Wednesday, November 2, 2011

The silliness of those who give Julian Assange unquestioning support

Defrocked UK Ambassador Craig Murray is a staunch supporter of Julian Assange, who he presents as a victim of US Government persecution.

Oddly, neither Murray nor his supporters seem to think it reasonable to question the assumption that Assange is some kind of rebel, saint or Knight errant, fighting the system.

Thus, in response to Murray's latest blog about Assange, someone writes:
We must prepare to take on the system if it does not find in favour of Assange.

Assange strikes some people as a "narcissistic sociopath."

Assange, like Craig Murray, received the Sam Adams Award for "integrity in intelligence", from a group of retired CIA officials.

No one seems interested in discussing what intelligence work Assange is, or was, engaged in or with which intelligence service he was employed.

Assange has the unlimited financial backing of the very rich Jemima Khan (née Goldsmith) in his legal difficulties in England.

He is presently accommodated in England by well to do supporters.

In dealing with Sweden's demand for his extradition, Assange has the services of a Rothschild-connected lawyer.

Assange the whistle-blower, worked in close collaboration with the mainstream media, including the New York Times, which in turn worked with the White House, in releasing secret US diplomatic cables.

There is no way of checking the authenticity of the secret cables made public by Assange, but as Zbigniev Brzezinski pointed out, they may very well have been fed to Assange by one of the intelligence agencies:
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: But I think the most serious issues are not those which are getting the headlines right now. Who cares if Berlusconi is described as a clown. Most Italians agree with that. Who cares if Putin is described as an alpha dog? He probably is flattered by it.

The real issue is, who is feeding Wikipedia on this issue — Wiki — Wiki — WikiLeaks on this issue? They’re getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointed. …The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at home.

The silliness of the charges made against Assange in Sweden, could as well have been concocted for the purpose of gaining sympathy for Assange and painting him as a victimized opponent of "the system," than for the purpose of placing him in the hands of the US Government.

No comments:

Post a Comment