It has been one hell of a year so far and no matter how you’re gauging it at this point it’s that time a year again when we stop to give thanks for the things we are grateful for in life. The usual list includes our family, friends, loved ones, our health, caretakers, even our jobs and pets, and maybe even that awesome co-worker who brings you coffee every morning. Some people are grateful for just having a car to get to work in the morning, a roof over their heads, or being able to feed their children this week. But what few will talk about over their Thanksgiving feast today is that they are grateful for Wikileaks’ publications which have brought the world ten years of truth and transparency. I mean, sure, it’s easy to be thankful that you’re not in Julian Assange’s shoes because he’s been illegally detained without sunlight for seven years, the Ecuadorian embassy is an incredibly small space, political figures want to drone him, journalists continue to defame him, half of the world can’t seem to comprehend that Sweden never charged him with a crime, and due to the hard work of Stefania Maurizi and the lawyers representing her it’s recently come to light that the UK deliberately encouraged Sweden to drag out Assange’s case resulting in his obscene and lengthy detainment. But what about being thankful for everything that he has sacrificed for us?
Although many of us will be thinking of him today, the holiday season has brought on another wave of hostility and venom and it looks like the anti-Assange hate wagon has boarded a few more ungrateful passengers due to the recent release of Wikileaks’ DMs with Donald Trump Jr. Now, I’m not one to normally help out someone who’s changed their stance on Assange based on a news article, because their political party was crucified this time around in revealing emails, or because assumptions have gotten the better of them but in the spirit of the holidays I’ve decided to make a list of anti-Assange campaigns for those converts that aren’t exactly sure why they despise Assange and are in need of some moral support. Let’s start with the U.S. government and their “Julian Assange is basically a terrorist” and “publishing leaks is bad” campaign. This one’s what I like to call an oldie but a goodie because the government has been trying to nail Assange since the April 2010 release of Collateral Murder because let’s be honest, no one in the U.S. government likes to be told that what they’re doing is illegal so shining a light on that whole murderous debacle in Iraq didn’t help Assange’s case.
For those of you who are concerned you may have to learn a list of anti-Assange government propaganda in order to join the government campaign, no worries. The awesome thing about the government is that there’s only one rule you need to know and that’s that leaks from the intelligence community are good but leaks published by Wikileaks are very bad. The other great thing about this campaign is that you’ll never be alone because tons of people still believe the government when they say that Assange colluded with the Russians who were behind the DNC and Podesta “hacks” just like they were behind you not getting that promotion this year, your kid catching strep throat from little Bobby last week, and your car battery dying this morning. I mean, if you’re into the whole non-existent evidence thing, that is.
And then there’s CIA Director Mike Pompeo. This guy is raging mad over the Vault 7 publications which showed us, among a host of other terrifying things, that he and his agency can listen to you through your television, control your car, and yes, plant malware/spyware into just about anything. There is virtually nothing that Mr. Mike Pompeo can’t watch, read, or listen to when it comes to you and your personal life and that alone should creep the f*ck out of you. Let’s not forget how Pompeo categorized Wikileaks earlier this year as a “non-state hostile intelligence agency” or that he directly inserted his anti-Wikileaks crusade into congressional legislation through Section 623 of the Intelligence Authorization Act. Listen, if you think that Wikileaks is bad for exposing the truth, maybe you should pay more attention to what your government is doing and rather than joining a campaign of this low-grade caliber you should ask yourself why Pompeo is so desperate to continue his playing his sick CIA games.
If I’ve convinced you that Pompeo, the Intelligence agencies, and the U.S. government are a bit too psychopathic-ish for you but you still feel like you need to be a part of an anti-Assange base, you could always look to the Drone Team for moral support. This team consists of an array of people in U.S. politics and the government plus a plethora of Twitter users who would like to see Assange droned or killed in some other manner because wanting to murder the people who bring you the truth is totally normal said no normal person ever. And by the way, as a member of the Drone Team don’t forget that your leader is Hillary Clinton so if you can swallow that bit of reality let me remind you that your team leader is…Hillary Clinton. Still willing to join? Hmm.
Might I suggest instead the Brazilian Team instead? No seriously. Ever since Donna Brazile’s book hit the shelves it’s been one black PR campaign against Assange and Wikileaks after another. This woman isn’t doing pressers about her book to call out Hillary Clinton, she’s picking up every interview she can so she can convince those that haven’t quite bought into the Russian narrative yet that Wikileaks colluded with them to bring down her girl, Hillary. And that, my friends, is probably why she’s still alive. At the end of day, however, no one should ever find it in their best interest to throw their support behind the likes of someone like Donna Brazile so another avenue you might want to look into is the Hacker Team.
If you hadn’t already noticed or you failed to read my previous post about black PR campaigns being used against Assange, there are more than a handful of “Anonymous” twitter accounts you can follow to get your anti-Assange fix. For instance, there’s always the Your Anon Central account which screams CIA funding or the latest anti-Assange contender, Your Anon News, both of which might be right up your alley. Now, don’t ask me why these Anonymous accounts loathe Assange/Wikileaks because a. I’m not a hacker b. I’m not well-versed on hacker culture or the history between Anonymous and Assange and c. Every anti-Assange account appears to be a little bit different in nature. Take for example Your Anon News. It doesn’t appear that they were always so rabidly anti-Assange but then again there’s only so much time in my day to stalk other accounts’ Twitter feeds.
Then there’s Barret Brown. He’s an activist who has been described as an “Anonymous journalist” and “advocate of Anonymous” and in the past month or two has been openly critical of Julian Assange and Wikileaks.
Both the Your Anon News account and Barrett Brown share at least one thing in common: They swan-dived off the anti-Assange edge after the DMs between Wikileaks and Donald Trump Jr. were released but it appears for slightly different reasons. Neither account seems to support Trump but Your Anon News appears to question Julian Assange more over giving out the putintrump.org’s website password to Trump Jr. after claiming they “guessed it” and collusion while Brown’s general hatred of Donald Trump and his belief in the Russian collusion narrative is what did him in on the DMs.
Either way, there are multiple ways to look at the DMs without automatically assuming there was collusion involved. First, most of the DMs come across as journalistic in nature such as asking for a comment about a website or requesting to publish Trump’s tax returns. I mean, what’s the problem here, folks? Second, the password for the putintrump.org website had already been made public and it did not give users any sort of administrative access to the website. Why Wikileaks said they guessed it I have no idea but it seems pretty obvious that they didn’t have to so again, what’s the problem? Then there’s the ambassador comment. First, if you think that Julian Assange threatened Trump or promised him something in return for making him ambassador to Australia you need to go back and read the DMs. No, seriously, because that never happened.
Second, even @SMaurizi tweeted out that she wasn’t sure that Assange’s ambassador comment was a serious one but even if it was I personally don’t see what the big deal is about. Don’t people ask for certain positions all the time? Is it because Assange isn’t a U.S. citizen? If that’s the case then why in the world does half of America think that U.S. laws should apply to him? The other thing to keep in mind is, again, even if Assange was being serious which some claim he wasn’t, at least he merely asked rather than paying to play like many ambassadors did under Obama/Clinton but no one wants to talk about that, am I right?
It’s also been pointed out that Julian Assange and Wikileaks know full well that DMs are not safe so it’s absurd to believe that they was trying to secretly collude with Trump via Twitter. No seriously. It’s a.b.s.u.r.d. Listen, if you don’t think that Assange and Wikileaks know what they’re doing at this point you’re living under a rock and it’s time you came out and became reaquainted with the light. I mean, maybe there’s more going on here that we don’t know about.
For instance, what if Wikileaks also DM’d Hillary Clinton or someone on her team? You heard me. And no, I’m not saying they did or didn’t because I have no idea either way but let’s say they did. Wouldn’t that change the entire conversation people are having about the Trump Jr. DMs? Of course it would. If Assange asked for Clinton’s comments about the anti-Trump website, sent her the same password, and told her before the November election that if she hired him as an ambassador voters might see the gesture as an attempt to clean up her act after the DNC and Podesta email revelations it obliterates the Trump collusion story. Again, I’m not saying it happened nor did it need to happen to see that Assange didn’t collude with the Trump administration but if he did reach out to her and even if he recieved no response in return the entire conversation on this subject changes. If this article about Twitter handing over Assange and Wikileaks’ DMs to Congress including client/attorney privileged exchanges is true (why aren’t people outraged over that?), it’s possible we might be getting another dose of the truth sooner rather than later and I suspect it’s not going to support the Assange detractors.
But look, I get it. Most of us don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes and it’s easy to jump to conclusions, assume the worst, or believe that we understand the whole picture when in reality we don’t. We’ve all done it. I’ve personally been guilty of jumping to conclusions a million times but it’s never been over anything that would make me join the anti-Assange band wagon. What I’m saying is that although things like the Trump Jr. DMs might look like something nefarious in nature, it doesn’t mean that they are. Sometimes it takes awhile for the truth to come out and patience is always a virtue.
When you have a publishing outfit that has never had to retract one document in ten years, one man who has the courage to sacrifice his life to bring you the truth, whistleblowers and leakers who put themselves at risk for the greater good, and AnonScan, Randy Credico and all the other people who put themselves on the line to support Assange, there comes a time when people should keep the faith during the bumps in the road. Being thankful today for our loved ones, our families, our health, our jobs, and even our cat is a wonderful thing. But we should also be grateful for Julian Assange’s courage and the strength to do what’s right in the face of unfathomable opposition.
This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.
The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.
The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.