280 Comments

I don't share your emotions. It's a play. Crumbs from the balcony of empire. Glitch in the matrix or just a lifting of the pot lid to let out some steam, pressure. Others still paying the price and I'm also sure they have him where they want him. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. I'm happy he's out but don't let that rope a dope fool you for a moment. Freedom, the 1st amendment was AGAIN defeated. This should be the bigger story - a journalist was convicted, it's on record, no matter how they got it done.

Expand full comment

Julian's 'home' country shamefully abandoned him in his time of need.

Expand full comment

It's also part of the five eyes. (FVEY) I don't know why anyone thinks he's safe there. If he's safe there he'd be safe in NYC.

Expand full comment

Tucker Carlson went to Australia to give a speech and was shaming them for neglecting their citizen Assange. He told them it is way past due for Australia to stop taking order from UK.

Expand full comment

Just one detail you go wrong mois US not UK . Sometimes via UK but still just the message deliverer

Expand full comment

Yes, I watched that.

Expand full comment

I have had these thoughts too. Like what is the ‘got ya!’?

Expand full comment

The "got ya" was the plea deal based on the clearly unconstitutional and misapplied Espionage Act. That, and nine years in prison or in an uncomfortable and transparent (to the powers that be) exile to avoid extradition. But the plea deal sets no precedent, it was the face-saving measure the Biden administration demanded.

Expand full comment

Thanks, was going to add the same. However, why do you say it sets no precedent? Everything IS a precdent, it can arm an kind of future interpretation. Plus, we must admit, doing 14 years for this HAS sent a big chill through all journalism. I remember prior to 2010 - there was hope. Then journalists on the bandwagon of the digital realm started getting popped, if they pushed too much. You might even go back to the very beginning of internet journalism (which is what this is all about) - anyone remember Gongadze, for example?

Expand full comment

It doesn't set a binding legal precedent. But in other ways, as all things do, it sets precedence for what TPTB can do and get away with.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't put it past our government to use it as a precedent.

Expand full comment

It is; common law.

Expand full comment

That fact that Julian was tortured in prison can be used to shoot down the precedent factor. Just wait.

Expand full comment

YES, YES, YES IT DOES.

The UK (if people knew) is still ruled by common law.

"England and Wales operate a common law system which combines the passing of legislation but also the creation of precedents through case law. The laws are established by the passing of legislation by Parliament which consists of the 'Monarch', the House of Commons and the House of Lords.12 Jun 2024"

Strange timing of the inset hey ?, June 24

Expand full comment

It does not set any legal precedent.

https://consortiumnews.com/2024/06/24/julian-assange-is-free/

This has nothing to do with UK common law.

Expand full comment

Technically, it would have to be adjudicated to set a precedent, and then only in said district. This was a prearranged deal that the judge accepted, so no legal precedent was set.

Expand full comment

Very misleading and legalistic interpretation of "precedent".and it is offered in defense of the indefensible.

Have you ever worked with lawyers? There are policy precedents. There are regulatory precedents. There are enforcement discretion precedents. There are administrative precedents. There are political precedents. There are journalistic precedents.

This case settlement agreement was given the imprimatur of a federal judge. That too is a "precedent". Why are Assange's legal team - and you - splitting these technical hairs? The NY Times even wrote that the case created a bad precedent.

BTW, I didn't read the hearing transcript, but assume Assange was under oath and was queried whether he was pressured or under duress to sign the deal and that he admitted guilt as charged. If so, how did he square the contradiction on the First Amendment? Because if he truly believe that it provided protection, he perjured himself - ditto with duress by prosecutors.

Expand full comment

Sorry but you're just wrong. There is no legal precedent. The only type of 'precedent' set is that the USG and UK governments know they can get away with detaining and torturing journalists without the benefit of a conviction.

https://consortiumnews.com/2024/06/24/julian-assange-is-free/

Bruce Afran, a U.S. constitutional lawyer, and Marjorie Cohn, former president of the U.S. National Lawyers’ Guild, both told Consortium News that a plea deal does not create a legal precedent. Therefore Assange’s deal would not jeopardize journalists in the future of being prosecuted for accepting and publishing classified information from a source because of Assange’s agreeing to such a charge.

Afran said:

“A plea is not precedent. Precedent consists of a decision interpreting a matter of law by an appeals court that will govern future cases on the same legal principle. In contrast, a plea is merely a factual agreement by a given defendant that they did a certain act, but does not bind future defendants in similar cases.

For example, if Julian chooses to drop his first amendment defenses and plead guilty, this does not mean that a similar defendant in the future does not have a First Amendment defense in an espionage act case. No appeals court has decided such issues, and Julian‘s plea does not bind future courts or future parties nor will it ever be considered in any other defendant’s case.

There is a doctrine that a person is bound to a factual decision, including a plea, only if they participated in that case. This means that no future defendant will ever be impacted legally, either by fact or law, as a result of Julian’s guilty plea. It has no precedental value or effect.”

Expand full comment

I have worked with lawyers for over 35 years and have friends and a cousin who are lawyers. I know perfectly well what a precedent and also what a shaky precedent is.

Expand full comment

https://www.foxnews.com/us/journalist-michael-hastings-sent-chilling-email-to-colleagues-before-death

Michael Hastings for example, could be a parallel to Gongadze.

Maybe "someone" can make a web site remembering all these murdered reporters. While you can find them on Wikipedia, we have to always remember the "twist" that is added by the "Blob".

Expand full comment

It would be worthy. You'd be busy as hell just with Gaza. CPJ does its job but with few resources. I mentioned Gongadze just because of the digital aspect - he was one of the first to start an online newspaper, like this substack, to voice and share his evidence against the corrupt government and president. Ended up beheaded in a park I ran through in Kyiv when there at the same time. Myself, I was eventually run out at gunpoint.

Expand full comment

All right then. Let us also remember Gonzalo Lira.

Let us also point out that the Ukrainian web site that lists all the enemies of the Ukraine nation (including Scott Ritter) has a home base in Langley, VA.

Curious, why Kyiv and not Kiev?

I am not sure why I always use Kiev. Has something to do with Kyiv being Nazi and Kiev being Russian -- I think.

While we're at it, let us also remember the rift that developed between Lira and Ritter. I never understood it. Lira never explained it. Ritter's explanation was feasible.

Oh, good job on getting out alive. I have the feeling some here might condemn you for that. ;-)

Expand full comment

"But the plea deal sets no precedent"

This is a bullshit lie - in a very, very, narrow legalistic sense it may be (stress MAY) correct. But effectively it is false and misleading. Investigative journalism is dead. The precedent is political intimidation. Legally, Assange's lawyers did not feel confident in making a First Amendment case. Politically, Assange's strategists were afraid to take on Biden. That's just Political and legal malpractice.

Did you get that line from CN story?

Expand full comment

It appears you are deliberately misinterpreting me. I agree that the goal was to chill free speech and journalism, and it was achieved. "Precedent" is a legal term, and this plea deal set no legal precedent. Yes, I agree with CN's analysis.

Expand full comment

A few weeks ago, during the UK hearings, CN printed as a legal fact (citing one of the same expert legal sources (NLG) as in today's article) that Assange had no protections under the US First Amendment. That was just flat out legally wrong and politically stupid, and it contradicted decades of legal advocacy of both NLG and ACLU, so I called Joe Lauria on it. Joe sent me angry emails and refused to even post my comments, which were backed up by on point case law and law review articles, a standard of evidence that is virtually NEVER provided by commenters at CN.

In the federal Court plea hearing, Assange specifically said that at the time, he thought his activities were protected by the First Amendment.

The only reason CN and NLG took the position that Assange had no First Amendment protections was to defeat the UK court's conditions and avoid extradition. They threw the First Amendment under the bus for tactical reasons in the UK legal proceedings.

BAD MOVE.

They are doing something similarly dishonest and stupid now on the "no precedent" claim. Of course there is both a legal and political precedent: legally, a journalist pled guilty under the Espionage Act for clearly First Amendment protected Activity. That is a legal precedent. Politically, Joe Biden presided over the indictment and filed the extradition, yet paid NO POLITICAL PRICE. That is a green light to future abuse and it chills free speech and investigative journalism. Period.

Expand full comment

You're right about a political precedent. No legal precedent was set. Period.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry, you seem like you know what you're talking about with some of the legal aspects, and you claim to have been closely following the case, but then you go and say that Joe Biden presided over the indictment and filed the extradition, both of which were done in 2019? Could you please explain how that was possible, considering that Biden didn't take office until January of 2021? It was Trump's DOJ that sought and obtained both.

Expand full comment

Yeah this is my take. Always ask who benefits. This wasn't some benevolent black swan, this was gearing up for the collection of 20 more Julians on the march to Whitney Webb exposed CBDC and David Webb debt clearing shenanigans.

Remember, the ultimate goal is a formal open oligarchy, and the next step of that plan is the "election" of a right winger to govern the same as the left but with less veneer of democracy.

The whole idea is to expose how fake democracy always was in such a way that we aren't willing to risk our incomes. (That's all we really have to do, general strike with zeal, ethics, and intellect, but we clearly never will.)

We've had thousands of years to get this right and we haven't and never will.

My prediction for the near to mid future is unchanged, and the long future is a toss up dependent on AI and other external to humanity factors.

https://innomen.substack.com/p/the-end-of-ai-debate

https://innomen.substack.com/p/well-now-what

https://rumble.com/v3yptkd-the-great-taking-documentary.html

https://rumble.com/v53mvd0-62524-julian-assange-pleads-out-walks-free-tlav-tuesday-skull-windows.html (Skip to Whitney's interview.)

Expand full comment

True. Well, at least unlike poor Gonzalo Lira, they didn't succeed in murdering Julian!

Expand full comment

And it made “Biden look good”. Not at all good for the few independent journalists that are hanging in there.

Expand full comment

Yes the show is falling to pieces and when the wreckage is analysed (assuming it it is not radioactive) this will show the beginning of the end.

Expand full comment

debate fodder, anyone?

Expand full comment

39 likes! I just read through the comments and realized that Caitlin is followed by some of the dumbest, nihilistic, thumb sucking narcissists, all vying to be right by predicting the worst. What a bunch of fools. She’s worked hard to bring her mob along, up out of the privilege whitey wallows in and lead you into the light. She’s even offered you all an apologia for your willing acquiescence to “propaganda”. Now when she’s saying maybe we can look at this from another point of view, her sheep bleat and bloat, afraid to abandon your safe, whinney, useless seats at the computer to GET UP AND DO SOMETHING!!!!

Expand full comment

I think you are very good at holding up mirrors. No sheep here. I've done a lot, how many protests for Julian have you attended? How many articles have you written? No sheep here - Caitlin's a big girl and she has her opinions and voice. So do many of us others who admire her. It's not a competition or leader - follow situation. My main point is that this is all bitter-sweet and the larger issue of what the state apparatus did to Julian should be foremost in "weight", not this brief snatch of freedom. I'm not in favor of crumbs, that's how we are kept as sheep and slaves.

Expand full comment

Jeano, girlfriend - people afflicted with diarrhea usually deal with it in private. The verbal one included.

Expand full comment

Disagree that it's as irrelevant as you describe.

Assange would still be in Belmarsh if it wasn't an election year.

Assange had become a problem for the Biden regime - they were under pressure, because of the amazing support Assange had, and because Julian never gave up.

The Biden regime were forced to release him, precisely because it was an election year.

This is something they wouldn't have wanted to do. The CIA would have been against it for sure. They caved.

That in itself is a significant victory.

They capitulated.

Expand full comment

I agree David, on this occasion, Caitlin is wrong by believing in miracles because this is not. A brave man was convicted and pleaded guilty. Guilty of what? Che Guevara wouldn't be happy about this.

Expand full comment

That was apparent from the beginning. But you fail to see the possibilities for overturning this in the future. You are not some super wise man giving we plebes the news, dude. We are overjoyed that Julian is free. The empire is going down of its own weight of crime and villainy.

Expand full comment

Certainly not a glitch, but I do like the idea of raising the pot lid to let off some steam. Give us right wing, tin-foil hat wearing, anti-jabs conspiracy nutters apiece of candy and a distraction as the Covid figures (sorry excess deaths and people falling like flies) come out / Israel's genocide and inhumane behaviour and Ukraine getting battered.. but forget them Assange is out.. TIMING !.

Also he looks pretty good hey after the past 12 years... obviously well fed !>?

I think " ikester8 " is onto something, because in UK - Common law still rules.

Expand full comment

I agree!

Expand full comment

Extremely well written Caitlin, thank you. I've been following the story of Julian since shortly after its beginning in Sweden. I've read 2 books of his. For 2 days now I've been crying tears of joy.

Expand full comment

It's been a crazy 48 hours. I've been laughing and crying, dancing and singing and looking for the Arrival Video.

Let's celebrate, rest up and get back to work destroying the Narrative.

Expand full comment

I was following his flight that Stella shared. Couldn't sleep till that plane landed!

Expand full comment

On the day Julian boarded the plane I was up until 3 AM. Last night it was until 1:30AM and up early to check Stella's X acct. Before I get the chance my news feeds lit up with videos of his arrival.

Expand full comment

G

Expand full comment

I am weeping. I wanted Assange freed from the clutches of the horrible US government. I want every American free from the clutches of the US government. Its dedication to atrocities is making me ill.

Expand full comment

I like this girl :)

Expand full comment

I think having a positive view of humanity is important. I believe most of us want the same things. We want a peaceful and even loving relationship with others. We want our children to thrive. We want to be healthy, happy and to feel loved. We don’t generally wish harm on others unless tricked into this. I believe there are relatively very few people driving all the negativity in our world and the rest are simply tricked into negative behavior. This can be changed rapidly. This is what the evil few are terrified of, that we’ll see them.

Expand full comment

We must end the worship of money.

Expand full comment

So you listen to Michael Hudson and Richard Wolff all the time do you?

Are you paying attention to the Geopolitical Economy report from Ben Norton?

When you say "we" is this a self-indictment or an indictment of some other select group?

Which nation(s) in the world best follow your dictum.

Not trying to get an argument going, just want to nail it down to some specifics about how you intend for this to happen.

Expand full comment

It's not as much the worship of money that is a problem, but the dangers associated with its absence.

Expand full comment

Amen! "For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil."

Expand full comment

Amen to that brother.

Expand full comment

I think ending the fear of not having any is important. It’s ok if people want nice things and like to show off a bit. That’s very human. But people not having anything is unacceptable in an evolved society. Moderate capitalism is ok for me

Expand full comment

"Moderate" is not how capitalism works. What you're describing - if you aren't totally blinded by American propaganda - is socialism.

Expand full comment

It’s not productive to debate the definition of ‘isms’. Of course we’re all influenced by propaganda, if not blinded. My point is, swinging from one extreme economic system to another might not be the answer

Expand full comment

It's American propaganda to refer to socialism as an "extreme economic system." You just proved my point.

Expand full comment

Ok you win Susan. Good job!👏

Expand full comment

Wholeheartedly agree.

Expand full comment

„Maybe we really do win this thing.“

… and then be ready to take over responsibility - this is one of our very important exercises that we should practice every day!

Expand full comment

Yes! Hallelujah! Tears of joy🥰

Expand full comment

We have historically always underestimated the power that we hold in our hands as citizens. As Stella acknowledged earlier at the press conference,without the dedication of the millions of people across the globe who were unrelenting in their support of Julian this may never have happened. Whatever one wants to call them, the establishment, the globalists, the obscenely wealthy elite,are scared senseless by us. They try to keep their horrible actions in the dark and use all of the resources at their fingertips to try and convince us that they have our best interests at heart and that any criticism of them is an indication of our lack of understanding,moral code or whatever other charges they can use to gaslight us. Mistakenly they believe that their wealth and privilege protects them from everything that they themselves are doing to the rest of us. They build their bunkers, they engage what is in effect their private armies to protect themselves but their relentless pursuit of money and power will be their undoing. I believe that we are witnessing a seismic shift in global politics and that if we actually manage to come through the next few years without a thermonuclear holocaust that the world will be a very different place. As the sun sets on the American empire,an inevitability given the history of such enterprises, a truly multi polar world will be of the greatest benefit to us,the people. The transition will be painful for some,especially those who currently hold the levers of power and not without a profound effect on all levels of society but it will come,whether we like it or not.

We owe it to ourselves and each other to hold the line and keep the faith because,as the old song says “we will overcome”.

Expand full comment

While I support the sentiment you express here, I think it important to reject the "Whatever one wants to call them" perspective, which just keeps "them" nameless and incognito.

Let me call out Amos Hochstein, who is a dual American/Israeli citizen.

There is a website that published a long list of such people, you may find it on Duck-duck-go, but I can't paste it in here because it would probably be deleted and perhaps threaten Caitlin's ability to publish at all.

In a recent Judge Nap interview, Nap and Wilkerson discussed the position Hochstein holds. Wilkerson related how Douglas Feith (the architect of the Iraq war and a dual citizen) had security provided by outright Mossad members who did not have to pass through security to enter the Pentagon.

The ADL anti-Semitism claims keep us from naming names. It doesn't help that so many Americans are still so horrified by the Holocaust that they refuse to acknowledge who it is that is destroying America because they belong to this protected group.

Norman Finkelstein, Aaron Mate, Max Blumenthal and many other "self-hating Jews" call them out, but the "rest of us" can't. We have to figure out how.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Really? I've been watching a lot of Finkelstein for the last several months.

Sorry, I do not believe you are being at all honest.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Oh my. A 10 year old article in the New Republic, which, at the time was owned by Chris Hughes, a Facebook founder, who certainly would have been swayed by Zuckerberg to discredit Finkelstein.

And a 2012 reference from the BDS movement proclaiming Finkelstein opposed it because it would lead to the "death of Israel".

HOWEVER:

I've certainly changed my opinions on dozens of subjects since 2015.

In 2015 I still believed Israel had a right to exist.

I went from that to hoping for a "two-state solution"

Now I'm rooting for Hamas and Hizbollah.

In 2015, I thought Bernie Sanders a gift from God.

In 2015, I was still a precinct officer in the Democratic Party.

You're being disingenuous and dishonest.

You might want to do a web search for something newer.

Expand full comment

>>"https://bdsmovement.net/taxonomy/term/157/all"

I was shocked by that video. That seems to be quite a different Norman Finklestein (12 years ago) than what I observe today. I disagree with many things he said in that video.

BDS is one of the most important movements (and tools) to fight the Israeli Zionist apartheid regime with. I don't understand how anyone can justify being Pro-Palestine and anti-BDS at the same time...

Having said that, it is important to keep the following in mind:

(1) All people are constantly changing based on new life experiences and new knowledge/information. I see (from current interviews) that Norman Finklestein has changed a few of his opinions over time. Example: At one time, he actually believed that non-violence was a viable strategy that Gazans could employ against their oppressors. He was proven wrong by the 2018 massacre of innocent civilians (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/3/30/gazas-great-march-of-return-protests-explained). Finklestein has changed his stance on that and others (especially since the events of Oct.7)

(2) No one is perfect and gets everything right all the time. Not even Norman Finklestein.

(3) Finklestein has done more to help the Palestinian cause than almost any other anti-Zionist Jewish person (that I'm aware of).

Expand full comment

WHAT??? To which Finkelstein are you referring? Some made-up one out of your imagination?

Expand full comment

Totally agree, this is not the Norm Finkelstein that I listen to and read. He has been outspoken re Israel's genocide and the unrelenting aid the U.S. provides the country. It is true that he doesn't see any solution for the Palestinians in the immediate future, but that's true for many of us, if we're realistic - Israel is not going to move 700,000 + settlers out of the West Bank, so that there can be a contiguous Palestinians state, and I don't think Israel is going to change its apartheid policies.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I do listen to Palestinians, on Democracy Now, Useful Idiots, Chris Hedges. That doesn't cause me to abandon Finkelstein, who I think is a clear-thinking hero.

Expand full comment

I would be happy to research your assertion. I like to believe that I will listen to both sides of a story.

On the other hand, there are always propagandists who try to smear their opponents. I can certainly believe that the Israeli government would go to great lengths to shut up Norman Finkelstein, since he has opposed their murderous genocide since the beginning.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Why do you repost the same discredited sources over and over again?

You keep saying to "listen to the Palestinians", who isn't? What do the Palestinians say about Finkelstein?

Not only are you being dishonest, you are just being evil.

You seem to be an anti-Semite in the truest sense of the word.

"Finkelstein is a Jew, therefore Findelstein is bad."

Your use of "Israhel" is not even juvenile, it is infantile. Do you think it bolsters your argument? You are very, very wrong.

Expand full comment

We SHALL overcome

Expand full comment

Anything is possible. The only way for our species to progress is by removing the 2 worst blights on our species: Capitalism and religion. They've had a death grip on us for eons.

Expand full comment

It's corrupted and it's Crony Capitalism. The other evil is Compounding Interest, Usury.

Expand full comment

Absolutely not🤦‍♀️ It's always been a pyramid scheme. War is good for business is all you need to know about capitalism. It places values on the RESOURCES WE NEED TO SURVIVE, and they put profit over LIFE.

Expand full comment

Propose a way to spread wealth. I believe Socialism can not live without Capitalism and vice versa.

From 1977 to 2007 70% of our nation's wealth was stolen from the Middle Class by the top 1%. It was achieved through Patrimonial Capitalism and Crony Capitalism.

Free Enterprise and Free Competition are not bad but it's a lie because it's all been corrupted and rigged by our Corporate Government.

We are ruled by oligarchs and their corporations when we should all be shareholders. We need to take back the levers of power and truly be a nation of the People, by the People for the People.

China and Russia are good examples, especially Russia.

Expand full comment

We need to STOP USING MONEY 🤦‍♀️

Expand full comment

Would you like to go back to bartering?

Think it through.

Expand full comment

SHARING 🤦‍♀️ You were taught how to do that, right? You place more value on things than you do life.

Expand full comment

You're absolutely right about the Congressional Corporate Military Industrial Complex. Don't worry, it's junk and the money will be gone as soon as dedollarization takes hold.

Expand full comment

And you know the horrible suffering that's going to entail, yes?

Expand full comment

"The other evil is Compounding Interest"... I would remove just one word in your sentence, Compounding...

Expand full comment

"The only way for our species to progress is by removing the 2 worst blights on our species: Capitalism and religion."... Pardon the pun, but Amen to that.

Expand full comment

Only the Christian Religion, lol. Not the Muslim one; that is doing well in Iran, quite well in-fact 😏😘

In fact, it might be the reason the Global Public resisting communism, fascism, and capitalism is doing quite well today, not to mention zionism and the resistance to free Palestine (and the world by default and extension, etc :) 😘

Expand full comment

ALL RELIGIONS are about control.

Expand full comment

Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Islam is about peace and tranquility in life and how to get there: through worshipping God, i.e by studying and learning and praying and fasting and fighting injustice and defending ourselves against tyranny, etc. These are all acts of worship in Islam, if done with the right intention (and not for worldly matters* or worldly gain, for example, to be more accurate there, ty :)

*such as not for fame or fortune, much as is relished by politicians in the West and East, for example, etc :)

Expand full comment

Not Budhism.

Expand full comment

Buddhism isn't a religion.

Expand full comment

You don’t have to deal with the emotional work of disappointment.

In my 50+ year fight for Palestinian rights, I've had to deal with a lot of disappointment. It's no fun! But maybe if Julian can be free, so can Palestinians?

Expand full comment

Yes Caitlin, The unthinkable has happened! Though it took so long and Julian Assange had to go through years of suffering and the uncertainty of not knowing. A wonderful day for his family and friends who worked tirelessly supporting him and been there for him, and most of all he had the love of a good woman. We who followed his cause right from the start - together with Caitlin and Tim - are elated. All the good people who were with him from all over the world have reason to be optimistic.

Maybe our dreams of a better world are not just dreams.

Expand full comment

Right on Caitlin. Sam Adams said it best, "It does not take a majority to prevail but rather a Tireless, Irate Minority keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

I say, be the T.I.M. !!! Keep firing Sister, you are the best. ~~ j ~~

Expand full comment

Paraphrasing Lenin: There are decades when nothing happens; then, there are weeks when decades happen.

Paraphrasing Einstein: Space-time is warped.

Paraphrasing quantum mechanics: By observing something, you change it.

Expand full comment

Peter,

Except for the quantum stuff, the rest resonates..

Expand full comment

"Paraphrasing quantum mechanics: By observing something, you change it."

Only within very narrow limits. And politics ain't physics.

Expand full comment

True, it's an analogy, not necessarily a strict one. The Einstein quote obviously doesn't apply to humans either...but you could argue that people (the Dark Matter of the masses) play the role of the mass that warps space-time...

But back to quantum mechanics. Note that people do change their behavior when observed. It seems that is on point with Wikileaks: by putting war crimes out where they can be observed by the max # people, you can effect changes.

Another analogy of quantum:

Putinger's (Schrodinger's) cat: the dual nature of the Special Military Operation....how can the Russian army be weak and ineffective, and yet threaten Europe at the same time? Two condtions that exist simultaneously, and collapse into one of these conditions when someone observes them (or depending on by whom...whether they are pro-Western or not....in analogy to physics: which tools are used to observe...Anglo-Saxon or Russian?).

Bonus quote: quantum mechanics in 5 words: Don't look, wave; look, particle.

Expand full comment

Peter... It's not trying to teach anyone about quantum stuff that things will change, but by understanding objectives that are good for tribes... and "quantum mechanics" ain;t gonna cut it.

Expand full comment

Back in the day, the pundits tried to connect Deep Physics to Eastern philosophies in an attempt to find new ways to solve old problems....maybe physics is irrelevant now that we have enough fission/fusion to destroy the world (or bioweapons, so it's biologists who are the devils now) ...all that remains are the tribal objectives. Good point. I just remember how Gell-Mann, informed by the 8-fold Buddhist way, formulated the quark model, taking the quark label from the poet James Joyce. I believe it's the chaotic unity of Every Thing (physics, biology, math, poetry, music) that underlies much Beauty in the world, and that cut's it just fine for me.

Politics cannot produce beauty, but it can destroy her. Let us rejoice that, with the release of Saint Julius we have won a small step back to beauty.

Expand full comment

"It was even possible to imagine him getting out one day on some legal technicality or whatever and living out the rest of his life in a nation that has an oppositional relationship with Washington like Edward Snowden, maybe. But coming home, to Australia?? No chance"

Julian is coming 'home' to a country that did nothing to help him during his travails. Australians should be ashamed that their government abandoned him. Australia is a United States butt boy.

Expand full comment

The Prime Minister of Australia gave a speech taking credit for the release and praising Australian government for all the hard work they did. Is that all bogus? (I have no opinion on the matter.)

Expand full comment

"Is that all bogus?"

Yes, he is a lying asshole like all politicians.

Expand full comment

Those sneaky Aussies. They've been fighting for Assange all these years. It was probably in the news, too. Who knew.

Expand full comment

Well there is one Aussie who did fight for Assange tooth and nail. And we all know who she is.

Expand full comment

Sure. Of course, I didn't mean individuals.

Expand full comment

I am so happy his father was alive to see this.

Expand full comment

So maybe Leonard Peltier has a chance

Expand full comment

Yes. I think he is about 90yrs now.

Pity we didn't stay on him too.

Expand full comment

It's important to remember how little any of us know about the world. And what you fill that vast unknown with is essential.

Do you fill it with anxiety, fear, and despair or do you fill it with hope, faith, and determination. I suspect that answer comes from one's understanding of and connection to their source.

Everyone remembers the story of Pandora's Box, but many forget the final item contained in it was hope.

Expand full comment