In the months that have passed since “Cablegate” began, my stance on Wikileaks has not changed.
I still believe the intent behind Wikileaks to be good; governments, especially democracies, need to be as open as possible -and the cables do provide interesting reading.
There’s nothing overtly shocking; people don’t like each other, American diplomats are critical of other countries, sometimes the public face of a government does not much its internal diplomatic actions.
As far as I know, lives have not been put in danger by the leaks and I continue to be of the opinion that when the dust settles, we will be able to see that this was inevitable in a post-Cold-War world. I don’t, however, continue to support Julian Assange.
For those who are not aware, the Wikileaks founder and figurehead was accused by Swedish authorities of what is essentially sexual misconduct. This is a nuanced situation.
There are people with more column inches available who can tell you more about the details behind the charges.
But the gist of which is that Assange is being accused of committing a sex crime, and Swedish authorities would like to ask him some very serious questions.
Assange claims that he is innocent, and that these charges are an attempt to lock him down and extradite him to America or spirit him away in a black-ops extraordinary rendition program.
So, that’s the situation. I’m not going to comment on the charges or whether or not the man is innocent.
That is a matter for the courts to decide. But I am extremely interested in the reaction to these events.
The assumption seems to have been, from all corners of the progressive media, that Assange was being set up; that the two women accusing him are CIA plants or something.
A noble hero like Assange could never possibly have done something so reprehensible.
The problem with this mindset is that sometimes, sadly, these sorts of charges are true. Or if they aren’t true, they at least deserve a thorough investigation.
The fact that people – progressive feminist media figures – would so instantly dismiss these charges is a little bit unsettling. It says all sorts of weird and uncomfortable things about our culture.
Following comments from the likes of Keith Olbermann and Michael Moore, the feminist blogosphere nearly exploded and a concentrated campaign to get some apologies for dismissing what – true or false – are very serious charges, succeeded. Moore and OIbermann apologized.
This is good. I wrote before that the United States government should realize that the Cold War has ended, and that Wikileaks might just be a good thing.
Growing up in a post-Cold War world, it seems as though a definite remnant of those anxious years is a tendency to see things in a very us or them, good or bad, yes or no fashion.
Assange did a good thing so he must be a good person, and so the nuances of sex crimes get tossed out the window.
The CIA has done bad things so they are the enemy and that is that.
I do not presume Assange’s guilt, but I do not believe these charges to be a trick. Assange should go to Sweden and face charges.
If he becomes a victim of extraordinary rendition, he will be the single-most public figure to disappear– perhaps the greatest leak of all.
If it turns out he did commit a sex crime, he should go to jail.
Assange is not Wikileaks, a service which will continue to run on no matter who is around to speak for it.
We need to remember that there has never been a time in which crime was simple, and that sometimes people who do commit good acts are capable of committing equally bad ones.
Noah Berman is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences.
