Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Leak Soup


I'm really busy at the moment but I wanted to direct you all to Cesca's damn good take on why Michael Moore's amusingly hyper-righteous posturing on Julian Assange -- namely helping to post the guy's bail -- is something that should make sane Americans at least a little queasy.

And while I'm on the subject, can we please just dust off and nuke Berkeley from orbit once and for all? It's the only way to be sure.

21 comments:

Captain Splendid said...

Bombing Berkeley? Jesus, the 60s called, they want their joke back.

It's never a bad day to punch a hippie.

Chez said...

Actually, it's never a bad day for an Aliens reference.

brite said...

Cesca writes:"Also, he wasn't arrested because of Wikileaks (that we know of). He was arrested on rape charges. Regardless of the Swedish definition of rape, they're still rape charges."
In fact, Assange has yet to be charged with any crime. Currently, the Swedish prosecutors would like to 'speak with him' regarding allegations made by two women.
It is astounding that someone can be held indefinitely in jail, without being charged with a crime, have available funds for bail and has agreed to a long list of conditions for his release and yet, he's still in jail.
I ask you Chez, if this were anyone other than Assange, wouldn't you be eager to point out that this situation reeks of bullshit?

Chez said...

Your argument is silly at face value, Brite, because you're dealing in hypotheticals. In fact, it is Assange we're talking about; he's wanted on a Swedish warrant -- an arrest warrant, or did you miss that part? -- and he's currently the guy who's splashing state secrets all over the internet, which admittedly means that the government that has him will probably cross every T and dot every I before it willingly tosses him out the front door.

You wanna defend Julian Assange, that's entirely your business. But please don't try to appeal to my logic or sense of fair-play when it comes to how you believe I should feel about him. I've made my arguments against him and what he's doing crystal clear.

slimlove said...

As someone who works in Berkeley, and used to live here as well, let me just say that even the rest of the Bay Area tends to think Berkeley is a tad ridiculous (and by "tad," we mean "completely"). When things like this happen, most of us sigh and roll our eyes and say "Oh, Berkeley." Because really, no one in a position of national power gives a shit what the Berkeley City Council thinks, and we all know it.

In short, there's a reason I now live in Oakland, high crime and all.

brite said...

OK Chez...yes I know exactly how you feel about Assange, fine with me.But Assange isn't splashing state secrets all over the internet, Wikileaks is.If governments want to start laying charges against Wikileaks and subsequently The NY Times, The UK Guardian and the other newspapers that have published exactly the same documents then they should step up to the plate, put on their big girl panties and see how that goes down.
You and I both know how convenient it is to demonize a single person, especially one as strange and uncharming as Assange, but so long as the public keeps their focus on Assange, what's really at stake here stays obscured.And what's at stake is the US' sacred First Amendment, Net Neutrality and your average citizen's right to know just what the fuck his 'elected' government is up to.I thought you were concerned about these things as well...if not, my bad I'll shut up now.

Chez said...

Of course I don't like to be lied to, and I absolutely accept and agree that a responsible media should be doing a better job of fearlessly digging to get to the truth. Assange and Wikileaks, however, seem to operate under the assumption that all state secrets are bad and that anything not done 100% out in the open is inherently nefarious; that's just horseshit.

Anonymous said...

Yeah we all know how easy it is to demonize a single person...like the two women who have been accused of being everything from CIA assets to to stupid to know how condoms work. Its the same shit, blame the victim...

I really don't care at all except women are routinely hounded into not reporting sex crimes. Also, when Assange basically lets it know that if any government holds him to any sort of the same legal standing as everyone else, he threatens retribution. Why him and not anyone else from wikileaks? So now, if he so much as gets a speeding ticket, is the entire internet supposed to righteously rise up and attack government and private interests?

Shit...I would have no problem with Assange if he wasn't such a fucking media whore and if he actually had some fucking integrity. (Cue oh but evil governments are blah...blah...fucking blah). The fact that anyone argues about US involvement in the Middle East or anywhere else that we get needed resources from, while on a fucking computer...through the internet...is insane. You even recognize how many people in the Congo died for your fucking cell phone or PS3.

We are all just fucking hypocrites. Now where is my fucking endangered Panda smoothy?

Benoit from Ottawa said...

Face it, Chez, in this dealy, everybody's posturing. Assange, Palin, Moore, even you.

Bear with me a sec: I think you're letting your feelings drag you too far on this one -- after all, you've despised Moore for years, and you seem to consider Assange's personal unlikeability as some kind of a justification, quite outside what WikiLeaks is doing!

In sum: Assange's not perfect (hah!), neither is Moore (double hah!), but faced with the howling ones that want Assange's head, I'm ready to hold my comments while Moore and any others who feel A. needs defending do their part in the legal push-and-pull. Nothing wrong with a person coming to the help of another, even if one thinks the helpful person's a fat, self-aggrandizing fuck.

Anonymous said...

It is worth noting that as far as posting the classified documents is concerned, Assange is completely in the right (legally). Reference United States v. New York Times, which was the relevant Pentagon Papers parallel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States

Bert said...

"...Michael Moore's amusingly hyper-righteous posturing on Julian Assange"

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Kevin Davis said...

Umm, yeah I think I technically fit inside the blast radius, so maybe not.

I'll say it one last time... I can't help but think your opinion on this is inextricably linked to your completely justified position that Assange is a Class-A douchebag, dragging any sort of middle ground on Wikileaks to the "shut them down yesterday!!" end of the spectrum.

I mean c'mon, yeah it's an arrest warrant for a completely trumped up charge of sex without a condom, and his "guarantee" was set at 240,000 pounds???

Just my 2 cents.

Kevin Davis said...

Also, I love me some Cesca but any post making an analogy between Assange and Roman Polanski I'm going to have to take with a grain of salt. That and "Regardless of the Swedish definition of rape, they're still rape charges." Yeah, and possessing marijuana is technically against the law so locking up people for a dimebag is warranted based on that logic.

Anonymous said...

You are a fucking self righteous moron. just like that retard cesca. Lied into war check. Look forward not backward, check. This is just blowback to a country, ours, that used to pretend to at least follow the law. You better put on your best pair of panties to twist in, since this is exactly the kind of shit the rest of the world loves. They know we're hypocrites and yet you prefer to be in the dark about. You are an excellent vassal, well done sir.

Chez said...

Oh Bert, you had me at overused-juvenile-put-down.

And Anon, you had me at -- well, whatever the hell it is you were trying to say.

Kevin Davis said...

Anonymous:

I enjoyed your use of the word vassal despite your grammatical errors. Thanks! Also, if you have a constructive point to make you might want to avoid using the phrase "You are a fucking self righteous moron." If your anger precludes you from such an action, maybe it's time you step away from the keyboard, take a deep breath, and go for a walk or something.

I was also confused by your panties metaphor combined with twisting in shit... I don't know what you meant but I think it's safe to say that's a visual image no one wants to see.

Sheriff Bart said...

Kids, you know the adults can't get any sleep if you're going to be all shouty like this.
Now wake me up when something interesting happens.

Lara said...

I have to say your take on this subject has been disappointing, it's okay if you dislike what wikileaks has done or Assange, but posting negative stuff about Assange persona, because you don't like him, you think he is narcissistic, self-righteous etc... that's not really a valid argument and it's kinda childish and fallacious. Posting others articules trying to validate your position does not make it right. But it's your blog so you are entitled to post whatever you want.

Chez said...

Lara, forgive me for making an example of you -- and I certainly appreciate your commenting -- but have you bothered to go back and read several of the rather lengthy pieces I've written on Assange and Wikileaks both here and at HuffPo? I'll say it one more time for the cheap seats: I've made my arguments against what Wikileaks has done -- and Assange's role in it all -- as clear as Belvedere. I link to other people's takes on this topic that I happen to agree with because I would do that with any subject.

Anonymous said...

THIS is worth reading
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/the-media-gets-it-wrong-o_b_797436.html

Dan said...

I know this post is days old -- an eternity in internet time -- but just read the following and was reminded of what Cesca wrote re: rape charges are rape charges.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

Of particular note:

"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.

"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.

"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."