As reported by Agence France-Presse, US State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland completely rejected charges that the USA was intent on persecuting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. At the same time, she declined to comment on the decision taken by Ecuador to grant him political asylum. Whilst the diplomatic row surrounding Mr Assange is flaring up, apparently, the USA is trying to keep a low profile. In the best tradition of the present administration, it’s trying to shift the burden of unpopular decisions and actions onto other actors’ shoulders. In this case, the dummies who are taking the greatest accountability (but obviously acting at the behest of and in the best American interests) are Sweden with its farfetched accusations of rape and harassment, and the UK, with a stubbornness and determination to carry the prosecution through, even if it requires violating international law and the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations.
As for the USA, in fact, Ms Nuland’s rejection of the supposition that it’s intent on persecuting Julian Assange may be true. If we remember recent history, the USA has seldom been too keen on persecuting its foes through legal instruments, instead, it resorts to torture, detention without trial, and extrajudicial killings. On the other hand, a close associate of Julian Assange, and the source of many classified leaks published by his website, Private First Class Bradley Manning, is in gaol, the legal process against him continues, and he faces up to death penalty, or, at least, life imprisonment. Manning’s fate is hardly encouraging for Julian Assange, but it definitely reveals what the US has in store for him if he is extradited to Sweden… and, perhaps, further on to the USA.
However, since the diplomatic stalemate could last indefinitely, the USA may eventually be tempted to speed things up. Now, it might seem too cockeyed to suppose that an American SEAL team is ready for a raid like the one they undertook in Abbotabad in Pakistan in May 2011, and that they’ll soon storm the Ecuadorian embassy. Even so, one should remember that everyone always regarded Pakistan has as one of the closest allies of the USA… almost as close as the UK… and this didn’t prevent the USA from violating its sovereignty.
“Heavy artillery” preparation for such an action… either by UK police or by US commandos… has already begun. In fact, the British and American media see little difference between the man whose only fault was telling the truth about Western diplomats’ covert activities, and the most notorious figures of the recent past. London‘s Daily Telegraph even dubbed Julian Assange “the internet age‘s Carlos the Jackal“. One author in the same paper asks, “When will we finally be shot of Julian Assange?” I may not be proficient enough in the English language to see the real meaning of the idiom, but words “shot” and “Julian Assange” put together produce an impression that the above supposition that some kind of a raid being possible on the premises of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London isn’t too farfetched.
Clearly, as for the UK authorities, the Assange case demonstrates, firstly, their utmost servility to their Transatlantic Big Brother, and secondly, once again, shows their adherence to the notorious principle of double standards, and “our SOB”. Today’s total neglect of the Vienna Convention forces one to remember the not-so-distant cases of Chechen terrorist Akhmed Zakayev and Boris Berezovsky, who was one of the main sponsors of the above-mentioned terrorism, who were granted political asylum despite numerous extradition requests addressed to the British authorities by the Prokuratura.
On the other hand, look at the hypocrisy surrounding the case of three Russian sluts who instantly became front-page celebrities throughout the Western world. The only question that’ll definitely be left unanswered is, “Why is the Western media so keen to demand the right for free speech for them and deny the same right for Julian Assange?” Indeed, Tell me with whom thou goest, and I’ll tell thee what thou doest. Indubitably, terrorists and sluts are much dearer to the hearts of so-called “free society” than people who dare speak the truth.
17 August 2012
Voice of Russia World Service
I’m GLAD to have put the Pussy Riot “story” to bed. I’m a journalist… its news… ergo, I covered it; furthermore, I covered it to the best of my ability. In return, you guys gave me my best day ever. Nevertheless, I found the whole story sordid, blown up out of all proportion, and incredibly banal and juvenile. It gives one an indication of the level of the mind of the Western élite (both “liberal” and “conservative”)… and of their hangers-on. Not very pretty, is it? Indeed, there were more Western journalists and technical staff milling about the courtroom than there was protesters.
At most, there were less than a thousand protesters… many reports indicate less than 500. At the end, there were only 100 hardheads left, and it was an easy matter for the OMONtsy to clear the area (without undue violence or force). In fact, there were probably more “Chiefs” than “Indians”… it was the usual cast of dreary suspects angling for a moment of Western media adulation. It was hard to confirm the number of the crowd, because most of my Russian contacts simply didn’t give a shit about it. One wrote, “I’m at the dacha digging potatoes… that’s useful. My wife will fry some up with mushrooms for lunch” (that was at midnight EDT, which is 08.00 MSK, which means that he got to me the first thing in the morning his time, obviously, after working in the garden in the early-day cool). Another wrote, “Nobody gives a flying fuck, only foreigners. Vova will pardon the bitches in six months, after the foreigners shut up, just you wait and see”.
I think that my friends at the Centre are right. This was much sound and fury, signifying nothing at all. It was meant to distract the Western audience from the fact that the oligarchs continue to rape them, and that the deck is (blatantly) stacked against them. Did it work? YOU answer that one…