21 Aug 2010

Authorities Blow the Whistle on Wikileaks Founder

Big Brother, Conspiracy 25 Comments

Hmmm. Bob Roddis sent me some stores on Lila Rajiva’s site, raising skepticism about the street cred of Wikileaks. (Try this one for example, and follow its links at the top if you want more.)

At first I thought, “Oh give me a break, so the government purposely allowed that helicopter video to leak out, in order to get progressives to trust Wikileaks, in order to justify its other stuff?” But actually, the stuff on Rajiva’s site makes a decent case.

However, I now see that Sweden is trying to arrest Wikileaks founder Julian Assange for rape “molestation”. [UPDATE: The charges were changed.] So there are a few possibilities:

(1) Assange did it.

(2) Assange is innocent, but the Swedish authorities genuinely believe he did it.

(3) The Swedish government is helping the U.S. government crack down on Wikileaks, which is truly a thorn in its side.

(4) This is yet another bold move by the global elite, to bolster Assange’s street cred with Justin Raimondo so that when Assange goes to prison he can yell out, “Iraq was a mistake, but 9/11 was an outside job!! Wait for me, Matilda!”

I rule out #4.

25 Responses to “Authorities Blow the Whistle on Wikileaks Founder”

  1. Alex Tabarrok says:

    Check your Sweden link again.

  2. Random says:

    How is your research on the Japanese deflation coming along? I’m looking forward to your findings.

  3. Not Bob Murphy's Love Child says:

    charges were dropped

  4. Bob Roddis says:

    I have no opinion on this expose of Wikileaks stuff except the “blaime Pakistan so we can invade Pakistan” line sounds interesting.

    I also wonder about all of this 24/7 “ground zero” “Mosque” stuff. O’Reilly should have Bob Murphy on every night, not Karl Rove and Dick Morris.

    O’Reilly’s purposeful mispresentation (assuming he’s smart enough to know right from wrong) of everything relating to the middle-east is something to behold.

  5. Bob Roddis says:

    I hate laptop keyboards.

    I meant:

    O’Reilly’s purposeful misrepresentation……….

  6. Blackadder says:

    You know, Bob, it’s been sad watching your decline.

    • Andy says:

      Decline? I’m not being chauvinistic here but what are you insinuating?

    • Louis B. says:

      Don’t worry Bob, my Nature Trick can hide the decline.

    • bobmurphy says:

      So you do think Wikileaks is a giant concoction of the global elites, being used to discredit the 9/11 Truthers and also to justify the invasion of Pakistan?

      Because the point of my post was that I don’t think that’s what’s going on here.

      • Dan says:

        I personally believe 9/11 was an inside job, but I doubt Assange is a front for the US. You and Lew Rockwell don’t subscribe to the 9/11 theory (which I think is smart whether you believe it or not) but are obviously not fronts. Most of the 9/11 truther crowd is angry without the economic background to know what to do with it. When someone says they don’t believe 9/11 was an inside job the truthers assume they are a mole because of their lack of knowledge in economic matters. They don’t know who to trust. They don’t realize that their anger should be focused on everything the government does and not just one example of their criminal activity. Their leaders are guys like Alex Jones who leave them angry and without hope. If they aren’t lucky, like myself, they will never discover Austrian economics and will always be lost without a compass.

        Having just a little truth can lead people to follow false prophets. Well now that I just said that maybe Assange is setting people up to follow a false prophet. Is Assange a keynesian?

        • bobmurphy says:

          Where are you getting my views on 9/11 from? (I’m genuinely asking; I can’t remember where I’ve talked about it.)

          • Dan says:

            You have said in the past on this blog that the 9/11 truthers had valid arguments but you haven’t looked into enough to take a stance really one way or another. I think you said something along the lines that getting bogged down on 9/11 wasn’t needed since you don’t believe in the State at all whether they did it or not. I was just saying that I haven’t seen a person on lrc saying 9/11 was an inside job. Not that you have the same opinion as Assange. Most of the 9/11 truthers I know have this mindset where they view any prominent figure who doesn’t believe exactly as they do on 9/11 is probably just a stooge for the State. I know of one friend that kept claiming that Ron Paul of all people was a plant because he didn’t say 9/11 was an inside job.

            • bobmurphy says:

              OK sorry I didn’t read your comment closely enough. I thought you had assumed from this latest post, that I was saying 9/11 was an outside job.

  7. #1 Zombie Fan says:

    Why do you assume the Us Govt is involved ?
    Perhaps another country is fronting this.
    This dropping of charges so quickly has me suspicious.

    Hint: It is the country we don’t speak about here.

  8. JimS says:

    IF they wanted this guy, that is the US gov, why would they or any country do a trumped rape charge? There are numerous other charges dealing with classfied material, misappropriation, spying, treason, etc. that could be easily levied.

    It is interesting to note that the Hornet loaded up and sat in the SF Bay and sailed under the Golden Gate with B-25s on her deck sailing to hit Japan and no one said a word let alone reported such events in the paper. My, how times have changed.


    • bobmurphy says:

      To ruin his reputation. The whole world has now seen the headlines that he was charged with “molestation.” A lot of people are drawing parallels to this.

      • JimS says:

        Espionage, treason, theivery are all reputation ruiners in my book, just as is rape. I do not know the story, but likely someone filed a complaint and according to Swedish law, authoritites were bound to respond. Upon further investigation, they realized the allegations were sketchy at best.

        Think about it, in the US, because of our attitude toward sex and domestic crimes, all woman need do is claim something happened and that is often enough to turn the dogs of law loose. I’m certain Assage has a fair chunk of change from his business which attracts a certain type of female who may seek to take advantage. Just ask Mel Gibson of his opinion on the matter.


        • bobmurphy says:

          In the US, if a woman claims something happened and the dogs of law are turned loose, do the dogs get put back on their leash within 12 hours?

          Pentagon officials have already said Assange has “blood on his hands,” etc. I don’t know if they are actively seeking to arrest him; maybe they are. There was talk a few weeks ago of a US manhunt for Assange. This is actually part of the conspiracy theory on this; just like the US government (in the conspiracy-theorist’s view) pretends it’s trying to find Osama bin Laden, so too does the US government make all these statements about how much they hate Julian Assange. This gives him credibility with the antiwar crowd, so then when Wikileaks “leaks” cables written by US diplomats etc. painting Pakistan as the bad guys, it drums up support for US invasion.

          Anyway, my point in all this is that the US government is already doing a lot of what you’re suggesting. So this rape charge is just one more thing.

          • JimS says:

            I think they do call the dogs off if the allegations turn out to be really outrageous. I do know, that unlike other crimes, alleged sex crimes and domestic crimes result in an automatic arrest in the US. Perhaps Sweden has a similar thing with rape?

            Let us say that instead of US government secrets Assage leaked a medicine company’s patent, or an internal memo of some software company, or the notes to Dr. Murphy’s next best seller, these things would be theft. I think Assage is a thief. You may say his cause is noble, and that may be true, but he is still a thief.

            I think if the US gov wanted him they’d have him. He is no where as elusive as Bin Laden. Having been involved in military actions, I know it is most difficult to find a bin Laden or Azid type. These are hardly public figures.

            If they could easily find Bin Laden, why not just before an election? What a hat trick that would be. I think there are many difficulties associated with the hunt.

            I have serious doubts about conspiracy theories. These folks cannot manage the economy or various government agencies let alone something as complex as a conspiracy. Of course, many might say that the mismanagement is part of the conspiracy; that too is hard to swallow.


  9. Bhruic says:

    Assange is still suspected of committing a crime, but the prosecutor doesn’t want to specify what kind of crime.
    As a Swede I would have to go with option 3.

  10. Bob Roddis says:

    Why speculate about intrigue when the actual truth is stranger than fiction? From antiwar.com about our “friend” Karzai:

    That election last August was so marked by fraud as to lead many observers to believe he stole it. It may be likely that the widespread fraud was unnecessary, that he would have won fair and square without it. But he has been fairly unbearable ever since. His actions toward strengthening the election complaint commission were so unsatisfactory that the White House postponed a scheduled Karzai visit to Washington. So Karzai went ahead and invited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – yes, that Ahmadinejad – to Kabul, where he delivered a fiery anti-American speech in the presidential palace with Mr. Karzai standing by, smiling. Mr. Karzai then visited Ahmadinejad last weekend in Tehran.


    I had not heard this before. But I did hear about that horrible mosque.

  11. Libertarian says:

    “Most of the 9/11 truther crowd is angry without the economic background to know what to do with it.”

    Great point from Dan. Never have put it this way, but it’s always how I’ve felt about truthers.