgents – they’re persecuted, demonized, and threatened, not befriended by and invited to parties within the halls of imperial power – and he thus causes many journalists to stand revealed as posers, servants to power, and courtiers.
… nothing triggers their rage like fundamental critiques of, and especially meaningful opposition to, the institutions of power to which they are unfailingly loyal.
(3) Some are credulous, with their minds blinkered
The Matrix is a system you know, that system is our enemy. When you are inside, look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters the very minds of the people we are trying to save. But till we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. We have to understand that most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And most of them are so nerd, so, hopelessly dependent upon this system that they would fight to protect it.
— Morpheus talking about America in The Matrix
Supporting players for the tragic comedy that is early 21st century America are those who comment and analyze the news — part of the larger journalism community (ie, providing content, but paid by others). Their primary role in the Affair Assange is vehemently denying the obvious, providing distractions from the events, and generally throwing dirt in the air. There are a thousand and one possible citations for this; here is one example from one of our best. Someone who has conducted a bombardment of misinformation against Assange using his Twitter feed. This is a glaring example, but he’s provided many others equally or more so.
Just out of curiosity, is there any evidence that Assange would be extradited to the US if he went to Sweden?
— Michael Cohen @speechboy71
(4) Some see the world more clearly
Fortunately some people can see these events more clearly. Here we look at one example, and marshal supporting data.
(a) Such as this, from “Don’t lose sight of why the US is out to get Julian Assange“, Seumas Milne (Assoc Editor), The Guardian, 21 August 2012 — “Ecuador is pressing for a deal that offers justice to Assange’s accusers – and essential protection for whistleblowers.”
Can anyone seriously believe the dispute would have gone global, or that the British government would have made its asinine threat to suspend the Ecuadorean embassy’s diplomatic status and enter it by force, or that scores of police would have surrounded the building, swarming up and down the fire escape and guarding every window, if it was all about one man wanted for questioning over sex crime allegations in Stockholm?
… The US interest in deterring others from following the WikiLeaks path is obvious. And it would be bizarre to expect a state which over the past decade has kidnapped, tortured and illegally incarcerated its enemies, real or imagined, on a global scale – and continues to do so under President Barack Obama – to walk away from what Hillary Clinton described as an “attack on the international community”. In the meantime, the US authorities are presumably banking on seeing Assange further discredited in Sweden.
(b) Milne refers to a large body of evidence. Such as the clear intent stated in “Wikileaks.org — An Online Reference to Foreign Intelligence Services, Insurgents, or Terrorist Groups?“, Army Counterintelligence Center, 18 March 2008. The report elaborates this “Key Judgement” in fine detail, much of which has now so fortuitously happened.
Web sites such as Wikileaks.org use trust as a center of gravity by protecting the anonymity and identity of the insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers. The identification, exposure, termination of employment, criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers could potentially damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others considering similar actions from using the Wikileaks.org Web site.
(c) Evidence from a source close to the US government: the private intelligence organization Stratfor. WikiLeaks published the The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails stolen from Stratfor. Some of its employees are from the US intelligence community, share its views and biases, and gain information from it. Many of these discuss Assange (collected here).
Chris Farnham to George Friedman, 6 December 2010 (red emphasis added):
Is it possible to revoke some one’s citizenship on the grounds of them being a total dickhead? I don’t care about the other leaks but the ones he has made that potentially damage Australian interests upset me. If I thought I could switch this dickhead off without getting done I don’t think I’d have too much of a problem.
BTW, close family friend in Sweden who knows the girl that is pressing charges tells me that there is absolutely nothing behind it other than prosecutors that are looking to make a name for themselves. My friend speaks rather disparagingly about the girl who is claiming molestation. I also think the whole rape thing is incorrect for if I remember correctly rape was never the charge.
Fred Burton (VP Intel, former head of State Dept counterintelligence) to his analysts, 7 December 2010:
Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorist. He’ll be eating cat food forever, unless George Soros hires him.
Fred Burton (VP Intel, former head of State Dept counterintelligence) to a secure email list, 27 January 2011
Not for Pub — We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect
(d) More evidence, from Down Under: “US targets WikiLeaks like no other organisation“, Sydney Morning Herald, 3 December 2011 — Excerpt:
{C}ables, released under freedom of information to the Herald this week, show Australian diplomats have been talking to the US Justice Department for more than a year about US criminal investigations of WikiLeaks and Mr Assange.
While the Justice Department has been reluctant to disclose details of the WikiLeaks probe, the Australian embassy in Washington reported in December 2010 that the investigation was ”unprecedented both in its scale and nature” and that media reports that a secret grand jury had been convened in Alexandria, Virginia, were ”likely true”.
… Newly released Department of Foreign Affairs documents show that on December 7 last year, the Australian embassy in Washington confirmed the US Justice Department was conducting an ”active and vigorous inquiry into whether Julian Assange can be charged under US law, most likely the 1917 Espionage Act”.
(5) For more information
(a) Excellent, recommended: “Sex, Lies and Julian Assange” on Four Corners — Investifative journalism at its best by Andrew Fowler and Wayne Harley, ABC Australia, 23 July 2012 — Both video and transcript.
(b) Assange in Sweden: The Police Protocol, Rixstep (see their About page) — Translated Testimony of the three proponents and statements by nine witnesses. I doubt anyone with an open mind can retain confidence in the charges against Assange after reading this.
(c) About Sweden’s laws and procedures for extradition:
- “The New Statesman must correct its error over Assange and extradition“, Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian, 24 August 2012 — “The claim that Swedish courts, not government, have final say on extradition is a crucial mistake that distorts the Assange case”
- Mark Klamberg finds his description of the law helping the wrong side, so he attempts to change his story: “Professer Kevin Jon Heller on Mark Klamberg“, GG Drafts, 25 August 2012
(6) Other posts about the affair Assange
(a) About this form of 4GW in the 21st century:
(b) Posts about the Julian Assange affair:
- Sad news about the CIA, 23 August 2010 – Delusional assumption about America savvy.
- The full story of the rape charges against Julian Assange of Wikileaks, a possible covert op., 27 August 2010
- Update to the WikiLeaks rape story, and why it’s important, 29 August 2010 – If a covert op, it’s working
- New and strange developments in the prosecution of Julian Assange (Wikileaks), 1 September 2010 – New but not more enlightening.
- Endgame for the affair Assange: a big win for the government, 27 September 2010
- The US government successfully smears Wikileaks, while America sleeps, 22 October 2010
- Freedom and justice, evicted from America, may have found a new home, 17 August 2012
.
