03 December 2010

Julian the almighty and WikiLeaks vs America

Yulia Latynina -  a hard-hitting Russian journalist and a remarkable person published an article Julian the almighty on Julian Assange in the Russian Daily Journal. While the article in general is dedicated to this conflicting (and quite pathetic, as it shows) character, there is a part that touches upon the effect of the latest batch of documents published by WikiLeaks. It is a remarkable analysis, hardly seen anywhere else, US media included. Since it's in Russian, a rather poor Google translation, cleaned up a bit by yours truly, is offered. In my humble opinion, it's a must. So:

And from the American diplomatic correspondence follows that American diplomacy does exactly what it says. Or don't you know that Qadaffi is mad tyrant who is afraid to fly and to live on the upper floors? Are you unaware that sex maniac Berlusconi is bought by Putin? Don't you believe that Putin is an Alpha Dog?

So American public diplomacy doesn't use these monikers in public. So what? If someone records my phone conversations, they can hear  what I'm saying on Ekho Moskvy. Only shorter and unprintable. This is not a scandal.

It would have been a scandal if Americans wrote in their secret diplomatic mail that Qadaffi is a saint, but as he fights against our bloody American regime, he must be discredited.

In fact, this is the main problem for Julian Assange and the extreme left. They always reveal, expose - mostly the bloody American regime, because, firstly, it is perfectly safe to do, and secondly, the bloody regime uses computers. (Tyrants who don't use computers don't deserve Assange's attention.)

And it turns out that this [American] regime, no matter how you expose it, looks exactly the same inside as it does from the outside. Inside goals are the same as the outside ones. Inside methods -  the same as the outside ones.

Assange has dug up 300 thousand documents about Iraq - and among them there is not a single one that carries the information that Bush is going to drink up the Iraqi oil. He has dug up 92 thousand pages about Afghanistan - and among them there is not a single one with the directive to massacre civilians. 250 thousand documents of diplomatic correspondence - and ... lo and behold! There is not a word that the bloody American regime, using its puppet Saakashvili, performed genocide against the Ossetian people. And nothing about the bloody Americans training torturers who slaughter freedom fighters in the Colombian jungle (as was told recently in a filmed reportage by Russia Today).

Assange came up with three quarters of a million documents - and all together they refute that drivel, which is spewed about American  foreign and military policy by the extreme left, Islamists, African cannibals, Latin American dictators, general Nagovitsyn and "Nashi" from Lake Seliger. And, by the way, by Assange himself. In this sense, as I said, all paranoias in the world are equal. There are no different paranoias - there is one and the same paranoia.


Francis Sedgemore said...

<p>Yulia Latynina has a professional and political pedigree that warrants respect, but the translated sections of her article on "Julian the Almighty" which you quote do not present the journalist in a particularly good light. I only wish that my comprehension of Russian were better than rudimentary, and I could read Latynina's piece in full.
</p><p>While the recent outpouring of Wilikeaks do not confirm the sub-Chomskyite prejudices of the lumpen left, they do reveal details of the very human and therefore flawed characters of those who manage our dysfunctional nation-states, whether we live in the democratic west, autocratic Russia or wherever. To that end Wikileaks performs a valuable public service, and acts in defence of the open society.
</p><p>There have also been some substantial leaks of information on military cock-ups and political incompetence with tragic consequences. It is by no means all bears, woods, popes and catholics stuff, however much Latynina and others find it convenient to portray it thus.
</p><p>Whatever one thinks about Julian Assange – and my personal opinion of the man has never been high – Wikileaks is not Assange's personal vanity project. It is unfortunate that many in the journalistic and wider media focus unduly on this one individual, and mistakenly label him as the organisation's founder. He isn't.
</p><p>If Wikileaks goes down as a result of western, eastern or whatever state action, it will likely be back in short order. Preferably under new management, or at least with the old management minus the foppish, itinerant prima donna with whom the politicians and commentariat are currently obsessed.

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Francis, I am afraid you are looking at something that the Latynina's article is not: i.e. a balanced, see-all-sides-of-the-issue piece.

Latynina is a pro-Western independent journalist, which is a rare phenomenon these days. I don't know what she thinks about the WikiLeaks in general, she didn't talk about this in this article. Its main thrusts is Assange, and the portrait she presents is pitiful, but this is besides the point.

The point is that in the part I've translated she talks about the expectations of the latest WikiLeaks deliveries vs the results. And I could hardly argue with her general conclusions. You simply don't argue with them, addressing other sides of the issue, such as necessity of a mechanism of WikiLeaks, some details of flawed characters who lead us etc. 

I am afraid that these are outside of the brief of the part I've translated and, in my opinion, outside of the whole article too.

Dick Stanley said...

The lady has a point. Paranoia stays remarkably the same as it crosses borders and boundaries.

So does Francis. Most of this stuff should not have been kept secret. But it would be refreshing, for once, to see the exposers tackle somebody besides the USA. Or do we just have a disproportionate number of traitors willing to help them?

SnoopyTheGoon said...

As it seems to me, Francis was (correctly) arguing points that the lady just didn't address, at least not it that piece.

Anonymous said...

Snoop: I posted a link to this post, twice, on one of the threads in The New Republic. So don't be surprised if you get some unexpected callers.

Anonymous said...

The 'guest' was noga, of course. I always forget to register expecting to be known instantly...

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Thanks and no worries. I shall take care of the unruly ones.

David All said...

The main problem with Wikileaks leaks are that they are embarassing to the US and some of its allies such as Saudi Arabia that quietly want the US and/or Israel to take out Iran's ability to produce nuclear weapons, but do not wish to say so publicly. (I am sure the Saudi King quite regrets his colorful, "cut off the head of the snake" remark concerning Iran!) Also embarrassing is doucments that show just how corrupt the Afghan regime of Karzai is. Not embarrassing, but frightening are the documents which reveal just how spilit between Islamists and pro-Westerners the nuclear armed Pakistani military is.

SnoopyTheGoon said...

That true, however the same angle was of benefit to Israel, as some suspicious Tehran bureaucrats pointed out. 

David All said...

Snoopy, since Israel is a democracy I like to think that most of the time the truth favors Israel as compared to her authortarian neighbors.

David All said...

OT: Here is another story out of Russia.
"Lenin Statue Blown Up in Russian Suburb" at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/07/world/main7126172.shtml?tag=cbsnewsSectionContent.3

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Let's hope so at least.

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Another one? Thanks.