As the corporate media in the USA and UK waver on the brink of a pathological inability to report the whole truth, and as the hidden deeds of hypocritical leaders, intelligence chiefs and military brass, are exposed, causing these people embarrassment, it is understandable why leadership wants to harm Julian Assange. In this environment it is also understandable why the corporate media act as cheer leaders supporting such harm or condone this intent by making no statement at all. Today, under the US Constitution, people in power can administer outrages and cruelty and the media endure this outrage for fear of becoming conspicuous by rebelling against it. Journalists fear that exposing the truth places them next in line for the sort of treatment the US wishes to metre out to Assange. Today the act of rebellion, based on pointing out the truth, is equated with treason. But treason against whom? Certainly not the country. The truth only offends those who cheat and benefit from their unwarranted acts that transgress the US Constitution and who think that, because they are in "power", they can spirit up their own defence, without involving the law, to point, to detract, and to blurt
"Treason!" at those who value and speak the truth. Worse still, heads of investigative agencies can take concocted evidence from supporters of a political campaign to twist the operation of the law by using such "evidence" to justify an "investigation" of an opposing candidate using the resources of the investigative agency. An example is the Mueller Report. Now that it has been established that the original allegations against Mr Trump are without foundation, it is necessary to follow the trail back to expose the truth as to how all of this took place.
But such arbitrary actions serving the interests of small groups all consist of abuse of the American Constitution and the mechanisms available for the electorate to insist that such leaders, so-called, should be brought to account are being ignored, or are moving far too slowly.
The USA's former world leadership role supported an image of protection of the Constitution and an ethical tone supported by the intoned mantra of, "..the defence of democracy, freedom and the rule of law". But, unfortunately, this image of a defender of fair and just treatment has declined into a swamp of decadence increasingly characterized by the confusing and brutal spectacle of a country bent on using bullying, bribery, threats, sanctions and warmongering as the "instruments" for conducting its foreign policy.
The Saudi Arabian leadership's primeval fear of the religious fanatics, who invaded the Grand Mosque in Mecca in 1979, led to a pact with the mullahs to promote the fanatical philosophy of Juhayman al Utaybi through the spread of strict Wahhabi philosophy outside Saudi Arabia. Since then, after 30 years of dissemination worldwide, this Saudi deal has fomented the most destabilizing wave of insurgency against the USA and Non-Sunni Islamic societies in the rest of the world. This interpretation of Islam has become attractive to terrorists who have used it as a controlling mechanism based on religious conversion and strict adherence as well as the slaughter of people from Shia, Christian and many of other religious persuasions. These people have a fanatical disregard for the human dignity of anyone who is not Islamic. And yet, whereas the US Constitution upholds freedom of religions to be a fundamental principle, the United States sides with Saudi Arabia militarily in this global religious war between the Moslem sects of Sunnis and Shia. In the so-called war on terrorism the USA not only trained and armed a good proportion of those they say they are fighting against but, in reality, they support and continue to arm these terrorists so they can be used against other targets. In spite of a Constitution that holds up the totem pole of religious freedom, the USA continues to wholeheartedly support Saudi Arabia with exaggerated sales of military equipment and assistance on nuclear technology. The ongoing use of the military equipment only highlights the brutal and cruel Saudi Arabian incompetence in its highly destructive conduct of the war in Yemen, leading to disastrous levels of famine, disease and the death of civilians from indiscriminate bombing. The USA and UK, in spite of claims to possessing and applying strict controls on armament sales, in practice, condone and support these atrocities by increasing their sales and by supplying tactical support through US and UK military and others.
The cruel arrogance and pompous righteousness of individuals such as Mike Pompeo and John Bolton whose utterances threaten the lives of people, worldwide, provide sufficient evidence of the insanity of a system that gives so much life threatening decision-making power to such people. In reality Pompeo and Bolton are clearly out of their depth promoting absurdly violent positions, but because they exercise some power, little is said to point out their incompetence and intellectual cowardice. The intellectual cowardice is demonstrated in their inability and unwillingness to confront the whole truth because it might demonstrate the fragility and fundamental dangers of their stands. It would not be so bad if all of this just boiled down to threats and posturing but, of course, it doesn't. It is estimated that since 1945 over 20 million men, women and children in other countries have been unnecessary murdered by US adventures abroad as a result of decisions made by people like these two in the various US administrations since 1945. It is therefore not surprising that growing numbers of normal and observant people, who live outside America, resent the USA's actions.
One of the peculiar mental aberrations are the interpretations of this growing concern which sometimes transitions into hatred, is the view that this comes from people being jealous of the "American way of life...", of even what is referred to as "US exceptionalism". If the USA continues its policy of bombing countries, whose leaders do not comply with US demands, back into the stone age, they are mimicking the policy of Israel with respect to the people of Palestine who have been subjected to an aggressive strategy of dispossession since 1948, more than 70 years. This violence continues today, carried by eager corporate media outlets, at the border fence, against supporters of the March of Return.
The role of self interest in motivating the USA's cowardice and weakness is the inability of the political classes to resist the obvious and overpowering influence of Saudi Arabia and Israel in the affairs of US national and international policy, this is regrettable. The elephant in the room is not the devious manipulation of American society by the "Russians" but rather the fifth column treachery expressed in the form of the willing support of Congress and Senate members, on all sides of the isle, to whatever the Saudi and Israel think tanks, lobbies and companies ask for in exchange for favour.
One of the false narratives has been that the rise of terrorist factions in Iraq and Syria was caused by a vacuum created by US led invasions. No, this was not a mistake but rather a strategy of creating space and confusion for the terrorist proxies to do their work based on plans laid by Israeli interests and some people in the American administration as far back as the mid-1970s involving Benjamin Netanyahu who was working at Boston Consultancy Group and Richard Perle and others and the Israeli Douglas Feith who was accused of handing over classified US material to the Israeli embassy. When Netanyahu became prime minister of Israel in 1996, Feith was asked to coordinate the drawing up of a master plan as a strategy for managing Israel's "back yard" i.e. the Middle East. In essence this set out a strategy to replace the leaderships of any countries resisting Israel's expansion, in a violent manner. The list of countries, so far impacted by this blueprint, that is followed by the USA, is obvious. The reason Saudi Arabia and Israel collaborate is that this disruption keeps "Israel safe" by creating confusion and mayhem in neighbouring countries and in this process stricter versions of Islam are imposed on the countries concerned by people Saudi Arabia has financed. The intelligence agencies of these two countries see this as a win-win situation. The USA follows this lead because the US intelligence agencies sell this plan which was adopted some time ago. The different administrations never seem to come up to speed on the details and there is an assumption that the plan is US-inspired and based on the current intelligence assessments and action requirements. In reality it was Israeli-inspired even involving the Mossad commander, Yigal Carmon. So the USA is carrying out the geostrategic policies of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
However, the stakes are becoming increasingly higher simply because the track record shows that the "terrorists" are only partially manageable. If there was a complete domination of caliphates replacing existing governments, sooner or later the advance of violent reform would impact Saudi Arabia and Israel and maybe sooner than later because of the underlying resentment and hatred amongst significant groups within the "terrorist factions" of Israel and the Saudi Royal family.
But the irresponsible conduct of the political class is to be expected in a country where money speaks to Congress Members and the Senate, more loudly than the gerrymandered votes of the people of America. The USA is gravitating towards the status of a failed state where many operations cannot operate "effectively" in the light of the truth and the law. All of this takes place through decisions made "in the name of the people of America", peddled as "keeping them free and safe". The Twin Towers were price paid for this form of corruption and this was no sign of "safety". The government's reaction, at the time, was to declare a "War on Terror". But the cynicism of this was the fact that most Americans did not know was that the USA had been involved in helping sustain the terrorist cadres for some time. However, at the root, the US decision-makers have proven to be naive because these groups assisted by the USA are disloyal and manipulative. In this ongoing saga, with people like Pompeo, Bolton and Elliott Abrams, this naivety and incompetence continues so the high costs on poor decision-making will continue to prejudice the world and ultimately to the people of America.
This evil plan has already created havoc and human suffering in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria resulting in the deaths and displacement of millions of people. The mentality of those that run this policy is one that has no compassion or feeling for those affected because the focus in purely on the survival of Israel and the Saudi Royal family. This cold and cynical approach to life arises from a process which evolved out of the Holocaust where the lessons include the fact that a particular group could not count on anyone to prevent those in power murdering members of their group. The imperative priority shaped a philosophy that personal survival can only be guaranteed by taking any actions necessary, including murdering any who even appear to be threatening that survival. This is not a Jewish trait but it is an obvious governing principle of many who were involved in the construction and today, governance of Israel. This is why the gradualist and proven techniques of diplomacy have fallen by the wayside and these have infected the American administrations. Benjamin Netanyahu was friend of Donald Trump's father, which goes some way to explain the excesses of Trump in respect to Israel and Netanyahu in partiular. It also goes some way to explain the Israeli lobby's influence in the 2016 election in support of Trump.
The evolving problem is that this nihilist cold inhumane approach to policy, albeit a pathological condition, has been accepted wholeheartedly by President Trump where, rather that apply this survival at any cost to a race or religion, he has applied this same aggressive approach to economics and finance. This has created a troubling correlation between so-called Neo-Liberal economics and globalism and the habit of applying sanctions on countries who do not wish to follow US dictats. Sanctions were a key arm in preparation for "regime change" applied in the case of Iraq and Syria resulting in the death of around 600,000 children in Iraq, written off as something of no consequence by some in the administration. The same sort of tactics were observed around the Maiden affair in the Ukraine with the direct and overt involvement of the US State Department and some Congress Members. The problem is that these policies have created chaos for countries who have made the mistake of supporting US alliances in such efforts. The European Union is in upheaval as a result of refugees and migrants escaping the violence and Turkey has also felt the brunt of irresponsible policies. The recent targets and justifications for actions have had to shift from "Communism" to "Socialism" because Russia has not been under a Communist government for almost 30 years and China has escaped these US onslaughts because the focus has been on Israel's rather extensive back yard, and China has become a dominant economy. The tag "Socialism" is a cliché increasingly referred to as evil, but it is not well understood by those on the attack. It is simply a tag to which will be added all sorts of evil associations to justify US-inspired regime changes put to the UN Security Council. The underlying violence promoted and the phrase "all options are on the table" only perpetuate the objective of promoting intimidation rather than demonstrating an ability to listen and learn and then to respond with constructive proposals. This is a dangerous arrogance. Creating global mayhem to guarantee one's survival cannot end well.
The ugly underbelly of the processes applied to carry out these policies are kept secret and hidden from the public. The degree to which "those serving their country in uniform" become involved in metering out unacceptance cruelty and violence, murdering civilians and unarmed individuals, kidnapping (rendition) and torture, all transgressions of established international agreements, norms and the US Constitution are kept from public view. The spirit of the role of the press in the US Constitution is that reporters are supposed to be able to monitor what politicians and adminsistrations are doing in the name of the electorate. The press is supposed to hold governments to account but unfortunately like most political representatives they have become cowards, fearful of reporting the truth. They have dedicated an inordinate amount ot coverage and reporting time wasting fantacies about "Russian collusion" and reporting on strings of investigative outcomes such as the identification of transgressions, based on aggressive plea bargaining, on issues that have no connection to the purpose of the investigations. The corruption of the Democractic National Congress related to Clinton funding, the corrupt manipulation to marginalise candidate Bernie Sanders and the funding of a dodgy dossier by Clinton-financed operators and used by the FBI, in the knowledge of the falsehood of its contents, in convincing a judge to justify an investigation all point to an equivalent decadence within domestic politics of the country. However, it is in the public interest that the public can have access to truth of such horrenous international deeds and domestic corruption because it is in the public interest that those who elect their governments become aware of the behaviour of their representatives and employees of government agencies. While the corporate media failed to keep the American public informed and therefore lost their credibility, Wikileaks received increasing amounts of material which the US and global media would have received if they were doing their job. So Wikileaks and Julian Assange, in particular, acted as is required by acting out the intended role of the press under the American Constitution. The Constitution, on this issue, does not state what is acceptable or not acceptable coverage it is only oriented towards uncovering the truth, no matter how unpalitable and upsetting. Distasteful facts and events do not reflect on the publisher, they point to those who are responsible and this, of course, is the Constitutional objective; accountability.
The people of America have the right to be better informed by their own national media. While this is resisted by intelligence agencies and corporate media, Wikileaks remains a valuable source to what is illicitly hidden from the electorate. It has pointed out who is accountable for dastardly deeds including corruption, murder and torture in a wholesale onslaught on international law and the American Constitution. It is therefore evident who is responsible and, as can be seen, it is these same people who pursue Julian Assange. The Constitutional provision for protecting the freedom of the press clearly extends that right by not condoning those who would attempt to remove that Constitutional protection by resorting to intimidation and abuse. The Constitution certainly provides no provisions for punishing jornalists who uphold the Constitution. Those accountable are complaining about Assange and these complaints are given ample coverage in the corporate media in an effort to distract attention from the perpetrators of the crimes he has exposed. The people of America need to, somehow, organize through peaceful political process to put the US Constitution back in its rightful place as a beacon for all, and to drive away from power, those who benefit, so well, from its abuse.
