Here’s my column today. An e-mail:
Dear Mr. Lowry,
…I would add only one more observation: Assange is a rank coward. If he really wanted to show his bravery, he should expose the secrets of Russia, or China. There’s plenty of dirt there from the trafficking of the organs from imprisoned Falun Gong practitioners to the murder of Russian investigative journalists. But no, he targets the US, because he knows that if he went after Russia or China, her would be dead in two days. Instead he attacks the US, a country that respects the rule of law and will not come after him until we can make a reasonable legal case against him. While we have ordered assassinations against people, once it becomes common knowledge, people are outraged. In Russia, it’s business as usual.
Assange is a coward pure and simple. Let’s see if he has the cojones to actually take on a real criminal state that would come after him.
"Let’s see if he has the cajones to actually take on a real criminal state that would come after him."
Why on earth would anyone who hates America take on our enemies? I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's actually being bankrolled by them.
Jonah Goldberg asked rhetorically some time ago why * isn't dead; he observed that our agencies that allegedly do that kind of stuff don't operate nearly as efficiently as Hollywood would have you believe, and we don't kill people just because they make life more difficult for us.
But why on earth is 's* server still working? In the entire U.S., there's no one who can write a worm that can turn his site into mush? He's already been hit with a denial-of-service attack; why can't we destroy his entire operation? I can't believe that would be illegal.
* NRO's auto-censor won't let me type the guy's name in because evidently the first three letters are "objectionable." C'mon, guys...
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse""Let’s see if he has the cajones to actually take on a real criminal state that would come after him.""
I'm no fan of Asange's, but his work in-country on corruption in the Kenyan elections had a likely hit squad raiding his safehouse.
The guy's many things -- a coward, no.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEven granting the premise, the correct answer to this is: So what? The United States is the biggest power in the world, with troops in more than 100 countries and the power to influence (if not steer) the destinies of many more. What our government does, then, is of interest -- not just to taxpaying citizens, but to the entire world. The United States might not be quite as willing to assassinate the Wikileaks leader for digging into its secrets, but that fact doesn't make our secrets any less relevant to many people around the world. Wikileaks isn't tough enough to go after the Russians? Really, who cares?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJoel says what it's all about: restraining the U.S., in the belief that it's the Americans, not the Russians or North Koreans or Iranian, who are the bad actors in the world. Of course Russian actions impinge on other peoples of the world and have relevance for us all, but if you are a rabid anti-American like Assange you wouldn't see that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe more I learn, the more I value what J.A. at Wikileaks is doing.
Read his interview with Andy Greenberg at blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg
The transcript reveals quite a bit.
I, too, said, "why doesn't he leak info on North Korea, China, Vietnam, Zimbabwae..." turns out the answer must be that it requires someone to leak the info to him... he sorts and publishes, he doesn't actively gather.
Reading this, I was reminded of Solzhenitsyn's description of the secret police coming into his apartment building. All the tenants cowered, hoping it wasn't their turn. When that night's victim was hauled weeping from the building, they breathed sighs of relief--at least it wasn't their turn! Solzhenitsyn comments (my paraphrase from memory) What if we'd turned out with axe handles and sticks and beat that first squad senseless? What if we'd stood up? But no one did because someone had to go first.
The last exchange in Andy Greenberg's transcript:
AG: And WikiLeaks has the opposite strategy?
JA: That's right. It's summed up by the phrase "courage is contagious." If you demonstrate that individuals can leak something and go on to live a good life, it's tremendously incentivizing to people."
I think JA's leaks are US-based and oriented because we're the most free and the most powerful/influential.
And look at the result? Turns out, we're a pretty honest "super" power.
Let's see some Nork leaks and some ChiCom leaks... let's see how 'equal' we all really are.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse>>Instead he attacks the US, a country that respects the rule of law and will not come after him until we can make a reasonable legal case...
"The rule of law" sounds so high-minded, so wise, something God-given or derived from natural rights. In fact, to look just within the context of U.S. criminal procedure, one sees a system that been distorted beyond recognition from the fundamental rights set down in our constitution. Why it has strayed so far -- and become so obsessed with procedure and newly discovered "rights" as opposed to finding truth and serving justice -- is a complex question that involves philosophical visions never democratically adopted, political agendas, the myopia that commonly afflicts "experts," the out-of-control cultural sympathy for the "outlaw" and hostility to authority, and the egos of attorneys.
When I hear appeals to "the rule of law" (which was not the central point of the letter writer), I do not feel immediate fervor to rally to that cause. Instead, I ask, "Who's law?" I feel bound by the constitution and what legitimately has followed from it...and not much else. The "international community" is only marginally respectable to the extent that it is dominated by what we used to quaintly call, "the liberal democracies." Most of what comes out of the U.N. is poisonous to liberty and world harmony. Frankly, I don't feel much better about what comes out of Brussels.
There are pirates operating with near impunity on the high seas; there is old-fashioned human slavery in many places; terrorists operate around the world and terrorist regimes make a mockery of international law while they amass, and trade among themselves, weaponry that has the potential, in the hands of a North Korean or Iranian lunatic, to set civilization back centuries and cause untold human suffering. And wherever really dirty money is being made, there are civilized European (Swiss) bankers ready to handle it with the utmost discretion for their elite customers.
No, I don't much respect the international system nor do I genuflect at the invocation of international law or international opinion.
The USA, for all its flaws and disappointments, needs to pursue its interests without the prissy sanctimony of undue respect for the opinions of the world at large or the world's law. This Julian Assange needs to be taken care of. (The only problem with taking care of people is that when one looks around, one can't help but reflect on numerous worthy projects. What if Frank Church had been taken care of back in the day? Seems to me like it would have been a good thing. I guess we need a hand on the take-care-of-him button that is more restrained than mine. But not a hand that is paralyzed.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Wikileaks isn't tough enough to go after the Russians? Really, who cares?"
Revealing the secrets of Russia and China would be extremely useful, because it would demonstrate how actively they are working against us, and undermine the arguments of the Leftists who insist these countries will be our friends if only we appease them enough.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse