Australian Politician Compares Attempts To Silence Assange With Catholic Church Silencing Galileo
from the and-thinks-it's-a-good-thing dept
Via Glyn Moody we get this absolutely bizarre quote from an anonymous Australian Parliament Member who wants to have the Australian government help try to shut down Julian Assange and Wikileaks. When the reporter Ross Cameron pointed out that shutting down Wikileaks wouldn't work, the politician responded:"The Catholic Church shut down Galileo for a hundred years. I think we can shut down Julian Assange.''This statement is both bizarre and ignorant. It's bizarre in that it seems to think it was a good thing that the Catholic Church hid from and denied reality for a century and condemned those who helped reveal reality. It's not often, these days, that you hear a politician speak out in support of the Catholic Church's treatment of Galileo.
It's ignorant in that it assumes that Julian Assange is all that needs to be "shut down." This is a mistake that many are making. Even if you think that Assange is an egomaniac with serious issues, focusing on Assange is missing the point of what's happening. There are a lot of people and a growing number of new operations, who are stepping up to do more of what Wikileaks was doing. This is not a one man show, and the simple fact is that such leaking of information is going to keep happening. Targeting Assange may stop Assange, but it won't stop the basic idea of Wikileaks, even if the functionality moves elsewhere.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: australia, galileo, julian assange, wikileaks
Companies: wikileaks
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Never in a million years could I have anticipated this. It almost has to be a joke...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Maybe the politician thinks he's the center of the universe?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
He's obviously over-magnified the issue. Must have his head up in the stars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is this dude a sinner?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My favorite is the claim that wikileaks is losing $600,000 a week:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503983_162-20028090-503983.html
The other is his methods of threatening those who oppose him with scandal. Like Rupert Murdoch:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/12/wikileaks-rupert-murdoch
Or threats against Bank Of America after they stopped transfering funds:
http://blogs.forbes.com/tjwalker/2010/12/23/bank-of-america-prepares-for-worst-as-wikileak s-threatens-damaging-document-release/?boxes=financechannelforbes
Assange will likely be easy to shut up only because he continues to poke people aggressively, and at some point, he will have crossed a line and the results will be clear. It won't be long before he is locked up for a very, very long time, or has a horrible auto accident. Or both :)
What I wonder is why TD doesn't address these issues, and continues to show Assange as a victim rather than an aggressive preditory type that he appears to be?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Secondly Assange will take himself out of the game. If you make enough threats and never follow through then people will see it as a bluff, and they will stop listening. If he actually has the documents then he should bring them forward if he wants to continue his little threats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's funny that you say that the BoA and Rupert are being "threatened". It seems more like Assange is playing a game of "You squeeze my balls and I'll squeeze yours back".
It all boils down to this: if they weren't pulling off anything illegal or unethical, they wouldn't be worried. The only reason Wikileaks had the impact it did is because there is something "leak-worthy" after all. That's not Wikileak's fault and, despite disagreeing with Wikileak's methods, I think it is a good thing they are putting the squeeze on many people that once thought they could get away with everything with total impunity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
No, it's ACTUALLY funny that he mentioned the BoA example because he announced he'd be releasing the documents BEFORE they stopped taking payments for the site. I've already corrected this silly little AC in the past on this point, but he keeps repeating it anyway.
Oh well, such is the way of the disingenous....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
He threatened them before they stopped taking payments, and has threatened them again and again after they stopped.
So, don't be silly DH, you are smarter than that, even if you live sort of half way up TD's rectum at times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm confused as well. Why is today filled with people arguing with one another while they're all saying nearly the exact same thing. Did I fall asleep and somehow we all became senators?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
**corrected
I have now corrected you. FTW!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." -- Cardinal Richelieu
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." -- Cardinal Richelieu
Yes, when the "finding" is done by the authorities. This is the opposite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Even if you think that Assange is an egomaniac with serious issues, focusing on Assange is missing the point of what's happening. There are a lot of people and a growing number of new operations, who are stepping up to do more of what Wikileaks was doing. This is not a one man show, and the simple fact is that such leaking of information is going to keep happening. Targeting Assange may stop Assange, but it won't stop the basic idea of Wikileaks, even if the functionality moves elsewhere.
THAT is the point here. Everyone agrees that Assange is at best questionable and at worst a complete egomaniac - just about every single Techdirt post on him points that out. But this has nothing to do with Assange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
He is starting to sound like Saddam Hussein and his chemical weapons. He kept on threatening, and when someone finally called him on it, we found out it was a bluff. What happens is Wikileaks is just mostly a bluff?
Wikileaks is all about Assange, because it is no longer about the information, but more about information terrorism. Look a little more closely, and you can see where this is going.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No, it doesn't. Not sure how you came to that conclusion.
He is starting to sound like Saddam Hussein and his chemical weapons. He kept on threatening, and when someone finally called him on it, we found out it was a bluff. What happens is Wikileaks is just mostly a bluff?
The way to call Wikileaks' bluff is to do nothing. If these people and organizations were sure he had nothing on them, they could just sit back and let him make a fool of himself.
Wikileaks is all about Assange, because it is no longer about the information, but more about information terrorism.
What does that even mean?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is effectively what the US government has done, outside of a few wayward Senators and House members trying to drum up the patriot support. Otherwise, the Obama administration has been incredibly quiet and not at all perturbed by all of this.
Now, they may be playing duck on this one, all calm on the surface, and paddling furiously under the surface to make it happen. It has been reported that people are getting reassigned all over the world. However, give them credit, they are not feeding the Cult of Assange machine in slightest.
I just personal object to Assange's style of threatening to release things. If you have it, and transparency is the issue, release them. Saying you have them and then waiting, like a poker player, makes you look incredibly suspect and makes the entire process that wikileaks is suppose to be look vapid and self-justifying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Err - what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Err, what? Hussein denied that he had such weapons. It was the GWB administration that swore that he did as an excuse to start a war there.
You've got a really warped sense of history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Now that just isn't true. You know what they call people who run around telling untruths, don't you? You should, you've probably heard it enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why is that relevant? It's not any more relevant than his personal life, or criminal record. It simply doesn't matter.
It won't be long before he is locked up for a very, very long time, or has a horrible auto accident. Or both :)
And then what do you expect to happen? You think all of the people that run Wikileaks are just going to take their ball and go home?
What I wonder is why TD doesn't address these issues, and continues to show Assange as a victim rather than an aggressive preditory type that he appears to be?
This post isn't even about Assange. It's about the idiocy of this politician. Oh, and also, from the article:
"Even if you think that Assange is an egomaniac with serious issues, focusing on Assange is missing the point of what's happening."
A friendly reminder to RTFA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Personally, I don't really care how, why or when Assange releases the info he has, only that he DOES release the info.
As evidenced by your statement above, it seems that strategic releasing of the leaks is a smart move on Assange's part to insure his own survival and you can't fault a person for wanting to live.
On a side note, I am finding it pretty funny that the authorities who have always told me "If you have nothing to hide, then us searching your property and person shouldn't be an issue" are now facing this from the other side.
Also, this AC (if you are the same AC who always comments on WikiLeak stories) seems pretty hellbent on discrediting Assange and WikiLeaks and this makes me wonder if there is some info out there that you wish to remain hidden for some reason??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A couple of hundred years later.
Galileo was tried and convicted by the catholic church in 1633 for heresy. He spent the rest of his life under arrest.
"the church stopped censoring his work in the 18th-goddamn-century"
Actually, the truth is that they continued to censor his work until at least 1835. That's well into the 19th century. And it was only in 1992 that Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and issued a declaration acknowledging the errors committed by the Catholic Church in convicting Galileo.
But why let the truth get in the way, huh?
I believe there is a statue of him in the Vatican now...
As if that is supposed to somehow make up for what they did? Maybe they could up statues of little boys to make up for the pedophile priests. Wait, maybe that wouldn't be such a good idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why let the truth get in the way of what? Interesting to learn that censorship wasn't gone until 1835 - I didn't know that. It doesn't really change my point, which was not to say how enlightened the church became or anything, but simply to point out that even they managed to accept heliocentrism long before the modern era.
I'm not sure how you interpreted my comment, but it really wasn't meant to excuse the church. It was meant to point out how stupidly they acted, and how strange it is for a politician to say something like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
care to guess which is which?
(i actually agree with the point you're making here, but still...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Think about it:
All over the world you have "Democratic" governments squashing people's liberties, in the name of "Justice", "Freedom" and "National Security". We have governments arresting and searching people without warrants or formal accusations. Domains are taken down without justification. We have "rat on your neighbor" plans being enacted. Torture is accepted as means of interrogation (seriously, wtf? Did we stop being humans at some point?).
"The Catholic Church shut down Galileo for a hundred years. I think we can shut down Julian Assange.''
That comment nails it in the head: The inquisition is back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And nobody expected them...
Full stop. Different subject.
Humans invented interrogation, torture, and using the latter during the former. You either have a seriously odd notion of what being humans means or chose your words poorly. Have a do-over on me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Correct. But in a civilized society, lemme say that again, civilized society, torture should be unacceptable. Not to also mention that info gathered from such actions is rarely accurate.
(seriously, wtf? Did we stop being civilized humans at some point?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That only applies to other societies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, there was that whole thing about water boarding... The not-torture interrogation technique that the very naysayers claimed was torture after trying it themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good job USA government, as usual, you took a small problem; threw a tantrum and now everyone wants to be like assange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Speak for yourself. I'm already a way bigger egomaniacal ass than Julian will ever be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Back to the Point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Back to the Point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And who got the last laugh?
This senator would look stupid if he didn't have a veil of secrecy regarding this statement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In the US the mass media wants to silence WikiLeaks, here in NL they are fighting over the scoops that can be got from the files.
Two of the major news outlets, one funded by taxpayers (NOS) and one commercial (RTL), are fighting to be the first to release the material.
Apparently, the NOS contacted WikiLeaks and asked for access to the files, while RTL worked together with a few other news agencies and got them through a foreign partner (Aftenposten).
And those files are related to the previous Afghan mission the Dutch forces had.
Can't the US media see the giant treasure chest of utter scoops that's being thrown in their laps? Oh wait, no it's not about the message anymore there. There is no substance only controversy in US mass media. Saying bad stuff about the gubberment and standing up against them is treason.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Much of the US media have become government lap dogs. It's called corporatism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And yet it leaks...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it can not see itself in a mirror
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe more Appropriate than it first seems...
The quote is exactly right, but in ways perhaps this Australian Parliament Member did not intend.
Heliocentrism was accepted by the Church as soon as it was *actually proven* 100 years later. Heliocentrism did not threaten the Church, but the fact that Galileo could only provide circumstantial evidence was used to club Galileo.
If Galileo wasn't punished for heliocentrism, what was his transgression? Galileo was punished for insulting the Pope, which he did in his book, which remained banned for that reason.
Let's be clear: Galileo was NOT held guilty for his study of the nature of our universe, but punished for insulting the politically powerful.
Likewise, Julian Assange's transgression is NOT publishing leaks, and providing a means by which whistle blowers can uncover dark secrets. His transgression is uncovering dark secrets of the politically powerful U.S. Government.
A veneer of science was tacked to Galileo's punishment, which embarrasses the Church today. A veneer of legalities may well be tacked to some punishment of Julian Assange for publishing these leaks from the U.S. Government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe more Appropriate than it first seems...
It very much did threaten the church as it went against the doctrine of papal infallibility.
If Galileo wasn't punished for heliocentrism, what was his transgression? Galileo was punished for insulting the Pope, which he did in his book, which remained banned for that reason.
The Pope was insulted because he said that the Sun circled the Earth and Galileo dared to say otherwise in his book. Galileo himself was actually a devout Catholic and was thus especially hurt by the church's unfair treatment of him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wishing well
If you missed it its more open government. I think the trickle from the faucet of control is finnally busted and quite literaly drowning us. The intended effect is to drown us out and yet... it seems were actually looking at the plumbing. The starting effect from the internment camps of Jap-Ameri's to TSA.
And now they just don't care anymore about what they say because apparently there's water in our ears. Explains why Obamavision exist.. what is it now? 30 times as much air time as any other president?
Anybody have any more articles that have the theme of getting what we wished for?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]