The Assange case – what it means for socialists

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marxists
do not base themselves on abstract morality or principles that are
outside time and space. That is moral which serves to advance the cause
of socialism and raise the consciousness of the working class. That is
immoral and reactionary which acts to retard it.

Someone once said that power politics is the diplomatic name for the
law of the jungle. If there was ever any doubt about it, the WikiLeaks
revelations have proved once and for all the cynical nature of Western
diplomacy. Here the language of Saint Francis of Assisi is used to
conceal the methods of Al Capone.

The methods of the imperialists have a lot in common with
gangsterism, not only in form but in content. In order to understand the
workings of imperialist diplomacy it is not necessary to spend three
years in a university. Rather one should spend the same amount of hours
watching The Godfather.

The aims determine the methods. The aim of US imperialism is to
impose the will of the most powerful gangsters on all the others. The
methods are straight out of Machiavelli: the threat of violence, backed
up with actual violence, with blackmail, bribery and corruption as
useful subsidiaries. Lying, cheating, backstabbing and deceiving are the
stock-in-trade of imperialist diplomacy. This applies both to one’s
friends and to one’s enemies, because, as we know, nations do not have
friends, only interests.

The exposure by WikiLeaks of the crimes of the imperialists has
rendered a great service to the world working class. It has torn aside
the veil of “respectability” that conceals the criminal activities of
the official diplomacy to reveal before the public opinion of the world
the rotten, corrupt and vicious reality that lies behind it. This is a
very important development and one that deserves the most careful study
by every class conscious worker.

Crimes of imperialism

When some tearful pacifist said to Lenin that “war is terrible”, he
replied: “yes, terribly profitable.” The wars waged by U.S imperialism
are terrible for millions of poor people, but terribly profitable for
the big arms manufacturers who fatten on the contract provided by the
vast U.S. military budget just as vampire bats feed on the blood of
cattle and men.

Under its “peace-loving” and “pacifist” President, the U.S.A. spends
$708 billion a year on arms. Contrary to his election promises, Obama
has not pulled U.S. forces out of Iraq. He has stepped up the aggression
against the people of Afghanistan and is engaged in other acts of
aggression in Somalia and Yemen. And fat profits are being made by big
companies like Halliburton, whose tentacles reach to the highest levels
of the US state and government.

One million people have been killed in Iraq since the invasion, and
90 percent of them were civilians. The occupying forces (British as well
as American) are guilty of the most abominable crimes: the murder of
unarmed men, women and children, the systematic torture of detainees,
the murder of prisoners, and all the other horrors that are necessary to
occupy an entire people against their will. Even before the invasion,
half a million Iraqi children died as a result of the criminal sanctions
imposed by the UN at the behest of the USA and Britain. This blockade,
which denied the Iraqi people clean water and medicines, was targeted at
women and children in violation of the UN Charter itself.

These monstrous facts have been carefully hidden from the public in
Britain and the United States. The same public was informed that the
purpose of the Iraq war was to destroy non-existent weapons of mass
destruction. When these did not appear it became transformed into a “war
for Democracy”. The “crime” of WikiLeaks was to lift a corner of the
thick curtain of lies and deceit that conceals the truth from the
American people and the peoples of the world. For this they are hounded,
slandered, persecuted, have their funds cut off and their leading
figure arrested.

This kind of thing must not be made public. The people whose taxes go
to pay the arms billionaires must never know the true purpose of the
wars fought in their name. In Britain the Official Secrets Act is one of
the most draconian in the world. The Iraq war showed how the so-called
free press can be dragooned or inveigled into supporting a criminal act
of aggression on the flimsiest of pretences. The full force of the state
was mobilised to ensure that British troops participated in the
invasion, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the British
people opposed it.

In 2007 WikiLeaks published film footage of an appalling act of
slaughter perpetrated deliberately by a US helicopter gunship against
civilians in Iraq. This cold blooded murder was denounced by a US
soldier on the ground who tried to rescue the children. When he
protested, the reaction of the gunship crew was: “It is their own fault
for bringing their kids to battle”. His commanding officer cursed him in
obscene language for going to the assistance of the children, saying
that this was an “everyday occurrence”.

The persecution of Julian Assange

A big problem for the imperialists is that there are signs of unrest
inside the belly of the Beast. A growing number of officials and
military personnel are disgusted with what they see and hear and are
inclined to leak it. The leaks are growing more numerous and this is a
cause of real and growing concern to the military and intelligence
establishment who are determined to stamp it out. But this is easier
said than done.

The first step is to make an exemplary punishment on those who are
responsible. Bradley E Manning, the young soldier who leaked the most
recent information, can expect no mercy. He has been kept in solitary
confinement in a military prison for four months now in conditions that
border on torture. But, from the point of view of the U.S. government,
he is at least a U.S. citizen who can (rightly or wrongly) be accused of
disloyalty to his own country. Julian Assange is not a U.S. citizen,
and is not bound by U.S. laws. Nor can he reasonably be expected to be
loyal to a country to which he, as a foreigner, owes no allegiance. But
from the standpoint of the Empire, these are trifling legalistic details
that cannot stand in the way of a higher moral right – the Sacred Right
to Revenge.

Today, Bush and Blair are enjoying comfortable retirement, instead of
facing trial as war criminals, as they so richly deserve. Yet the
courageous individuals who have dared to expose the ugly reality of
Great Power politics are persecuted, hounded, arrested and even denied
the elementary rights that are routinely granted to common criminals.
Julian Assange has had his life threatened and faces extradition to the
USA where he would face life imprisonment. That is what the imperialists
understand by “justice”.

In the USA politicians are calling for Julian Assange to be “taken
out” (i.e. murdered) – a feat which the CIA is quite capable of
arranging. On November 30, Professor Tom Flanagan, who is close to
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, called for the assassination of
Julian Assange on national television. He advised Obama to “take out a
contract or use a drone or something”. Flanagan was expressing in public
what is being said in private in the corridors of power in Washington
and many other western capitals.

A secret memorandum of the British Ministry of Defence describes
investigative journalists as “terrorists”. And terrorists, as we know,
can be “taken out”. Before physical assassination, however, it is
necessary to prepare the ground by character assassination. . These
tactics and objectives of the imperialists are made clear in a secret
Pentagon document that has been made public by WikiLeaks. Now Pentagon
intends to discredit WikiLeaks and blacken their name.

The American government will stop at nothing to silence WikiLeaks.
The CIA and its collaborators have orchestrated a noisy campaign of
smears and baseless accusations concerning the personal life of their
enemy. This is one of the oldest tricks in the arsenal of the CIA, which
keeps detailed files on a large number of politicians, journalist and
other public figures who it may need to intimidate and blackmail at some
point in time.

The long arm of Washington

WikiLeaks has lifted the curtain on the shady world of imperialist
diplomacy, the sole purpose of which is to cast a thick veil over the
brutal reality of Great Power politics. All the fine talk about
“democracy”, “freedom”, “peace” and “western civilisation and values” is
just a fog that obscures the crude reality of bullying, threats,
bribery and corruption, violence, torture and murder.

Criminals like to operate under the cover of darkness. No assassin
likes to have a spotlight shone in his face. The reaction to these
revelations is what could be expected: the Beast lashes out in blind
fury, snapping and growling. And its faithful servants jump to do their
Masters bidding. Not a single government in the western world dares to
stand up to the bully-boys in Washington. When it comes to dealing with
the transatlantic Big Brother, all the governments of the western world
display the most despicable cowardice.

John Pilger has rightly criticised the craven conduct of the
Australian government and Prime Minister Julia Gillard: “Gillard’s
statement, saying that what WikiLeaks was doing in disclosing these
documents was illegal – it’s not illegal at all, under any laws in
Australia. That’s the sort of thing that most Australians should be
concerned about,” he says.

Yes, indeed. Every person who loves democracy should be concerned
about this case – and not only in Australia: concerned about the way in
which US imperialism wields power over elected governments and bends
them to its will; concerned about the systematic manipulation of the
courts, the judges, the press and the television; concerned about the
brutal punishment meted out to anyone who dares to expose these
abominations and denounce them.

What is particularly nauseating is the obsequious servility of
supposedly sovereign governments who are prepared to stoop to the lowest
depths in their complicity with Washington. The latter has only to
shout: “jump!” and they answer: “how high?” The leaked documents show
the real relationship between the USA and the leaders of Europe. Let us
quote just one example.

The Spanish judiciary investigates the case of a Spanish journalist
killed by the US forces in Baghdad. The US embassy uses every means at
its disposal to prevent this, and also to stop any investigation into
illegal flights of US planes over Spain to hand over prisoners for
torture. This constitutes blatant interference into the Spanish judicial
system. But so what?

The US ambassador informs the Spanish government that “my patience is
running out”. This is not the language of an ally talking to a friendly
government. It is that of an imperial Proconsul addressing a satrap.
The long arm of Washington stretches all over the globe, penetrating
cabinets and editorial offices. Whole governments are under its
tutelage. Judges and senior civil servants are in its pay or under its
control. One may be tempted to think that similar methods of
“persuasion” have been applied more recently to the Swedish and British
judicial system.

The first to jump to do Washington’s bidding was Sweden – that
celebrated bastion of “democracy” and “human rights”, whom the U.S.
Ambassador to Stockholm describes as a “pragmatic”, “strong”, and
“reliable” partner in the leaked cables. As a result of allegations of
“sex crimes” in Sweden the founder of WikiLeak was dragged before a
British court. The Swedish director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny,
has naturally dismissed suggestions of a political motive for the rape
allegations. The Swedish Tartuffes try to mask their treachery with a
“progressive” colouring. Their persecution of Assange, you see, has
nothing to do with his anti-American activities. Oh no! It is to do with
the defence of “women’s rights”.

Of course! I mean, what other interest could these good, honest,
upright, liberal, neutral, pacifistic, feministic, moralistic Swedish
politicians have? For years the Swedish bourgeoisie has cultivated an
image of “Mr. Nice Guy”. But the stinking hypocrisy of the Scandinavian
middle class was long ago exposed in the plays of Ibsen. The case of
Assange brings to mind forcefully his masterpiece: An Enemy of the People.

The “nice” ladies and gentlemen in Stockholm are just as implicated
in the criminal activities of the CIA as are their counterparts in
Germany and Britain. The right wing government in Stockholm is anxious
to be in America’s good books. Although Sweden is not formally part of
NATO it collaborates actively with it and has sent troops to Kosovo and
Afghanistan, as well as participating in NATO exercises under the guise
of the so called “partnership for peace”. Among the papers disclosed by
WikiLeaks, we read the following glowing U.S. assessment of Sweden’s
role:

“Within the EU, Sweden often takes positions that coincide with our
own on issues as diverse as the DOHA round, EU enlargement and Turkey,
Swift banking data privacy, and the EU’s relationship with Cuba.” (see
cable 07STOCKHOLM506).

In other words, the government of Sweden is in the pockets of the
Americans. A single phone call would suffice to obtain the most
enthusiastic participation of Stockholm in this disgusting witch hunt.
The only difference is that Angela Merkel could expect a direct phone
call from the White House, while London, these days, is only entitled to
a call from someone in the Pentagon. In the case of Stockholm, a word
from a minor clerk in the embassy would suffice. We cannot know the
exact content of this phone call, but it probably ended with: “My
patience is running out.”

Character assassination

Assange was originally accused of four offences including of rape.
The accusation of rape, having been splashed all over the front pages of
the tabloid press, was suddenly dropped. It had served its purpose,
which was to blacken his name. Now the Swedes argued that he was guilty
of “unlawful coercion” and acting “in a way designed to violate sexual
integrity”.

The charges are not new. They go back to August when Assange was
charged with sexual assault. He responded by claiming he was being
smeared: “the charges are without basis and their issue at this moment
is deeply disturbing”. The very next morning, August 21st, chief
prosecutor Eva Finné overruled the prosecutor on duty the previous night
and withdrew the charges saying: “I don’t think there is reason to
suspect that he has committed rape”. John Pilger noted that “the chief
prosecutor in Sweden abandoned this case, threw it away, saw no worth in
it”.

However, on September 1st, orders came from the higher reaches of the
Swedish government. The Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny
decided to reopen the case, claiming “new information” had been
received. What was the source of this “new information”. Was it perhaps a
phone call from Washington? Or maybe the U.S. ambassador informed Ms.
Ny that his “patience was running out”? That is the kind of “new
information” that makes Directors of Public Prosecution jump – and not
only in Stockholm.

With indecent haste, and having ignored all attempts by Assange to
voluntarily answer any questions at the Swedish embassy in London,
Sweden issued an international arrest warrant, claiming they were unable
to contact Assange for interrogation. It has since emerged that the two
women who brought forward the charges originally did not want to pursue
them, but only to ask Assange to take a test, because a condom had
broken during consensual sex.

We are in no position to judge the truth of these allegations, but
what is abundantly clear is that they are being used politically, and a
fair trial is ruled out under these circumstances. The question must be
asked: if Julian Assange had not been the founder of WikiLeaks but an
unknown figure, would there have been an international arrest warrant
sought against him, would there have been any attempt to extradite him,
even if he was guilty of rape? Would the Swedish director of public
prosecution have taken such a keen interest in the case? We believe that
these questions might well give rise to a reasonable doubt….

In a letter to the Guardian newspaper, the organisation Women Against
Rape, which specialises in supporting rape victims, expressed surprise
at the UK court’s decision not to grant bail, saying that the granting
of bail in rape cases is routine in the UK. They also point out: “There
is a long tradition of the use of rape and sexual assault for political
agendas that have nothing to do with women’s safety”.

That is the whole point. Washington is not interested in Mr.
Assange’s sex life. They are interested in revenge. In preparation for
the trial and imprisonment of the man they see as public enemy number
one, they first soften up public opinion by destroying his moral
reputation. One has to be more than a little bit stupid not to
understand what this is all about. Sadly, there are more than a few
people on the “Left” who cannot see further than the end of their nose
(and some not even that far).

What can one say about those pathetic clowns on the “Left” who are
prepared to defend the actions of the Swedish government on the alleged
grounds of “defending women’s rights”. They confine their activity to
defending Assange’s “right to a fair trial”. Isn’t this disgusting? How
can Julian Assange hope to get a fair trial under these circumstances?
He has already been tried and found guilty by the media, branded as a
dangerous subversive, a spy, a rapist. The full force of the state has
been mobilised to destroy him.

This kind of thing shows just how far some sections of the Left have
become enslaved to the prejudices of the petty bourgeois “progressives”
who do not possess an atom of revolutionary class consciousness and
whose only role is to confuse and disorient those workers and youth who
pay them any attention.

Judicial farce

The judicial farce of the “rape” case was only a crude cover for the
real business in hand. This was a clear case of organised character
assassination. It was set in motion by the CIA, utilising the services
of their stooges in the Swedish government and judiciary. The CIA’s
well-oiled propaganda machine rolled into action. The world’s media
immediately started to shout about “rape accusations”. Extradition
proceedings were immediately started to send him to Sweden to face
“rape” charges.

Of course, all this was just a pretext to prepare for the real
business in hand: diplomatic sources have leaked that discussions have
begun to extradite him to the USA from Sweden. The Swedish prosecution
service, of course, deny this, saying it would be impossible without the
consent of the UK government. That is, it is impossible without the consent of the most loyal ally of the U.S. in Europe.
It is an open secret that US officials are looking for ways to charge
Assange under American espionage laws. If he is tried and found guilty
in an American court, they will lock him up and throw the key away as a
warning to others.

Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station after a
European arrest warrant was received by the Metropolitan police
extradition unit. He appeared in court, where he spoke to confirm his
name and date of birth and to tell the court: “I do not consent to my
extradition.” Like Pontius Pilate, the British government made a show of
washing its hands in public, while throwing its helpless victim to the
wolves. Downing Street said Assange’s arrest was “a matter for the
police” and there had been “no ministerial involvement”.

The words are carefully chosen. “No ministerial involvement” does not
mean no involvement by the British authorities or MI5. If anyone
believes that the London government is not acting in cahoots with
Washington and Stockholm, they are in urgent need of the attentions of a
competent psychiatrist. Not only the government, but the British legal
establishment will have been thoroughly briefed and informed of what
lines they are expected to say in this unpleasant little farce.

This is shown by the proceedings so far. Assange, who has
consistently denied the allegations that he sexually assaulted two
women, asked to be released on bail. Despite the fact that it is
standard practice to grant bail in such cases, he was denied bail. Gemma
Lindfield, on behalf of the Swedish authorities, told the judge there
was “a real risk” that Assange would abscond if granted bail. Lindfield
said there were “strong reasons” to believe he would fail to attend
court for the full duration of the extradition hearing and to surrender
to police if extradition was ordered. Let us examine the content of
these “strong reasons” for opposing bail:

Incredibly, no details were given about the strength of evidence against Assange. Ms. Lindfield stated that it “is not a factor in relation to bail”. Even more incredibly, she also opposed bail for reasons of Assange’s personal safety,
saying if granted “any number of unstable persons could take it upon
themselves to cause him serious harm”. The Swedish Tartuffes demand that
Assange be kept in jail (without producing any evidenced of his guilt) out of tender concern for his safety! Here the art of cynical hypocrisy is pushed to its very limits and beyond.

John Jones, lawyer for Assange, said the case must be “shorn of all
political and media hysteria” associated with WikiLeaks. Assange was of
previous good character, and had no criminal record. Jones explained:
“He resists extradition as it is disproportionate to extradite someone
under these circumstances. There has been every indication that the
point of this warrant is to get him back for questioning.” But despite
the overwhelming arguments in favour of Assange, the Swedes remained
obdurate, as we see from Ms. Lindfield’s words:

“This is someone for whom, simply put, no conditions, even the most
stringent conditions that could be imposed, would ensure he would
surrender to the jurisdiction of this court.” The motive of the Swedish
government (that is to say, the United States government) is
transparent: to ensure that Assange is sent to prison and kept there indefinitely.

Despite Jemima Khan, former wife of Pakistan cricket captain Imran
Khan, John Pilger, Ken Loach and others offering to stand surety
totalling £180,000, the judge said the Australian Assange’s “weak
community ties” in the UK, and his “means and ability” to abscond,
represented “substantial grounds” for refusing bail.

Others offering surety were Professor Patricia David, and the lawyer
Geoffrey Sheen, president of Union Solidarity International, who both
said although they did not know Assange they were concerned about human
rights. An unnamed relative of Assange offered £80,000.

But Judge Riddle said:

The prisoner was therefore sent back to enjoy the hospitality of Her
Britannic Majesty in the comfortable surroundings of Wandsworth prison,
where he was held in solitary confinement, with no access to books,
visitors, newspapers, television or, of course, Internet. Such harsh
treatment of a man who has been found guilty of nothing is, to say the
least, unusual.

It seems evident that Judge Howard Riddle felt a certain amount of
embarrassment at being compelled to reject the request for bail. He
publicly commended Loach and Khan for helping the prisoner “out of
concern for human rights” without knowing the defendant personally. Mr.
Stevens said that the judge was “impressed” with the number of people
prepared to “stand up” on his client’s behalf. “[Those supporters] were
but the tip of the iceberg.” “This is going to go viral. Many people
believe Mr. Assange to be innocent, myself included. Many people believe
that this prosecution is politically motivated,” he said.

After the ruling – with supporters waving A4 printouts reading
“Character Assassination” and “Protect Free Speech” – his solicitor,
Mark Stephens, emerged from court, explaining that the prosecution was
politically motivated and pledged WikiLeaks would not be cowed. He
announced that they would appeal. Pilger said outside court: “Sweden
should be ashamed. This is not justice – this is outrageous.” Only after
substantial pressure was brought to bear on the courts was Assange
finally released on bail, and then only under the most stringent
conditions, amounting to house arrest.

Democratic rights under attack

The editor of WikiLeaks has received widespread support all over the
world, including high profile figures, such as veteran investigative
journalist John Pilger and left-wing film director Ken Loach. John Pilger
has called the treatment of his compatriot “outrageous”, which it
certainly is. “This case is about, number one, a person’s right to
justice, when they’re innocent until proven guilty,” Pilger told ABC
Sydney.

It is about that but it is about much more than that. The defence of
democratic rights is an important part of the struggle to resist the
attempts of the ruling class to eliminate all the conquests made by the
working class in the past and to put the clock back a hundred years.
This includes a general onslaught against wages and conditions, the
slashing of spending on health, education, housing and other public
services. But it also includes a systematic attempt to whittle away the
democratic rights of the working class, in order to restrict its ability
to resist the attacks on living standards.

In “democratic” Britain, the right to strike has been so restricted
by anti-trade union laws that in many cases it has virtually been
cancelled out. These anti-democratic laws were introduced by the right
wing Thatcher government in the 1980s, and Blair’s New Labour government
did not repeal them. The legal rights of British citizens have been
seriously eroded by the so-called “anti-terror” laws, which give the
police wide powers to stop and search people, and to arrest and hold
them for 28 days without their having been convicted by a court of law.

More recently, there has been an attempt to curtail the right to
protest on the streets. In the recent student demonstrations, the police
made use of the tactic of so-called “kettling”, whereby demonstrators
are trapped by a police cordon for hours on end in freezing conditions,
and denied access to food, water or toilet facilities. This is worse
treatment than would be given to a criminal in a prison cell. It is also
a clear case of what the lawyers call “false imprisonment”, which is
supposed to be illegal under British law.

While the judicial persecution of Julian Assange continues,
increasing pressure is being brought to bear in the US on companies and
organisations with ties to WikiLeaks. Joe Lieberman, chairman of the
Senate’s homeland security committee, urged businesses to sever their
ties with the website, and Visa suspended the payment of donations to
the website through its credit card.

Freedom in the USA (such as it is) is now threatened. When asked about the New York Times‘s
role in publishing the leaked cables, Lieberman told Fox news the
newspaper “has committed at least an act of bad citizenship. Whether
they have committed a crime I think bears very intensive inquiry”.

Michael Mukasey, a former US attorney general, said that American
lawyers should try to extradite Assange to the US for betraying
government secrets. “If I was still in charge there would have been an
investigation,” he told the BBC’s Newsnight. “This is a crime of a very
high order. Julian Assange has been leaking this information. He came
into possession of it knowing that it was harmful.”

Mukasey, who retired from the post of attorney general last year, let
the cat out of the bag when he implied that the Swedish sexual
accusations may only be a holding charge. “When one is accused of a very
serious crime,” he said, “it’s common to hold him in respect of a
lesser crime… while you assemble evidence of a second crime.”

Limitations of liberalism

What is the purpose of all this? Was it, as the hysterical right wing
media claim, an attempt to subvert and overthrow western democracy and
civilisation as we know it? Is Assange a dangerous revolutionary, as he
is routinely portrayed? No, he is not. Assange is not a revolutionary or
a Marxist, but he certainly has guts. The mechanisms whereby Washington
runs the affairs of supposedly foreign states has been exposed for all
to see. This and this alone, is the crime for which Julian Assange is
being prosecuted.

The whistle blowing website stated defiantly that it would not to be
gagged by the imprisonment of its founder. Assange himself was equally
defiant. Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for WikiLeaks, confirmed it
would continue publishing US diplomatic cables. In a statement he said:
“This will not stifle WikiLeaks. The release of the US embassy cables –
the biggest leak in history – will still continue. We will not be
gagged, either by judicial action or corporate censorship.”

WikiLeaks staff have moved into a London office, having spent weeks
commuting between the capital and the country house from which Assange
has been coordinating the release of the leaked cables. Staff had been
required to take elaborate measures to ensure they were not followed to
Assange’s location and the use of mobile phones was banned to avoid
detection.

These actions will be applauded by all progressive people, and in the
first place by Marxists. The fight for democratic rights is an integral
part of the fight against capitalism and imperialism. Ken Loach,
director of Kes and Looking for Eric, said: “I think
the work he [Assange] has done has been a public service. I think we are
entitled to know the dealings of those that govern us.” That is the
crux of the matter.

Julian Assange did not want to overthrow bourgeois democracy, because
he believes in it. What he wants is to make it “more responsible”, more
open, more – democratic. But thus is his mistake. He is a
liberal, and believes in democracy. But democracy under capitalism
always has a one-sided, incomplete and distorted character. In essence
it is democracy only in form, and behind the purely formal mechanisms of
democracy lies the crude reality of the dictatorship of the banks and
big monopolies. Nowhere has that dictatorship reached such monstrous
proportions, and nowhere does it wield such colossal power, as in the
USA.

It is as useless to apply the norms of morality to the cesspool of
imperialist diplomacy, to appeal for honesty, justice and “international
law” to decide issues between nations, as it would be to ask pears from
an elm tree. Any consistent struggle to defend democratic rights must
necessarily end in a struggle to overthrow the dictatorship of the banks
and big monopolies that exercise more power than any elected government
in the world.

It is the interests of these giant companies that determine the
foreign and domestic policies of the USA and every other government. It
is the duty of every class conscious worker to study the leaked
documents in order to gain an insight into the world of bourgeois
diplomacy and the real interests that lie behind their own government’s
foreign policy. And it is the elementary duty of every socialist to
defend Julian Assange against the monstrous persecution to which he is
being subjected for the “crime” of telling the truth.

• Free Julian Assange!

• Defend the freedom of expression!

• Publish all the documents that reveal the criminal activities carried out by governments and their secret services!

• Down with secret diplomacy!

• The people want the truth, not lies!