Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:19 PM Jun 2013

Chris Hedges: "We Steal Secrets:" State AgitProp...On Bradley Manning

‘We Steal Secrets’: State Agitprop" (Chris Hedges on Bradley Manning)
by Chris Hedges

Is the most important thing about Martin Luther King Jr. the fact that he was a serial adulterer? Did King’s infidelities invalidate his life and struggle? Do the supposed defects of Assange and Manning negate what they did? Gibney would have us believe they do. Manning, in a just world, would be a witness for the prosecution of those who committed war crimes. Assange would be traveling around the United States collecting First Amendment awards.

The persecution of Manning and Assange is not an isolated act. It is part of a terrifying assault against our most important civil liberties and a free press. Manning and Assange are the canaries in the mineshaft. They did not seek to sell the documents that WikiLeaks published or to profit personally from their release. They are part of the final, desperate battle under way to stymie the security and surveillance state’s imposition of corporate totalitarianism. They and others who attempt to expose the crimes of the state—such as Jeremy Hammond, who admitted in a plea agreement last week that he had hacked into the private intelligence firm Stratfor and who faces up to 10 years in prison—will be ruthlessly persecuted. And the traditional media, which printed the secret cables provided by WikiLeaks and then callously abandoned Manning and Assange, will be next.


The Associated Press recently saw the state seize two months of its emails and phone logs, and the government has admitted seizing Fox News reporter James Rosen’s phone records. Half a dozen government whistle-blowers have been charged by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act. It is becoming harder and harder to peer into the inner workings of power. And once there are no Mannings or Assanges, once no one is willing to take risks to expose the crimes of empire, there will be no freedom of the press.

The fundamental conceit of “We Steal Secrets” is that Assange’s concern about the possibility of being arrested by U.S. authorities is a product of paranoia and self-delusion. The vast array of intergovernment forces—at least a dozen—dedicated to arresting Assange, extraditing him and destroying WikiLeaks is, Gibney would have us believe, fictional. I detailed these forces in “The Death of Truth.” The refusal to acknowledge the massive campaign against Assange is the most disturbing aspect of the film. There are numerous indications, including in leaked Stratfor emails, that a sealed indictment against Assange is in place. But Gibney refuses to buy it.

“Had the secret-leaker become the secret-keeper, more and more fond of mysteries?” Gibney asks in the film. “The biggest mystery of all was the role of the United States. Over two years after the first leak, no charges had been filed by the U.S. Assange claimed that the U.S. was biding its time, waiting for him to go to Sweden, but there was no proof.”
-----
Adrian Lamo, who worked as an FBI informant, faking a friendship with Manning to sell him out, is given a perch in the film to wring his hands like Judas over how agonizing it was for him to turn in Manning. He did it, he assures us, to keep the country safe, although no one has ever been able to point to any loss of life caused by the leak of the secret documents.

“I care more about Bradley than many of his supporters do. … And I had to betray that trust for the sake of all of the people that he put in danger,” Lamo says tearfully. It is one of the most cloying moments in the movie.

MUCH MORE AND WORTH THE READ AT:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/03-11

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
1. Thought Chris Hedges made interesting point, here:
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:40 PM
Jun 2013


"Is the most important thing about Martin Luther King Jr. the fact that he was a serial adulterer? Did King’s infidelities invalidate his life and struggle? Do the supposed defects of Assange and Manning negate what they did? Gibney would have us believe they do. Manning, in a just world, would be a witness for the prosecution of those who committed war crimes. Assange would be traveling around the United States collecting First Amendment awards."
 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
4. Didn't you like Gibney's 'Enron: the Smartest Guys in the Room?'
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:50 PM
Jun 2013

Also, as I detailed in post # 3, I think the dismissal of victims of sexual assault in this Hedges' piece is offensive.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
5. Yep. If DU was around in the 60's...
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:55 PM
Jun 2013

Every time MLK Jr. was brought up in a thread, the crabs would be howling incessantly about rumors of his affairs, and refuse to let any discussion of the civil rights movement go without a huge flamefest about how MLK Jr's a horrible person for having an affair.

Can't have any fellows getting out of the bucket, can we?

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
3. Hedges uses misogynistic language to describe a woman who is a victim of sexual assault.
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:45 PM
Jun 2013

Calling one of the women who has filed charges against Assange an "estranged paramour" is disgusting and demeaning. Characterizing a rape charge as "sexual misbehavior" is just....unspeakable.

"We Steal Secrets" is a very uncomfortable film for Assange fans to watch. I get that. But demeaning a victim of sexual assault should be beneath a "progressive."

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
6. Why, our transparent government would never, ever, periisb the thought, go after whistelblowers.
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 09:00 PM
Jun 2013

Except when they fear that the people will find out what they actually do when not waving the flag and talking about "transparent government".

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
7. Gross.
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 09:01 PM
Jun 2013

Starts off with a RW slur of MLK Jr. and proceeds to slobber all over two Ron Paul-loving crooks.

Auto-Hedge hide.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
9. Ron Paul...Where is Ron Paul Mentioned anwhere in this. Did you reply to the wrong post by accident
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 09:37 PM
Jun 2013
Kind of bizarre...along with the What the heck are you talking about?

I'll give you "benefit of doubt" that you made a mistake replying to this thread...And, apologize "If" you made an honest mistake, though.

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
8. They're not protecting anyone except themselves, the 'money trumps peace' crowd.
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 09:03 PM
Jun 2013

STRATFOR wikileaks cache revealed incestuous relationship between intel insiders and Wall Street.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002366571

Response to Octafish (Reply #8)

snot

(10,530 posts)
11. It makes no sense
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 10:57 PM
Jun 2013

to ignore the war crimes exposed by Assange to fixate on allegations that he had unpermitted sex without a condom. I don't mean to say the latter doesn't matter; but the difference in magnitude is extreme, to say the least.

We can't let ourselves be so easily distracted

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
14. Assange wanted a million dollars to be interviewed for the documentary....
Mon Jun 3, 2013, 11:38 PM
Jun 2013

the director refused to pay him, and rightly so....

Jon Wiener: Any film about Wikileaks has to make interviewing Julian Assange task number one. You worked hard on that, and finally you met with him to discuss an interview. How did that go?

Alex Gibney: Not so well. I tried over the course of a year and a half to get the interview. He’d already been interviewed by practically everyone on the planet. Finally we had a six hour meeting. He told me that the market rate for an interview was a million dollars. I told him I don’t pay for interviews. He said “That’s too bad, in that case you might do something else for me.” He wanted me to spy on our other interview subjects—which I found a rather odd request from someone concerned about source protection. So I never did get the interview with Julian Assange.


Read more: http://www.thenation.com/blog/174526/we-steal-secrets-filmmaker-alex-gibney-talks-about-wikileaks#ixzz2VDOzQV9x

http://www.thenation.com/blog/174526/we-steal-secrets-filmmaker-alex-gibney-talks-about-wikileaks#

 

Pelican

(1,156 posts)
17. The fact that he didn't want money doesn't mean squat...
Tue Jun 4, 2013, 03:16 AM
Jun 2013

It was his ideology that drove him and his need to hurt the organization that he had failed at and he felt had treated him unfairly.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chris Hedges: "We Steal S...