Thursday, 9 December 2010

the assange analysis: pop-star or politician? confusion or corruption?


spark up! supports wikileaks' right to freedom of expression, on principle - and not least because it has revealed the extent of:

a) united states' interference in the democratic process in nigeria (on behalf of royal dutch shell plc)

b) united states' acquiescence regarding war-crimes committed by the ugandan military

c) united states' illicit air-strikes against alleged al qaeda targets in yemen which resulted in large numbers of civilian casulaties

d) united states' and british war-crimes in iraq

e) united states' and british war-crimes in afghanistan


moreover, if our governments exercize the right to control, tax, and snoop on us, as private citizens, it follows that we, as individuals, have every right to obtain knowledge of actions taken by our states in our name. after all...it's not as if we can trust them, is it?

however...in the (rape) case of julian assange versus the state of sweden, we must be clear that the defendant and his accusers are all acting as individuals, and that this is a personal matter - yet it appears that the defining lines between the state and the individual have become unhealthily blurred.

i am convinced that the defence team for mr assange (the founder of wikileaks) has made a serious miscalculation in crying 'political' (ie state), given that the case has arisen from extremely personal incidents involving individuals - if mr assange believes that this is a 'political' prosecution, then he must therefore believe that he himself is a political figure with political power akin to the power invested in the representative of a state. the fact that the work undertaken by his organization may have political implications is irrelevant here - unless he also claims that he consented to engage in a political fuck. i appreciate that mr assange's lawyers are attempting to stave-off the strong possibility of a politically motivated extradition attempt by the united states (in relation to his actions in his capacity as the head of wikileaks), but this is a separate matter (which involves many other protagonists), and should be treated as such - lest mr assange and his team wish to be tarred by the same accusations which they level at the state prosecutors.

in essence, mr assange has got himself into some trouble with two women who may, or may not, be proven to be scorned-and-vindictive lovers cynically taking advantage of sweden's peculiarly tight sex-laws and the super-sleuth's subconscious hankering for established political status - but he must deal with this situation as a fallible human individual, and not as an irreproachable infallible all-powerful political figurehead of the type which he professes to expose and discredit through his work. julian assange is not helping his case, nor endearing himself to supporters, by threatening, in the manner of a blackmailer, to make further damaging revelations in the event that action is taken against him - surely these revelations should be made regardless of third party actions, and without further ado, that is his job, and one for which he is admired. if the united states administration seeks to take advantage of the swedish prosecution in order to extradite mr assange, it is they who will lose the political initiative - and even more political standing than they already have done.

by intimidating companies which have elected not to do business with wikileaks, operation payback (which is being conducted by the group known as anonymous) is, by association, also damaging the reputation of mr assange, not to mention the prospects of the entire wikileaks venture - for the ideology of freedom is absolutely and irreparably undermined by attempting to coerce other self-governing organizations to support one's own cause; any private sector business ultimately has the right to chose its customers - herein is enshrined the concept known as liberty - and contractual disputes must be resolved in time-honoured fashion. the companies whom anonymous is targeting do not force any individual or organization to make use of their services, and, ipso facto, it is wholly immoral to gang up against and force such companies to serve any particular individual or organization, even though one's oppressor may be doing exactly that - those who use their power to bully others in this fashion are, by definition, no better than the fascist states which they claim to wish to depose. to undermine an authoritarian state is vital, but to replace it with a totalitarian one is fatal. to replace fear with fear is revolting, to replace the ideology of fear refreshing.

so it seems that julian assange wants to be a pop-star and politician all at the same time - but he can't, because the concept of each degrades the other. he's got to choose. the politician must have impeccable integrity and avoid sleeping with anarchists - otherwise no-one will grant him power and status; the pop-star must break every rule and never sleep within the boundaries of established society - otherwise he will not garner fame and fortune. contradictorily, the famous anarchist, julian assange, has been sleeping with the social-establishment and yet desires power - and he has now landed in purgatory. personally, i think he would do better selling his secrets and becoming an outlaw-star...

...but it's a free world...

give me a capitalist enterprise any day - at least you're told what you're getting for your money...but a non-profit-making company? who knows?

20 comments:

flying squirrel squadron said...

julian assange was under the infernally intense spotlight of world media attention and pervasive political pressure, the cia must have been clocking his every move, the stress must have been absolutely incredible, he must have been on an immense high and horny as hell - had he been mingling with his regular fans, nympho groupies would have been dropping their knickers at 50 yards and taking him out with full-frontal flying splashdowns to defuse the tension...but unfortunately, in sweden, where one is apparently required to pass an honours degree in criminal law and complete a 50-page-long social-profiling questionnaire before being sufficiently qualified to contemplate slipping one's hand up a girl's skirt, things were somewhat different...and his desire for instant sexual-gratification ultimately led him to take advantage of the emotionally stiff attentions of the lutheran bourgeois bimbocracy...with tragic results...

sheila shagpile said...

03:44

apparently, they both went home and he drank a cuppa tea with the lady before ripping her clothes off...yes darling...now down in oz that would be considered highly romantic...you see darling, us girls don't usually get farther than the pub car-park before succumbing to the old trousersnake-touchdown.

gingerbread b 'n b (no hackers, no anti-capitalists, no smug free-loading aussie slags) said...

the dirty cunt ponsed off me for a whole fucking week and wanted extras too...said something about struggling for a free world...my arse he is...bugger didn't even stretch to a condom...tight little two-faced tosser...pardon my swedish

maid marianne ny said...

just checked my visa statement...strange...i don't remember ordering 20 kegs of castlemaine xxxx...?

cap'n harry locksmith said...

no julian...i really don't reckon the weather's up to it old chap...and besides...don't you think you've had enough...errr...'barbies' already...?

salty suzy said...

oh god...i remember the guy...kinky rotter had a penchant for taking his daily dose of vegemite...err...how did he put it?...mmmm..."down-under"...

spark up said...

as i outlined in the blog-post, i feel that it was rather high-handed of assange and his legal representatives to brush aside the due process of swedish law and label the prosecution as purely political - regardless of any possible political interference, or one's views as to whether this case should go to court, assange's behaviour has clearly upset two women and this fact cannot be ignored. even though they seem to have made a hash of things so far, it's up to the swedish authorities to decide whether to proceed with this matter - they may be more micro-judicial in such personal matters than other countries, but let's face it, assange was well aware of swedish cultural sensibilities and, as far as i'm aware, no-one forced him to enter their country. it's interesting to note that julian assange asked one of the complainants to pay for a train ticket because he was worried about the cia tracking him should he use his credit-card - yet surely this is just female-impressing flim-flam, as he was in sweden fulfilling a series of public engagements and it is inconceivable that the cia were not being supplied detailed information of his every move. it certainly therefore looks as if assange was taking advantage of the woman financially, and now the specifics of the physical and verbal interraction have been revealed in the guardian newspaper, his conduct towards the woman would definitely also appear to have been emotionally overbearing - none of this casts assange in a good light, and, given the politically charged atmosphere in which the whole sordid scenario is being played-out, it is a shame that the individual parties concerned cannot resolve this matter on a personal level - notwithstanding that, in light of subsequent events, a private reconciliation is probably totally out of the question.

jocelyn jack esien said...

03:05

yes spark up, no-one forced saint jules to go poncing around sweden showing off to the big-boobed blue-eyed blonde bimbos, no-one forced him to stick his wicked white willy into frigid feminists fans, and no-one forced him to hide behind his political missionary work when he got caught in possession of an unsocked cock. now it's all back-fired on him and his standing as a freedom-fighting fuckwit is about as firm as democratically induced diarrhoea the dumb man-cunt.

i do however fully support wikileaks inalienable right to publish a load of boiled-up bollocks about barbarian male bigot bastards, even the bloody black ones. god save our queen (for she hath tits).

president obombaklaart said...

i've been politically raped i 'ave

missile obama said...

04:50

oh shut-up and carry on spouting crucial conscious crap like you're paid to

the slickest sideshow on earth said...

...and meanwhile the war rages on utterly undeterred...in afghanistan...congo...somalia...

hillary clintwood said...

nuke the uk! the revolting little insurgent runts!

julius assbange said...

04:50

hey honey...i thought you wanted me to do it?

the armchair anarchist said...

there are only two possible outcomes to revolutions which involve violence: either they fail, and all the revolutionaries are slaughtered mercilessly, or they succeed, and all the establishment are slaughtered mercilessly. take your pick...but i would always recommend you do it my way...mental, give us a light spark up.

spark up said...

06:17

gladly armchair, but may i appraise readers of your omission to note that the 'revolutionaries' and the 'establishment' are one and the same controlling class engaged in a hierarchical tiff which inevitably results in millions of misguided supporters and innocent citizens being murdered in the crossfire?

sally pally from the bowling alley said...

05:53

no hun, i wanted you to do it...basically so that we could destroy the democrats, flush out the commies, and buy off all these whingeing liberal limeys, aussies, spics and other other varieties of non-american wog before launching into a brand-new arab-backed world-war against the iranians - who seem to reckon they should have the same nuclear rights as us, the star-spangled master-race. it was a cinch, sugar.

danny glover (weather god) said...

18:58

and now i've sent a snowstorm to cool all you conspiring cunts down.

exchange state fall-out said...

18:58

when, in their salad-days, whizzkids like assange and obama get themselves into bother with the law, the cia will spot them and quietly groom them from the background - deftly guiding their protégés, at arms length, either down the path of subversive, or up the ladder of offialdom, as their natures dictate. some precocious players may be 'inside the tent', and aware of their position, others, on the outside, may be oblivious, and genuinely believe themselves to be working against the establishment - but, ultimately, they are all finely carved chesspieces of the powers-that-be, hard-programmed to suppress every non-aligned talent which shows-up on their radar.

communists are go said...

20:15

although we were the original inventors of the game of chess, we in the eats now prefer to distract ourselves over strategic-exercizes where all the stones are seeded with equal value...

micky molewarp said...

judging by the activities of the anonymous hackers, the wikileaks organization has clearly relied upon the support of many left-wing anti-capitalist activists, who (using similar modus operandi to their comrades involved in the uk student-fee demonstrations) have attempted to subvert the freedom-of expression campaign for their own ends. of course, secret groupings such as anonymous are just meat-and-drink to the central intelligence agency (the united states' governmental arm of organized crime), who will routinely infiltrate and manipulate them - in this case, to cast libertarian free-speechers in the rôle of 'terrorists' who pose a threat to national security. why else would wikileaks have sat for so long on all this so-called 'hot' confidential information and taken so much trouble to conceal the identities of united states' informers? the drip-drip release of the diplomatic cables is a far cry from the searchable-database envisaged by the whistleblower himself, private manning, and suggests that there must exist either financial or political motivations...why does not wikileaks simply get on with the business of dumping the diplomatic cables on the internet as a job-lot? are they attempting to influence the next presidential election in the united states? and why have we not been privy to communications which embarrass the israeli government - yet have been treated to cables which reveal that some arab states are alledgedly against the development of nuclear weapons in iran? no wonder that observers in the middle-east are highly suspicious of wikileaks' motives. is leaking dependent upon receipt of sufficient 'donations' from interested parties - including the united states administration? surely, coming from a non-profit-making organization the leaks should not be tied to any form of negotiation - the information is effectively public property, and wikileaks claims to have 'other' separately-acquired 'poisonous' material which it can hold back and use in self-defence.