This poppy is way too tall

Clenching her fist in front of her, Prime Minister Julia Gillard declared yesterday, "the foundation stone of this Wikileaks issue is an illegal act. So lets uh, not try put any glosses on this."

Ms Gillard is essentially begging us not to look too deeply into the millions of cables released by Wikileaks detailing exchanges between international diplomats, causing politicians to freak out and the media to froth at the mouth.

And why would you listen to anything put forth by a rapist anyway? That's right, the man at the centre of it all, Australia's own Julian Assange has surrendered himself to police in London over allegations of sexual assault from two women in Sweden which he denies. He has been refused bail on the grounds that he has "weak community ties" in the UK and has the "means and ability" to abscond. However, the charges themselves are flimsy, if examined for more than two minutes. According to Assange's barrister, James D. Catlin, the basis of the charge is having consensual sex without a condom, which is punishable in Sweden as rape.

But with the word "rape" and Assange's name repeatedly appearing together, governments across the world are now breathing a sigh of relief in that the attempt to vilify and destroy Assange's attempts to create a more transparent and accountable world have partly succeeded. 

There have been many who believe that Wikileaks has brought no real revelations anyhow. We already know, for instance, that the US sees China as a threat, and that the war in Afghanistan is being miserably lost.
But Wikileaks has shaken the world like a snowglobe, politicians and corporations bumping around in bewildered outrage.
Most importantly, it has reaffirmed the militaristic and domineering nature of the US, and its intentions to rule the world by force.
Take for example classified US diplomatic cables which show that nine Nato divisions have been identified for combat operations in the event of an attack on Poland.
There is also no link between the rape charge that Julian Assange faces and Wikileaks, as Kevin Rudd has reminded the Australian public, despite the it being revealed by Wikileaks that the US ambassador to Australia dubbed former PM  Rudd a "control freak".
Many seem to be losing this salient point, and we are being told that Assange is a criminal and what he did was illegal (although Julia Gillard could not list one reason why) and he is a "dangerous anarcho-Marxist with paranoid tendencies and enough conspiracy theories to keep the Grassy Knoll Society busy for a month".
Pissing off conservatives worldwide, vitriolic attacks on both Wikileaks and Assange are being countered by claims that the Wikileak's editor-in-chief is the Ned Kelly of the Digital Age.
But the net around Assange appears to have finally tightened, and the future of Wikileaks and its ability to disseminate information that everyone deserves to know (not just elites in suits) is facing a great hurdle, challenging Assange's insistence that "the truth will always win".
Skip the bullshit from politicians and the agenda of the media and read the op-ed written by Julian Assange for The Australian today. Thank God its not 1984 yet.

In 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide’s The News, wrote: “In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win.”

His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch’s expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.

I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.

These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia , was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.

WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?

Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.

People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.

If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.

WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain ‘s The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.

Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be “taken out” by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be “hunted down like Osama bin Laden”, a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a “transnational threat” and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister’s office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.

And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.

We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn’t want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.

Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.

Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: “You’ll risk lives! National security! You’ll endanger troops!” Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can’t be both. Which is it?

It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US , with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.

US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan . NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn’t find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.

But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:

The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran ‘s nuclear program stopped by any means available.

Britain’s Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect “US interests”.

Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.

The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay . Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.

In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government”. The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth. 

Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.