Take a Hike, Mike

It has nothing to do with his movies. I know filmmaker Michael Moore is capable of some absolutely outrageous antics in his documentaries. Some of them miss important points the director chooses not to be aware of, but others, even the boldest of them, are right on the money.

I thought his idea of taking uninsured Americans in desperate need of health care up to the gates of Gitmo and demanding his passengers get the same level of care given to the Muslim terrorists inside was nothing short of brilliant. That was a big part of his very well-done documentary, Sicko-a telling indictment of the failure of our healthcare system, if such a thing can even be called a system.

No, my departure from Mr. Moore's future endeavors comes entirely from his off-screen behavior. I am referring specifically to the matter of Julian Assange.

I should not have to provide a lot of background on WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, inasmuch as he has hogged a great many headlines over the past few weeks, beginning with his massive leaks of confidential documents, right up to his having posted bail for the crimes he is accused of in Sweden.

It seems that, while in the process of releasing all that sensitive information, he may have sexually assaulted two women in Sweden, for which that country wants to put him on trial. Assange had been hiding out in England. When he was discovered, he was promptly arrested and held in custody, pending his extradition to Sweden.

Recently, a British judge, over the vehement protests of the Swedish and American governments, granted Assange bail, but in in the amount of £200,000. Here is where my beef with Michael Moore comes in. He, along with Bianca Jagger, offered to post Assange's bail. I cannot begin to express how disappointed I am that a strong and powerful voice for the downtrodden, such as Michael Moore, decided to militantly throw in his lot with such a dangerous ideologue.

What Julian Assange did cannot be called crusading journalism by any but the most fanatical haters of America. Even if his WikiLeaks project did uncover some unsavory secrets that benefited from the light of day, his mindless shotgun approach to American foreign policy did immensely more harm than good.

Did some of our people speak ill of clepto-in-chief Hamid Karzai? Is our State Department somewhat disappointed in Pakistan's efforts to help suppress Al Qaeda? By what calculus is this evil? Do we have agents within the Islamic community who provide us with useful information about people who are trying to kill us? By what mandate does it become necessary to reveal their names? No, wait, let me answer that: by Al Qaeda's, of course.

Mind you, I thought the Pentagon Papers exposure was a good thing in the midst of the Viet Nam War. As many people pointed out, the communists in Viet Nam were not making any attempts to kill those of us who were not in their land, trying to kill them. The bastards we are in conflict with today have a far different target: any and all Americans they can find a way to slaughter.

The fact of the matter is, even in the absence of some nefarious scheme, every sovereign nation needs and should be entitled to speak confidentially to its people engaged in any sort of foreign service. It is not just a matter of courtesy or convenience. In the long run, it is a matter of survival.

Getting back to Michael Moore, he has maintained that the Swedish government is being hypocritical in charging Assange with sexual assault, in that their nation seems to be unusually tolerant of rapists in general. Clearly, according to Moore, they are bowing to American pressure.

If Sweden has a history of excusing rapists, that is very unfortunate and ought to be changed without delay. Still, there are certainly laws on their books against that sort of thing, and, if there is strong reason to suspect that Assange violated them, they should be allowed to question him. Rape is rape, and, if the two incidents actually happened, the perpetrator should be brought to account, regardless of some third party's "hidden agenda." I would hope and expect that Assange would get a fair hearing in Sweden, but that hearing absolutely deserves to be held.

While there is some degree of likelihood that Assange will not flee his bail, I am offended at Moore's ringing endorsement of his irresponsible behavior. If the suspect does go back underground, that will make matters all the worse.

I mentioned earlier that both Moore and Bianca Jagger offered to throw Assange's bail, yet I only seem to be punishing Moore. Is this yet another case of your narrator being influenced by feminine wiles? Not in the least; if Bianca Jagger makes any movies in the future, I will not go to see them either. And that is that.

Sources

Businessinsider.com

Guardian.co.uk