Sarah Palin vs. Julian Assange

Sarah Palin vs. Julian Assange

The former vice presidential nominee may not be able to see Russia from her house. But she sees the WikiLeaks founder as enough of a threat to argue for hunting him down as a terrorist.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Time magazine readers, voting in a poll on potential "Person of the Year" candidates, have placed WikiLeaks founder and frontman Julian Assange in the top tier—along with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. 

Sarah Palin, the queen of all media, is far behind in tenth place.

What to do?

Palin wants Assange hunted down as a terrorist.

In a rant on her Facebook page, the former governor of Alaska says the Obama administration is not doing enough to take down WikiLeaks and Assange.

"Assange is not a ‘journalist,’ any more than the “editor” of al Qaeda’s new English-language magazine Inspire is a ‘journalist.’ He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?" Palin demands to know. "What if any diplomatic pressure was brought to bear on NATO, EU, and other allies to disrupt Wikileaks’ technical infrastructure? Did we use all the cyber tools at our disposal to permanently dismantle Wikileaks? Were individuals working for Wikileaks on these document leaks investigated? Shouldn’t they at least have had their financial assets frozen just as we do to individuals who provide material support for terrorist organizations?"

As it happens, Sarah Palin does not get to define who is or is not a "journalist," or what is or is not "journalism." Nor does she get to decide who should be pursued "with the same urgency we pursue Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."

But it is worth noting that, while reasonable people can and do criticize Assange, most of them do not place him in the same category as the leaders of international terrorist groups. Palin and New York Congressman Peter King, who wants to label WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization, are the outliers. For now. Even Senator Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent who often sides with Republican King on national security issues, says of the "terrorist" label: "Normally, we reserve that designation for groups that fit the traditional definition of terrorism, which is that they are using violence to achieve a political end. While it’s true that what WikiLeaks did may result in damage to some people…it’s not Al Qaeda."

Lieberman is the voice of reason on this one. But can he hold Palin back if she starts to worry that Assange is stealing some of her "star" time?

Like this blog post? Read all Nation blogs on the Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.
NationNow iPhone App

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x