Is it wrong, or morally objectionable to bring out information that clearly brings to light the complicity of a nation? Recently Julian Assange has been made the enemy of the state by the United States of America, which means that he is now in the same caste as tyrants, killers, and other human rights violators. With pundits already calling out for his assassination back in 2010, now with the current turn of events it has become close to legal to shoot the man on sight. And if not that, then he still has a worldwide arrest warrant set by Interpol.
Julian Assange is trapped by allegations of cyber terrorism and molestation –both as flimsy in origin. In any legal matter the case should be studied and a fair trial had, and I do believe that Assange should face a court. Sadly, the political climate around him doesn’t allow for much fairness, and one can be left guessing the validity of the accusations.
Whistleblowers are seen as a nuisance by governments or businesses, so it would be expected that Julian Assange’s cause would be accepted with open arms by the big man. Julian Assange has been made into a figurehead of merciless transparency of governmental action, he has allowed the common man to find out about the hidden corruption and backroom deals with the help of individuals and organizations. This makes him and those closest to him within Wikileaks great targets when fighting against the ideal carried by freedom of information.
The governments that accept Julian Assange’s current status are making a clear statement against freedom of expression and the freedom of knowledge, both that are essential for a democratic government. This kind of inaction should be regarded with great contempt.
There were those who decided to show comradeship as the enemy of the state status was placed on Assange. There were tens of thousands of people boldly stating that they are themselves enemies of the state. Even now there still are some who keep doing that, but the fad has passed.
Call me cynical, even though the sign of e-solidarity to the speech Assange gave to the UN a few days ago is admirable to say the least, but do those statements amount to anything else except idle talk. It reminded me of the mindlessness of the people who decide to drop out of the rut and be a stone in the clockwork of some capitalistic Babylon. Yet what could one do to something like a westernized version of fatwa?
I believe one of the strongest arguments against this political insanity was within the speech addressed to the UN by Julian Assange. As he brings out quite clearly the point of Wikileak’s extreme call for transparency, he points out:
This is better than the alternative – to drift into irrelevance as the world moves on.
We must be clear here.
The United States is not the enemy.
Its government is not uniform. In some cases good people in the United States supported the forces of change. And perhaps Barack Obama personally was one of them.
But in others, and en masse, early on, it actively opposed them.
This is a matter of historical record.
And it is not fair and it is not appropriate for the President to distort that record for political gain, or for the sake of uttering fine words.
Credit should be given where it is due, but it should be withheld where it is not.
-Julian Assange’s Address to the UN on Human Rights
September 26th, 2012
It is clear, Julian Assange is not the enemy of the United States and he doesn’t do his work to attack the States. The witch hunt should end and the government should look into ways to reform their system, but perhaps this is merely idealistic to hope. But this unethical war against people who demand transparency must come to an end.
The United States government has placed freedom on the line by trying to stomp out the message of a person like Julian Assange. One shouldn’t feel comfort during his persecution. For if nothing is done and we gladly give our right to access information, then we shall find strength within ignorance.
Though most of the spotlights are on Julian Assange for now, somehow the public eye has swallowed the situation of Bradley Manning. The leak he allowed and made possible, should have caused governmental introspection. The allegations of “aiding the enemy” are nothing more than signs of the lack of self-analysis. Who are the good guys again, because I am starting to doubt they exist.
While the internet being a powerful, hypersensitive media outlet and fads controlling most of the outbursts, there are those certain issues that shouldn’t be let go due to minute’s fancy. I wouldn’t want this to feel like an obituary of transparency at a later date. That would be regrettable and beyond acceptable.