In Europe and the US we’re constantly being reminded by our governments that we live in democratic societies where free speech is allowed. In the last few years, however, that seems to have become mere lip service, more honoured in the breach than the observance.
Take the perfectly legitimate student protests in Britain, for example. They can protest, but the police will kettle them and keep them in one place because they might cause trouble if allowed to move. I know the police have employed psychics before, but have they now found one who can accurately predict how an afternoon will turn out? And if so, why are they letting him/her work for the Met Office?
America, for all the hope that entered with Obama, is nothing more than business as usual. The Wikileaks revelations have brought real transparency to government and no one in power is pleased. Sarkozy has reportedly issued orders that the services can’t be hosted in France, the US has banned Federal employees from looking at Wikileaks as the papers are still classified (the words bolt, horse, and stable door spring to mind). The death knell was sounded when Bush announced that anyone who wasn’t for America was against it in this war on terror, even as his people were arresting people on no pretext.
Governments don’t want democracy or transparency. Osborne didn’t want the HMRC deal with Vodafone made public, for instance, in part because that £6 billion could have saved plenty of cuts. The police have had plain clothes people at demos in spite of saying they don’t. They leave a police van, an expensive piece of equipment, around students they’ve kettled as bait, then, when it’s damaged, it’s a crime scene so they can keep students there for hours. An interesting tactic.
Maybe, just maybe, governments are beginning to run a little bit scared. The student protests, along with the flash mobs closing down shops, are real democracy in action. It’s a groundswell with no obvious leaders, the power of the people. And the Americans can’t contain what’s out there on Wikileaks. Overall, maybe, the grasp on power is beginning to weaken a little. What that will bring in return, of course, remains to be seen…
Showing posts with label wikileaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wikileaks. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Friday, 3 December 2010
The Missing Stieg Larsson Book?
I’ve no idea whether Julian Assange is guilty of the sexual misconduct charges that have been levelled against him in Sweden. I do, however, find the timing of this new warrant for his arrest disturbing. These charges first appeared earlier this year, then seemed to vanish, then returned more strongly just as Wikileaks was about to come out with its new batch of revelations.
Timing, as they say, is everything. Add to that the hacking of the Wikileaks site and pressure on various hosts (reportedly from the US Department of Homeland Security) to take it down and the whole thing is beginning to take on a bizarre conspiracy theory feel.
There’s a rumour that there’s another, unfinished Stieg Larsson novel on a laptop, which may, or may not, see the light of day. Whatever your opinion of his three books, they’ve sold in huge quantities and have, perhaps, made people more aware of conspiracies and the darker corners of politics. That can be no bad thing. Maybe it’s the Swedish association, but what’s going on with Wikileaks and Assange has all of the feel of a Larsson novel coming to life.
It’s far from an exact analogy, of course. For a start, this is real life, not fiction. But it certainly raises plenty of questions, especially when Assange’s lawyer says his client has asked to meet with prosecutors to answer questions and was rebuffed. If he ends up in court there will be questions marks over any evidence present (from both sides) and the verdict.
What is perhaps unsurprising is some of the American reaction to these leaks. Sarah Palin suggested he be hunted down and killed like Al-Queda, which hardly comes as a shock from her. But the assertion that these leaks put lives as risk seems excessive. In many ways this was a series of revelations waiting to happen, as the US supposedly gave a staggering three million people access to these documents. Not what anyone would call secure, by any means.
Yes, some communications do need to be secret. There’s no doubt about that. But the putting them on a network available to so many who don’t need to see them, that’s just asking for trouble. And that, it appears, is just what the US government got.
Timing, as they say, is everything. Add to that the hacking of the Wikileaks site and pressure on various hosts (reportedly from the US Department of Homeland Security) to take it down and the whole thing is beginning to take on a bizarre conspiracy theory feel.
There’s a rumour that there’s another, unfinished Stieg Larsson novel on a laptop, which may, or may not, see the light of day. Whatever your opinion of his three books, they’ve sold in huge quantities and have, perhaps, made people more aware of conspiracies and the darker corners of politics. That can be no bad thing. Maybe it’s the Swedish association, but what’s going on with Wikileaks and Assange has all of the feel of a Larsson novel coming to life.
It’s far from an exact analogy, of course. For a start, this is real life, not fiction. But it certainly raises plenty of questions, especially when Assange’s lawyer says his client has asked to meet with prosecutors to answer questions and was rebuffed. If he ends up in court there will be questions marks over any evidence present (from both sides) and the verdict.
What is perhaps unsurprising is some of the American reaction to these leaks. Sarah Palin suggested he be hunted down and killed like Al-Queda, which hardly comes as a shock from her. But the assertion that these leaks put lives as risk seems excessive. In many ways this was a series of revelations waiting to happen, as the US supposedly gave a staggering three million people access to these documents. Not what anyone would call secure, by any means.
Yes, some communications do need to be secret. There’s no doubt about that. But the putting them on a network available to so many who don’t need to see them, that’s just asking for trouble. And that, it appears, is just what the US government got.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)