Yes dear reader(s?) it has been a small while since my writings
were consistent and while I promised I had been working on a few articles -
that is true – they remain works in progress for your dear blogger has been a
magnus ignavus solum. Yes I can roll out the upper class fancities when needs
must. So today I am going to write a little about a few different interests of
mine all nicely intermingled into the one blog: history, criminology and
politics. The history is brief – a quick synopsis of the report released
recently about Pat Finucane. The criminology is investigative of the state. The politics will aim to show how if we
sociologically and politically wished to learn from history and criminology, we
can quite easily do that and the tools are there for us now.
A report was recently released detailing how British intelligence colluded with the RUC and the UDA, or to be
PC about it, they ‘facilitated’ the murder of a Human Rights lawyer, Mr. Pat
Finucane. To be un-PC about it, the report merely stated in cold truth the
unspoken words of the years of ‘the Troubles’ – that the agents of the British
government, in the name of law and order conspired with the loyalist militias
to kill (as they saw it) Republican sympathizers. If they were willing to do
this to get a human rights lawyer, then you cannot be in any doubt it was done
to get Republican Paramilitaries as well. The report of Sir Desmond de Silva
implied that ignorance
among politicians about what was happening on the ground in Belfast was almost
intentional. On BBC Radio 4 Wednesday, Lord King (who was Thatcher’s
Northern Ireland Secretary) feigned total shock at the findings of the De Silva
Report and of course defended the RUC. As an agent of the state, the RUC were
answerable to government so this defense by King is wrong. Indeed De Silva said his report, which was mainly a review of the
paperwork relating to the case, "left me in no doubt that agents of the
state were involved in carrying out serious violations of human rights up to
and including murder". He went on: "However, despite the different
strands of involvement by elements of the state, I am satisfied that they were
not linked to an over-arching state conspiracy to murder Patrick
Finucane."
If he merely reviewed the paperwork relating to the case,
the Northern Ireland Secretary would have seen this paperwork at the time. The
other side to this is the side of the Finucane family. Mr. Finucane’s widow
spoke after the release of the statement and after watching the debate about
the report in the House of Commons. She said that it was “a report into which we have had no input. The British
government has engineered a suppression of the truth behind the murder of my
husband." She went on to say that dead witnesses and now-defunct military organisations had
been given the main share of the blame.
On the side of the government, that is not too shabby a hand
to try and play. But as Michael
Finucane, one of Pat Finucane's sons, said: "This is another piece of the
jigsaw. The report needs to be read and the documents studied.
"They
are bare and cold, containing more shocking facts. That can be used to further
our case for a public inquiry."
It has taken over twenty years for the family to get this
far and they are not finished their journey yet. Twenty three years to squeeze
a little more information from the government archives in their search for the
truth. Now I realise this is a sensitive subject and I apologise if anyone
reads this that thinks I’m attempting to exploit this case for my argument. I’m
not. I’m arguing for an immense power that we the people have in our midst and
we’ve allowed ourselves be blinded by lies as to how helpful it can be for us.
(A quick aside to the Finucane news, Robert Fisk pointed out that “our protectors” released some more damning news on the same day that the Finucane Report came out. Amazing
the stories that our governments slip out on the quiet.)
As a society, we have in our midst today an organisation
that has been pilloried, attacked and in effect, criminalised by some of the
most criminal governments around. An organisation that in the last number of
years, has had more journalistic scoops than ‘esteemed’ journalistic empires like the BBC or the New
York Times.
This organisation is of course, Wikileaks.
The anger is still obvious today. Here is an interview conducted by the BBC with the leader of the organisation,
Julian Assnage. Invited on to discuss his new book, Cypherpunks (which I highly recommend), it didn’t take the ‘journalist’
10 seconds to forget her Journalism for Dummies handbook and accuse Mr. Assange
of the falsities that the mainstream media are still perpetrating. I emailed
the BBC World Service and complained about her personal attack on him and her
false accusations and was told that
“We regret that
you were unhappy with the Zeinab Badawi interview with Julian Assange. We would
like to assure you that we always strive to report in an unbiased, responsible,
factual and sensitive manner.
The relevant
department have given us the following statement, regarding this interview:
"It was a
robust interview where Mr Assange put his points and the BBC asked challenging
questions - as we do of all guests."
Robust interview my arse! The mainstream are fighting
governments’ battles so they can maintain their access and this shows.
Wikileaks have uncovered and shared with the world massively
important issues that prove beyond doubt governments lie, they cover up murder,
they tolerate abuse. Think Afghanistan
and Iraq war logs. They’ve released diplomatic communications detailing what
diplomats think of their host nations and government ministers. With relevance
to Ireland, Wikileaks detailed what government ministers thought of their own
legal system and it’s people. All this information obtained and released within a few years of their
happenings.
When awarded their Walkley prize for journalism in Australia
(the comparison would be the American Pulitzers), the panel noted the group’s “courageous and controversial
commitment to the finest traditions of journalism: justice through
transparency,” and hailed it for having “applied new technology to penetrate
the inner workings of government to reveal an avalanche of inconvenient truths
in a global publishing coup.” In summation, they said “by designing and
constructing a means to encourage whistleblowers, WikiLeaks and its
editor-in-chief Julian Assange took a brave, determined and independent stand
for freedom of speech and transparency that has empowered people all over the
world.” Some commendation.
In tackling State Crimes, I don’t believe there is any
organisation more valuable to society than Wikileaks. Don’t believe me? Look at
how the attitudes changed within the mainstream media after the US government
started going after them. The New York Times, The Guardian, all dropped
Wikileaks like a hot stone. If you are in the media and the government love
you, then there is something wrong. "A
cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press must be suffered by
those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of
expression and the right of the people to know." -- Judge Murray
Gurfein, Pentagon Papers case, June 17, 1971
The problem today is access. The press wants it and the
government gives it to the good news clubs. Wikileaks threatened these news
corporations access by revealing government lies and the access was revoked.
That caused anger on behalf of the news organisations. Hatred and jealousy
festered and those that were associated with Wikileaks also bore the brunt of
the mainstream media’s petty jealousy. Read the following article from the
‘liberal’ Guardian newspaper on the winner of their Person of the Year 2012 Award
Bradley Manning has been held for 934 days at the time of
writing without trial. He was
accused of releasing state secrets to Wikileaks. State secrets that Robert
Gates, then defense secretary of the US, later stated “has not revealed any sensitive intelligence sources and methods
compromised by the disclosure.”
Yet there he is. 934 days without being charged of any
crime. Do the mainstream media cover his case? No. The media complicity and
submissiveness of the last few years has been criminal.
Likewise without any criminal prosecutions, US ‘lawmakers’
got companies like Mastercard, Visa, Paypal, Amazon to all cut support for
Wikileaks and their work. Corrupt, inept politicians. Who has stood by it? The People.
People are financing it, keeping it going. Paypal, Visa and Mastercard stopped
allowing payments to be made despite Wikileaks breaking no laws. Anywhere.
Thankfully our European Parliament has some balls.
But did Wikileaks die? No. People are still finding ways of
supporting it.
Like this way.
Or this.
Or this.
Besides my hinting at ways to support this organisation, my
main point with this argument is that organisations like Wikileaks can ensure
that if States commit or collude in crimes, that swifter justice for victims
could ensue. It could mean less chance that dead witnesses and now-defunct military organisations could
be saddled with the main share of the blame in cases like Mr. Finnucane’s. Think
of the Hillsborough tragedy and the time taken to get the government to
acknowledge the wrong that happened. Think of the struggles that families have
had while the police, the government and the media created a false shitstorm
around the 96 victims. Thankfully in the US, there is a fight back taking
place. The newly formed Press Freedom Foundation is taking the lead to try and ensure that Wikileaks can get the funds needed to
operate successfully. I would urge you if you can spare a few of whatever
currency you use to spare it on these guys. Their battle for transparency
affects us all. Whatever one government gets away with, others will only
follow.
We
need whistleblowers and we need organisations like Wikileaks. Ironically,
Hilary Clinton has spoken about the need for whistleblowers while her President
has used the Espionage Act more times to prosecute whistleblowers than any
preceding administration combined. This clip really says it all and this article is worth a read
Remember that in 2008 Candidate Obama said “Government
whistleblowers are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from
reprisal."
934 days. Without trial.
Most mainstream media do not even bother covering Bradley
Manning’s case. Al Jazeera’s programme, The Listening Post, covered investigated
this in their most recent show.
It is thanks to Twitter and being able to follow dedicated
professional caring human beings that I have been able to. These people,
alongside Bradley Manning, are heroes. They refuse to let Bradley’s story die.
They cover it, tweet about it, write about it, go on independent media with his
story.
So for Christmas this year, consider supporting Bradley
Manning,
Even if it is to be supportive and write him a letter to
know that his cause is being followed.
Small acts can be the biggest boost when you learn others around the world
believe your cause to be just. Don’t let the military machine of the US beat
this man.
Consider supporting Wikileaks using the links above.
Remember: The truth is not treason unless we allow it to
become treason by not standing up for the truth tellers.
No comments:
Post a Comment