The Sledge – Julian Assange, Douchebag

Filed in Other by on October 15, 2012

 

I don't know whether Julian is the victim of a political conspiracy, or just a dud root.”  – anonymous Making the Nut reader

As usual, there is much wisdom to be found in anonymous comments on the internet. Is Julian Assange being oppressed by the juggernaut of American political power? Or, is he a socially inept, narcissistic, sexual deviant?

Julian Assange has always struck me, in appearance and temperament, as a villain from a bond film. Not the main villain – more of the albino sidekick to the main villain. The sort of sidekick that Bond would shoot with a pistol in the belly about three quarters of the way through the film and quip, “what’s wrong Julian? I thought you liked leaks.”

Good old Bond.  

Anyway, appearance aside, there are far more substantial problems with our Julian that go to the very core of his credibility. It seems to me one of the great ironies of Assange is that he doesn’t particularly appear to care about freedom of speech or information. I say this because while he has been enthusiastic about promoting leaks against the United States, he’s kept conspicuously silent about some of the great censors and suppressors of information of our time.

Julian has, for example, been curiously silent about that giant organized crime syndicate with an aversion to the rights of journalists (more commonly known as ‘Russia’). In a pointed turn of phrase, in one of those American cables leaked by Wikileaks, Russia is described as a "virtual mafia state". Yet Julian Assange seems to have anointed himself the sidekick of the Tony Soprano of world leaders, President Vladimir Putin.  

And it is easy to see why. When Assange was being held in the UK, Vladimir Putin condemned Assange's detention as "undemocratic.” A source within the office of President suggested that Assange be nominated for a Nobel Prize. He’s also been given a role as an interviewer for Russia Today – a Kremlin mouthpiece. In return, Julian dry humps Putin’s leg (one would hope, with Putin’s consent) and remains conspicuously quiet on the high number of deaths and disappearances of reporters in Russia. Indeed, Russia is one of the most dangerous countries in the world for journalists.

Then of course, in order to avoid extradition to Sweden, Assange absconded from bail and ended up in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Ecuador: another regime with a poor record for freedom of information and of the press. According to José Miguel Vivanco, director of Human Rights Watch's Americas division, “I think this is ironic that you have a journalist, or an activist, seeking political asylum from a government that has – after Cuba – the poorest record of free speech in the region, and the practice of persecuting local journalists when the government is upset by their opinions or their research." Earlier this year, Ecuadorian police shut down six radio broadcasters and two TV stations in two weeks.

This is not a criticism of Wikileaks (well, it is, but stay with with me for a moment). The world needs Wikileaks, and kudos must be given to Assange for being one of the main players in setting it up. With so much information sloshing around the world and the traditional media increasingly unable to keep up, there needs to be a trusted global source that whistle blowers are willing to turn to. With so many regimes trying to lock down information, combined with so many different ways to expose it – whether through handheld cameras or recording devices in phones, whether it be the ‘viral’ nature of social media, or the fact that the world is so much more interconnected – if Wikileaks didn’t exist, someone would need to invent it.

Sure, America makes some pretty horrific mistakes and if there are truths about Afghanistan and Iraq that need to come out, we should welcome Wikileaks making that so. But the thing about the US is this: for all its flaws, it still has a free press. Many of the countries that Wikileaks appears unwilling to criticise do not.

But right now, I don’t care about any of these arguments. What I care about is this: whether Julian Assange has sexually assaulted those two Swedish women. That’s the crux of the issue. Because if he has, and the allegations are true, then this self-serving little cumquat needs to go to prison.

In the debate about Assange it has been a shame to see individuals who call themselves progressive – who one would think would be at the forefront of advocating women’s equality – so easily reduced to smears and innuendo against the women who are making the accusations against Assange. Naomi Wolf, a putative feminist, has called into question the motivation of the women making the accusation. She said the sexual assault allegations were about ‘hurt feelings’ and not genuine sexual assault, and accused the Swedish authorities of being the ‘dating police’. She also suggests the Swedish legal system is corrupt, insofar as the allegations are merely a pretext for getting Assange into US custody.

Let’s be clear. Julian Assange is being accused of a serious offence. He is accused of having sex with these two women without a condom, after both had asked that he use protection. One of the women was actually sleeping when (it is alleged) she awoke to Assange having sex with her. Both of the women went to get tested for HIV / AIDS afterwards.

During hearings in the UK, twice the English courts ruled clearly that the allegations against Assange would also constitute rape under English law. This isn’t hurt feelings. This isn’t about being a dud root. The accusations are serious. Before impugning the integrity of these women, Naomi Wolf needs to give herself an uppercut and think again on whether there is a better way to come to Assange’s defence.

Of course, Assange may well prove to be the victim of false accusations, or an overzealous Swedish justice system, or any number of plausible alternatives. But the point is we don’t know.

The point is the man has gone through more appeals in England than the rest of us could expect and had more money spent on his legal bills than the average person could imagine. He’s had a fair crack. The fact is that the credible British justice system has said he has a case to answer.

As to Assange’s claims that this is an American conspiracy to send him to Sweden so the pliant Swedish authorities will hand him over – well, as a number of commentators have noted, Sweden – like Ecuador – does not permit political extradition. He could as easily be extradited to the US from the UK.

On the other hand, let’s not pretend that the intentions of the US are always pure. They have had more than a few shockers in their time.  Bad intentions from a country that tried to kill Castro by putting poison in his milkshake can be immediately discounted (not making that up, the yanks really tried this one). And a few Tea Party crazies have called for Assange to be assassinated – former Republican Presidential nominee Mike Huckabee has said as much, and Sarah Palin said he should be “hunted down like Osama Bin Laden.”

So yes, there is something in the argument that says that Australia has to intervene to make sure he doesn’t end up being sent to the US to rot in a spiderhole somewhere. I agree with that. He’s our Julian after all. But unless one assumes that the Government of Sweden is somehow conspiring with the US to extradite Assange, this doesn’t seem a likely outcome.  

Guilty or not, Assange is a narcissist who increasingly seems detached from reality. He dines with demagogues and constantly displays double standards about freedom of information. He’s steadily undermining the credibility of Wikileaks. He’s a douche. It’s time to face the music buddy. 

Image:

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. SemiiPro says:

    It is a shame that a noble movement such as holding people publicly accountable for deadly decisions that are made in secret that groups such as ‘hackers’ are engaged in is now intertwined with the narcissist Assange.

    I find it nearly as offensive as Shane Warne’s head.

  2. Keyboard Rambo says:

    I was ambivalent about JA until his rockstar appearance at the Ecuadorian Embassy. Now I'm pretty convinced he suffers from a god-complex.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Tim you would believe almost any spin thrown your way wouldnt you?  Sweden is bound to not extradite only in cases of the death penalty as are all EU nations. This wouldnt stop them extraditing Assange should he only face the rest of his natural life behind bars.

    Lets get this right , the man had consentual sex with 2 woman. With any of the other allegations do you think for one moment that you , I or anyone else would be extradited for any of this ? of course not . A rhetorical question – Why is Assange being hounded?  

    You now attempt to blame the man for an unproven crime and condemn his morals , values and ethics for attempting to avoid going to prison for the rest of his life. At least the man had the balls to report and bring to light the underhanded way in which our governements have been conducting world affairs in our name , he also blew the lid of a few politicians being nothing short of bribed by wealthy individuals with agendas. Perhaps the mainstream sources of "news" are frustrated or jealous of the man for doing something the wouldnt , couldnt or just didnt have the balls to do themselves. Freedom of press , transparency in our sources of information and the way in which it is delivered is of the utmost importance to any society Mr Napper. Bravo Assange! Bravo! 

     

     

    • Avoozl says:

      [Snip. Edited by management – MTN can be held responsible for defamatory comments]

      You make a good point about Assange's inequitable focus on the unaccountability of the American government without regard to many similar (and frequently worse) problems in other countries such as Russia and Ecuador. However, I think its quite unfortunate that you didn't extend your article's scope to comment more on how cowardly, uncaring and gutless Julia Gillard and the Australian Labor Party have been. I was extremely disapointed by John Howard's lack of courage in preventing the persecution of David Hicks and Julia Gillard has recently shown from her decision to completely ignore  Assange (and her hypocritical defence, of Peter Slipper's actions hasn't helped her cause either) that she's really only interested in herself and getting Labor Party votes and has absolutely no integrity or values whatsoever.

      I'll stick my neck out on the chopping block and risk being labeled a misogynyst but I think it's time that Old Ms Julia "grew a pair" and started sticking up for Australian values rather than worrying so much about her petty political games.

      • Anonymous says:

        Avaaz, while you make a good argument that Assange can be both oppressed and socially and sexually inept at the same time, you've totally missed the point.  Likeable?  Who cares?  The man is a possibly a criminal and is deliberately undermining his own juggernaut to avoid having to face his charges.

        And the PM's anatomy doesn't have anything to do with it either.  You can be sure that the government's done everything short of engaging in supra-legal efforts to deal with Assange.  At the very least, he won't have been completely ignored.  Assange is doing a very good job of making himself very hard to help in a diplomatic sense.

  4. SemiiPro says:

    Nice one, Tim.  That pretty much sums 'er all up.  The double standards he employs when 'interviewing' people who actively restrict free-speech is particularly galling.  Perhaps being hypocritical is a natural human state, but he's takikng the piss, yeah?

    • Tim Napper says:

      Maybe Assange has started to believe his own hype. Maybe the pressure he's been under (which must be enourmous) has got to him. But it seems to me he's losing supporters every day. And I think that's probably deserved.