I dislike almost everything about Julian Assange. People called Julian are almost always creepy, and Assange just sounds sleazy. I don't like the name of his website. More substantivel;y, I don't like what he's done. Without buying into the whole "He has recklessly put lives in danger" bollocks put out by the people discomforted by his behaviour, he has only really succeed in causing embarrassment and awkwardness, and putting his sources in a terrible position. He's a bit of a self important tosser, to be honest. But even self important tossers don't really deserve to have the Forces of Darkness unleashed against them as seems to be the case here.
It's almost like the gibbering paranoid conspiracy loons are right, and the western world is ruled by a self-serving oligarchy which pretends to be decent and civilised and abide by the law only so long as it feels like it, but doesn't give a monkey's for all that really, and will quite happily show its true face when it suits.
Though before we all apologise to the troofer freaks and their ilk, and acknowledge they was right all along, it does beg the question - how come the Powers That Be could orchestrate the Twin Towers mass murder, frame the innocent freedom fighter and philanthropist Osama Bin Laden, yet not manage to close down one poxy website and put a creepy Aussie sex pest (alleged) to silence?
1 - "Julian Assange denied bail over sexual assault allegations," by Caroline Davies, Sam Jones and Afua Hirsch. Published by The Guardian, 7th of December, 2010. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/07/julian-assange-denied-bail)
2 - "WikiLeaks Founder Warns About More Dispatches," by Shane Scott. Published by the New York Times, 6th of November, 2010. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/world/europe/07assange.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)
No comments:
Post a Comment