Hillary Vs. Assange
This is a fictitious exchange between Hillary Clinton and Julian Assange over the leaked diplomatic cables.
Some will enjoy, some others will revolt… oh well…
Disclaimer: Mr. Assange did not approve of this nor has anything to do with this.
Clinton’s assertions were taken verbatim from here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmKxCe7m1Tw
Clinton: Documents were illegally provided from United States Government computers.
Assange: They might have been so. I can’t assert that, an international court may have to rule on that one. I believe, though, that it is in the world’s best interest to know about facts and figures that the US would not be willing to share otherwise out of fear of public embarrassment and out of sheer hypocrisy. Furthermore, a man’s actions in life cannot be blindly guided by what is passively accepted by the masses as “legal” but by a deeper, personal sense of Justice. I am well aware that my personal vision of what is legal and what is not was bound to clash with the current US definition of “justice” and I’m ready to face the consequences for my own actions. An undeniable proof of that is my surrender to the UK authorities to face false sex-related accusations although I’m well aware of the evident risks. I am fully assuming that as part of my consequences. Are you and the US government both ready to face your own consequences for documented actions and omissions, which have already negatively touched the lives of thousands, if not millions, of citizens of the world?
Clinton: In my conversations with counterparts from around the world over the past few days, and in my meeting earlier today with Foreign Minister Davutoglu of Turkey, I have had very productive discussions on this issue.
Assange:How could it be otherwise if by “productive” you mean “convenient” for the statu quo?
Clinton: The United States strongly condemns the illegal disclosure of classified information.
Assange:We expected the US government to react that way, and, still, we decided that Justice is a perennial higher value which is above temporary and perfectible man-made laws, particularly, well above the current American version of international “justice”.
Clinton: It puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems.
Assange: We knew people’s lives were going to be in danger after the public release of these cables but, to our knowledge, not a single documented case of death has come to our attention which we can directly link with the public disclosure of the cables. We repeatedly asked The Pentagon to help us screen the documents in order to protect people’s identities and help was never forwarded. If lives are indeed at risk, it will be a shared liability. Furthermore, it seems rather ludicrous that the US government is now “worried” about “saving lives” when documents and footage extensively prove that the US government has repeatedly disregarded human life and human rights when forcing their agenda on other peoples of the globe.
Clinton: This Administration is advancing a robust foreign policy that is focused on advancing America’s national interests and leading the world in solving the most complex challenges of our time, from fixing the global economy, to thwarting international terrorism, to stopping the spread of catastrophic weapons, to advancing human rights and universal values. In every country and in every region of the world, we are working with partners to pursue these aims.
Assange: I believe I am not speaking for myself here but, when was the US unanimously appointed The World’s Attorney General, The Worlds’ Judge and The World’s Police Force? Who told the American government they are entitled to such a great responsibility and honor? The truth is, the US will intervene anywhere in the world whenever the US corporate interests are affected, and they will not do so out of philanthropic intentions.
Clinton: So let’s be clear: this disclosure is not just an attack on America’s foreign policy interests. It is an attack on the international community – the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations, that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity.
Assange: Déjà vu… do I hear George Bush speaking through you all over again? “If you’re not with America, you are against us” … I believe the international community is now tired of hearing such empty and offensive rhetoric. If there’s anyone here who’s a real threat to global stability, it is clearly the US foreign policy and not your purported and clichéd “public enemies”
Clinton: I am confident that the partnerships that the Obama Administration has worked so hard to build will withstand this challenge. The President and I have made these partnerships a priority – and we are proud of the progress that they have helped achieve – and they will remain at the center of our efforts.
Assange: That’s nice, congratulations on that.
Clinton: I will not comment on or confirm what are alleged to be stolen State Department cables. But I can say that the United States deeply regrets the disclosure of any information that was intended to be confidential, including private discussions between counterparts or our diplomats’ personal assessments and observations. I want to make clear that our official foreign policy is not set through these messages, but here in Washington. Our policy is a matter of public record, as reflected in our statements and our actions around the world.
Assange: I hope the US government, and particularly, your diplomats will see this as an opportunity to learn from their mistakes rather than another opportunity, yet again, to create international “monsters” and start “witch hunts” just to prove you can.
Clinton: I would also add that to the American people and to our friends and partners, I want you to know that we are taking aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information.
Assange: I don’t think you’re speaking on behalf of every American now. Fortunately, the US foreign policy is so scandalous and embarrassing that most sensible Americans now see what their government has been up to and will not continue to support your foreign agenda indiscriminately.
Clinton: I have directed that specific actions be taken at the State Department, in addition to new security safeguards at the Department of Defense and elsewhere to protect State Department information so that this kind of breach cannot and does not ever happen again.
Assange: But of course you have! But you should know that we are positive beyond the slightest doubt that there will continue to be TRUE Justice and democracy lovers within your ranks who will be willing to put their lives on the line again to bring ugly facts out of the US government’s closet. You can call them anything you want, we know they’re serving a higher purpose and God is truly with them. The only way you could possibly prevent these uncomfortable facts from being spilled to the world is by running a one-man operation and I doubt you would represent a threat to global stability then.
Clinton: Relations between governments aren’t the only concern created by the publication of this material. U.S. diplomats meet with local human rights workers, journalists, religious leaders, and others outside of governments who offer their own candid insights. These conversations also depend on trust and confidence. For example, if an anti-corruption activist shares information about official misconduct, or a social worker passes along documentation of sexual violence, revealing that person’s identity could have serious repercussions: imprisonment, torture, even death.
Assange: We have been told, time and again, that the US “war on terrorism” will unfortunately have “collateral damage” and we have had to learn to live with it although we do not necessarily agree with it. If hundreds of thousands of civil lives and young soldiers are the cost of your war on “terrorism” I am positive that a great number of “human rights workers, journalists, religious leaders and others outside of governments who offer their candid insights” will also be very willing to offer not only those insights but their very lives as well (and they are probably already doing it anyway) to stop the American nonsense throughout the world… so, will you please stop using them to justify your dirty American foreign policy cause it makes me and intelligent people around the globe sick!
Clinton: So whatever are the motives in disseminating these documents, it is clear that releasing them poses real risks to real people, and often to the very people who have dedicated their own lives to protecting others.
Assange: Yes, we agree here. This information poses a “real” risk to “real” people who have dedicated their own lives to protecting others. (their own people, that is)
Clinton: Now, I am aware that some may mistakenly applaud those responsible, so I want to set the record straight: There is nothing laudable about endangering innocent people, and there is nothing brave about sabotaging the peaceful relations between nations on which our common security depends.
Assange: Endangering innocent people? … You mean like those civilians and journalists gunned down like animals by American troops on the helicopter in Iraq just for kicks? … or like the millions who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?… like the innocent people who died in Vietnam… like the thousands of Palestinians dying every year just because they want their territories back? Will you please keep the hypocritical rhetoric to a bare minimum? You’re embarrassing yourself!
Clinton: There have been examples in history in which official conduct has been made public in the name of exposing wrongdoings or misdeeds. This is not one of those cases.
Assange: Do you really think intelligent people will buy it?
Clinton: In contrast, what is being put on display in this cache of documents is the fact that American diplomats are doing the work we expect them to do.
Assange: Of course they’re doing what you expect them to do! They are US government workers who live in some sort of affluence (by world standards) and who don’t have to drink contaminated water from a pit in the ground like Palestinians, Afghans and Iraqis are often forced to do because their already poor infrastructure was shattered to pieces in the name of some American “democratic” or “anti-terror” delusion… all for an all-American unquenchable thirst of oil.
Clinton: They (the diplomats) are helping identify and prevent conflicts before they start. They are working hard every day to solve serious practical problems – to secure dangerous materials, to fight international crime, to assist human rights defenders, to restore our alliances, to ensure global economic stability.
Assange: “Secure dangerous materials”, “fight international crime” … Bush jargon nightmare all over again. God help us!
Clinton: This is the role that America plays in the world. This is the role our diplomats play in serving America. And it should make every one of us proud.
Assange: Who established that? AND WHEN?… Who said this is the US role in the world? You are so full of yourselves. Get out of these illegally occupied countries and mind your own business, use that warfare money to create much needed jobs for your people instead…. that’s a sure way to mend the errors and spare honest Americans from the public embarrassment you’re already causing them. Go ahead and ask’em, I’m sure they’ll tell you to stop.
Clinton: The work of our diplomats doesn’t just benefit Americans, but also billions of others around the globe.
Assange: Say what? Billions? … There’s only seven of them in the world. TWO of them don’t even know the US exists and they’re starving to death, consequently, they couldn’t care less. TWO more are already looking into taking the power from you, so they couldn’t care less either. A fifth ONE hates you with all its guts and wants nothing from you. A sixth ONE looks at you in derision. A seventh ONE knows your screwed ways but expects something in return, so it will play along while profitable… So which specific “billions” are you talking about Mrs. Clinton?
Clinton: In addition to endangering particular individuals, disclosures like these tear at the fabric of the proper function of responsible government.
Assange: Responsible government… (??) Doesn’t the adjective “responsible” imply, precisely, facing the consequences of one’s own actions and omissions? Why is the US government complaining so acidly about the release of these cables when it is the US government who put itself in this embarrassing position by either a) not adhering to more intelligent international “diplomacy” writing standards and using proper deference when referring to international “allies” or by b) not protecting the sensitive information properly or by c) foolishly hiring actual humans (rather than well-trained chimpanzees) to manage the sensitive information?
Clinton: People of good faith understand the need for sensitive diplomatic communications, both to protect the national interest and the global common interest. Every country, including the United States, must be able to have candid conversations about the people and nations with whom they deal. And every country, including the United States, must be able to have honest, private dialogue with other countries about issues of common concern. I know that diplomats around the world share this view – but this is not unique to diplomacy. In almost every profession – whether it’s law or journalism, finance or medicine or academia or running a small business – people rely on confidential communications to do their jobs. We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it. And so despite some of the rhetoric we’ve heard these past few days, confidential communications do not run counter to the public interest. They are fundamental to our ability to serve the public interest.
Assange: I celebrate in “good faith” that the internet has changed (and will continue to do so) the way individuals treat each other and their sensitive information. With the advent of social networks, people have now started learning (often the hard way just as the government is now learning) how posting the wrong information on the net may have a potential negative effect on their reputations and relationships and are actively, although perhaps painfully, adapting to the new reality. Governments should follow suite, as in this era of free information flow, no one can really guarantee that private information will remain private indefinitely. Someone, somehow, will gain access to sensitive information as was the case, and if such information is of public relevance, as is the case too, this information might end up made available to the public as has been the case already. The Greater Good must be served rather than the selfish one deceivingly held by the current US foreign policy as the “Universal Desiderata”
Clinton: In America, we welcome genuine debates about pressing questions of public policy. We have elections about them. That is one of the greatest strengths of our democracy. It is part of who we are and it is a priority for this Administration. But stealing confidential documents and then releasing them without regard for the consequences does not serve the public good, and it is not the way to engage in a healthy debate.
Assange: I strongly disagree with you. Ask intelligent Americans now and people all over the world and you’ll be surprised how many disagree with your vision and with the current US behavior. The very nature of the content on these cables does not represent feelings of fairness, democracy and freedom the American government purportedly defends. Precisely by adopting a censorship position you’re threatening some of humankind’s fundamental rights: The right to free and uncensored access to information related to government deeds and a right to freely discuss such information. If anything, we’re giving back to the people what was genuinely theirs from day one and which had been shamelessly taken from them. Those cables were written by people whose salaries come from taxpayers on equipment bought with taxpayers’ money, thus, they are entitled to knowing each and every word said to the world on their behalf. It’s called accountability and it’s anything, but a new concept.
Governments need to know NOW that we are also keeping an eye ON THEM, and that “responsible government” is nowadays a two-way road with current technologies… we like it that way… and we’ll fight back to keep it that way.