Assange: Get Up for Freedom of Speech

This film is an exclusive interview by the Get Up organisation in Australia. I interviewed this organisation many years ago after seeing sky writing over Canberra saying ‘Get Up’. I found them very interesting. Apparently they had trained in the United States to set up internet based community action. They have become an alternative force here in Australia as they are able to generate petitions on issues and collectively pay for full page ads in newspaper and the means that enable another voice to be heard.

I was interested to learn they flew to London for an exclusive interview with Julian Assange. I am interested in another viewpoint as sometimes it is hard to hear Julian’s voice given the commentary’s. I can see his exhaustion and personal suffering.

A few comments regarding the film. I was so surprised to hear the US commentators stating he should be killed. My first thoughts go to democracy and justice. The commentators are not even aware that they are speaking like dictators rather than democrats (democratic country) making judgements based on media information or right wing rhetoric rather than based on truth as would be expected from a court of law charged to uncover the truth. What comes to my mind now is the power of being ‘right’ and the influence that carries rather than seeking ‘truth’ in the interests of all and a better society and world community.

Serious allegations of corruption in the banking system and war crimes were revealed by Wikileaks. I saw the footage of helicopter gunship murdering people on the ground. It was alleged one of the men had a gun yet in truth it was a camera. I was deeply disturbed at the pilots delight in targetting them and there seemed to be no awareness of the Geneva Conventions and assistance provided to the wounded. Instead those rescuing the injured man were shot. When I listened to Scott Ritter give a condemning speech at the University of Melbourne some years ago about Iraq he made it very clear it was an illegal war of aggression. He chose to speak out as he believed in the values of his country. There has to be a point, a line drawn in the sand where people decide that truth is more important than appeasement to criminal conduct. The judicial system should be the appropriate place to play out international war crimes, albeit the International Criminal Court, rather than an Australian journalist having to seek refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy as it appears his own government cannot offer these assurances. What I found interesting, if it is true, was the US military labelling him an enemy of the State. That definitely would put his life at risk. If their thinking is ‘you are with us or against us’ anyone that supports Julian Assange will be seen the same. Rather than the military seeing itself as a pillar of a democracy upholding the US Constitution and freedoms and choosing to go down that path. If it were to see itself in that light then international law would be pushed for. If it is engaged in illegal activities then the rule of law has become blurred and they would view their rights (self interest) as paramount and any counterveiling argument or statement as a threat. This is what we see at the base of all conflict ‘us against them’ rather than an issue that has come to light as a challenge or a problem to be solved. I see all those who challenge myself as teachers, they make you look inward, you can see them that way or you can fight. When you fight it becomes negative and the other is demonised, there is no search for a solution as you are right, there is no attempt to really tackle the grievances. This requires a retrospective look at yourself, your organisation, your policy, your strategy and perhaps your reason for being. Most people try to avoid this as they may be wrong and that is seen as weakness, no-one wants to be a loser as they say. This is fundamentally why negative outcomes continue to happen, no-one learns. You have to do that to justify revenge. The military mindset is one of opposing forces it is not about peace making, so whatever differs will be fought unless it is not (enlightened leadership emerges).

So it is a defining moment for the World, I feel it as ‘freedom of speech or business as usual?’. I am sure the issues extend way beyond the United States into every other country, many if not all would have skeletons in the closet they would prefer not seen. Yet we are moving into unprecedented times where the truth is surfacing and I don’t think anyone can stop it. It is like a purging. Eventually you have to look into the mirror at those you call enemy and see yourself. What we see in our world is a reflection of ourselves. Our unquestioned thinking and dogmatic beliefs is what keeps us stuck in mindsets unable to change or living in fear of disclosure. Yet they keep repeating the same mistakes unable to deeply learn from what is not working. I do sense that people like Julian Assange are the best experience to happen to the military. There will be leaders in the military who have seen the corruption and left. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell comes to mind in this moment and why he left the Bush Administration is my question. I remember reading he was seen as moderate and a good man. So it would be much better if they don’t leave but stay on to create a better military with core ethics and upholding the true purpose of the military and perhaps look at expanding its role into peacekeeping in an honourable way. Rather than extentions of power where the ends justify the means. I feel deeply for the soldiers who are trained to believe they are serving their countries to find other agendas at play. I am thinking of Syria in this moment.

From my perspective as a person into happiness and peace, I feel there is nothing to fear. Perhaps there are ways to offer freedom from prosecution in exchange for revealing the truth to the public. If we don’t do this then we head down a road I don’t think serves anyone.

My last thought would be do we create a Hobbesian worldview of tooth and claw where the world becomes a dangeous place, where power is retained through violence? or the alternative is do we move to a Lockean worldview where democracy, international law, coooperation and freedom of speech is the foundation to a renewable world order. I am on the side of openness, truth and peace. If the face is military or civil, I don’t mind. I look forward to see the true face with hands on the table. I send peace and love to both sides and may they have the courage to face themselves in the highest light for the future of their children will depend on it.

So decide for yourself, what do you choose?