The momentous news of Julian Assange's release has sent shock waves across the political and media landscape. It's a remarkable and long-awaited conclusion to a dark journey that began with Assange locked up in an Ecuadorian embassy for almost ten years (2010-2019) to avoid spurious and motivated “rape” accusations politics in Sweden. In the middle of the 2016 election, Assange's organization Wikileaks released a trove of emails that were highly embarrassing to the Democratic establishment and are generally acknowledged to have played a no small role in the 2016 election results.
In the US, no one went to jail for the 2008 crash or the disastrous Iraq war (which Wikileaks infamously exposed). On a more pedestrian level, roving gangs of dysgenic zombies can loot and trash convenience stores with impunity. One thing that remains criminal, however, is shaming the corrupt and powerful, and especially during an election year. Assange learned this the hard way when the US Department of Justice revealed a false and clearly politically motivated indictment against him in 2019, setting in motion a chain of events that ended up landing him in Belmarsh Prison of the United Kingdom, where he languished in horrible conditions for five years. until his release yesterday.
We at Revolver News have been enthusiastic supporters of Assange from the beginning; see, for example, the interview we did with Assange's girlfriend. here. We welcome his freedom, but of course we are sorry that it has come so late and we find the regime's way to save face by forcing Assange to plead guilty to the bogus conspiracy to obtain and reveal classified information in return to credit Assange for his time. served at Belmarsh. Many others, including Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald, celebrated Assange's release. Not everyone, of course, was happy. Among those who publicly registered their disapproval of Assange's new freedom was none other than traitor Mike Pence.
Julian Assange endangered the lives of our troops in wartime and should have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The Biden administration's plea agreement with Assange is a miscarriage of justice and dishonors the service and sacrifice of the men and women of our…
— Mike Pence (@Mike_Pence) June 25, 2024
It might come as a surprise to some that a former Trump administration official, let alone Trump's vice president, would speak out so publicly against Assange. After all, didn't Wikileaks' exposure of Democratic corruption help Trump win in 2016?
From a broader perspective, Assange and Wikileaks' history of exposing the crimes of the national security state, particularly the War on Terror, appears to be ideologically associated with Trump, whom he bravely defeated and famously the Bushes and Clintons in one of the biggest embarrassments to the establishment in 2016. The answer here is complicated. While Trump's anti-establishment energy was certainly synthesized by Wikileaks' efforts, the same deep-state elements that took every step to undermine Trump, of course, went after Assange. Trump may have been nominally in charge of the national security and Justice Department bureaucracies, but that never stopped the bureaucracies from working tirelessly to undermine his presidency. It should come as no surprise, then, that the same national security bureaucracy that opposed Trump while Trump was president would have followed through with Assange's indictment. Most disturbingly, there have been credible reports that Trump's own secretary of state secretly conspired they have assassinated Assange.
That Pompeo has always been bad news should, of course, come as no surprise to regular Revolver readers. See, for example, our classic piece here or our interview with Trump on Pompeo here.
Some of the reasons why the establishment and the deep state hate Assange so much are worth reviewing.
Assange exposed the deep state and Hillary Clinton's criminal policy in Syria
In the 2016 election, one of the many fundamental differences separating Trump from Clinton was foreign policy. As Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was directly involved in some of the worst foreign policy disasters since Bush's Iraq war, for example, Clinton's notorious involvement in ruining Libya. A particularly hot geopolitical issue at the time was Syria, where the deep state was desperate for another regime change operation to topple Bashar Assad. Many who analyzed the situation at the time noted that the United States appeared to be in a very uneasy alliance with the so-called “Sunni rebels,” which included radical Sunni elements and, reportedly, ISIS. There was a dark logic to it: ISIS was Assad's enemy, so we should support them, even surreptitiously.
What was clear to keen geopolitical observers became indisputable when Wikileaks leaked an email about Hillary Clinton in which a State Department official casually blurted out that “Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria.”
“[al-Quada] is on our side in Syria”: email from policy adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (February 2012) https://t.co/Jq5FDgD2hr pic.twitter.com/k6hIk68nvC
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 12, 2017
Fortunately, when Donald Trump defeated Hillary, he moved away from American support for Sunni rebels, Al Qaeda and ISIS, and this led to the fall of the IS caliphate in Syria.
Assange soon exposed the dark side of Big Tech
If you read one thing by Julian Assange, it must be his hilarious, incisive and insightful assessment of the big technology called “Google is not what it seems.” Note that this piece was written in 2011, long before the problem of Big Tech censorship was widely understood, let alone the dynamics that the tools and approach to censorship were reused from of the tools of psychological warfare that Big Tech brought to the Arab Spring and other foreign conflicts. , courtesy of former State Department official and Google censorship architect Jared Cohen.
To get a sense of Assange's sense of humor and keen insight into human character, check out the two paragraphs below describing his impressions of former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen, respectively.
For a man of systematic intelligence, Schmidt's politics, as I could hear from our discussion, were surprisingly conventional, even banal. He quickly grasped the structural relationships, but struggled to verbalize many of them, often introducing geopolitical subtleties into the Silicon Valley market or the ossified State Department micro-language of his colleagues. He was at his best when he spoke (perhaps without realizing it) as an engineer, breaking down complexities into their orthogonal components.
I found Cohen a good listener, but a less interesting thinker, possessed of that unrelenting conviviality that commonly afflicts career generalists and Rhodes scholars. As you'd expect from his background in foreign policy, Cohen knew the flashpoints and international conflicts and moved quickly between them, detailing different scenarios to test my claims. But at times it seemed as if he was talking about orthodoxies in a way designed to impress his former colleagues in official Washington.
The following paragraphs precociously and perfectly capture the emerging role of Big Tech as a key tool of the national security state and empire.
But as Google Ideas shows, the company's “philanthropic” efforts also bring it uncomfortably close to the imperial side of U.S. influence. If Blackwater/Xe Services/Academi were running a program like Google Ideas, it would be under intense critical scrutiny. But somehow Google gets a free pass.
Whether it's a company or “more than a company,” Google's geopolitical aspirations are firmly embedded in the foreign policy agenda of the world's biggest superpower. As Google's search and Internet services monopoly grows, and as it expands its industrial surveillance cone to cover the majority of the world's population, rapidly dominating the mobile phone market and struggling to extend Internet access to the Global South, Google is steadily becoming the Internet for many people. Its influence on the choices and behavior of the totality of individual human beings translates into real power to influence the course of history.
If the future of the Internet is to be Google, this should seriously concern people all over the world: in Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa , the former Soviet Union. i even in Europe—for whom the Internet embodies the promise of an alternative to US cultural, economic and strategic hegemony.
A “don't be evil” empire is still an empire.
Read Assange's full article, published in Newsweek, here.
Assange humiliated the military-industrial complex
Assange highlighted the sad reality that the goals of our foreign wars are not to succeed, but to be endless and thus continue to fill the coffers of our security elite.
Take, for example, the following iconic (and representative) clip:
Today is a good day to remember this video, which encapsulates in less than 30 seconds exactly why the US government had to destroy Julian Assange's life and health. They have done it and there was no need to even imprison him in the US. pic.twitter.com/AKFSlYxo0q
— RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) June 25, 2024
It is a sad irony that just as Assange is released, we face the very real prospect of President Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee for 2024, facing prison for what amounts to the same crime: shaming the ruling class corrupt government. United States. We will continue to follow Assange's case with interest and congratulate him and his family on their new freedom.
English 
Español de Venezuela 