Connect with us

The Daily Sheeple

Man Details HIS Case For Droning Julian Assange: Why He’s Wrong

Some writers now want to follow in Barack Obama’s footsteps, and drone Julian Assange – without trial – with the sole goal of keeping him quiet.

Editor's Choice

Man Details HIS Case For Droning Julian Assange: Why He’s Wrong


The Trump administration thinks that “talking tough” is going to somehow squash Julian Assange and keep him from leaking more government secrets. In fact, they haven’t laid out a case for dealing with the Wikileaks founder, but some writers now want to follow in Barack Obama’s footsteps, and drone him – without trial – with the sole goal of keeping him quiet.

We could start with the massive human rights and constitutional violations in that oh-so-simple-plan. But it seems too obvious. Whether one likes what Assange releases or not, shouldn’t make a difference. The truth is still the truth and it doesn’t change simply because you drone its messenger.

Directly on the heels of the news of Chelsea Manning recently being released from prison, truth-haters have now set their sights on Julian Assange. It seems that political and government apologists are now all too eager to drone the man responsible for publishing the truth for the American public. Oddly enough, it’s not the government (right now), but knuckledraggers who insist on death because they don’t like the truth that are the problem. It appears that once Americans put on their red or blue goggles, they decide which truths they want to be released and which truths should be punishable by drone death.

Mediate made sure to declare that this article was an op-ed and the opinion of the just the writer. With little basis, other than being upset that the government he worships had some uncomfortable truths released about it, Jon Levine laid out a case for what he thinks is acceptable punishment for Assange releasing the truth about his church, the holy government.

Before his “kill the messenger” solution to the egregious crimes Hillary Clinton and the CIA commit, the writer laid out his poor reasons for coming to the conclusion that Assange should be killed. He used information said by the Trump Administration to back up his violent rhetoric, but at least he got that part right. Yet it hardly makes an excuse for killing the man who delivers the truth. During a press conference in April, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that he was looking for ways to arrest and prosecute Wikileaks’ founder. That same month, CIA Director Mike Pompeo denounced the organization as a “hostile intelligence service,” but added that the problem of Wikileaks and Assange offered no “quick fix.”

With all due respect to the estimable CIA Director, I would proffer there is a quick fix.

We can drone Julian Assange.

In a controlled targeted strike, the United States can blow up the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he currently resides, and put an end to Mr. Assange and Wikileaks.

Now hear me out; I don’t use the “D-word” lightly. The fact is, Mr. Assange is no ordinary hacker, fleecing little old ladies or snatching R&D from Microsoft. He is a nefarious actor on the world stage. His disclosures have directly aided and abetted America’s international adversaries from Russia to ISIS, and his leaks have unquestionably made Americans and many others less safe around the world. Assange’s actions are not hacking, they are cyberterrorism — and they should be dealt with thusly. –  Mediate

Making sure to give Assange 48 hours to surrender before slaughtering him seems to make the author believe he’s morally superior. That’s a hell of a choice. Surrender to death or be droned to death. What a choice!

Taking a page from warmonger, Barack Obama’s book, the sociopaths in society who cannot handle truth seek death as a means to prevent uncomfortable information from being released. Newsflash, some of us want to know what is being done with our money in our name. The left didn’t whine when Chelsea Manning decided to release documents proving the US government committed war crimes. So why the tears now? Because Hillary Clinton lost and killing someone for publishing truth is some sort of revenge? But the right didn’t whine when the Podesta emails were published in the way they complained about the truth Manning released. The truth is still the truth, even when it makes the right look bad too, so they aren’t being let off the hook here either.

This is where military apologists continue to get things wrong. Chelsea Manning isn’t a traitor. If the military truly cared about the freedom of the American public, than those who serve and have served should care about the crimes the government commits with our money in our name. The very crimes they force the military service members to commit for a paycheck. Sure, the information Manning released was uncomfortable, but unfortunately, we don’t live in a world run by unicorns and fairies who fart glitter. Governments commit crimes with stolen money. Then those on the left and the right blame the messengers who simply want to draw our attention to it and who refuse to censor the truth to protect their feelings.

It looks the country is full of snowflakes of both the red and blue variety. Wanting to kill another person who has not aggressed against you in any way makes you nothing more than the oppressive fascist both sides claim they loathe.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Dawn Luger of The Daily Sheeple.

Dawn Luger is a staff writer and reporter for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up – follow Dawn’s work at our Facebook or Twitter.

Dawn Luger is a staff writer and reporter for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up - follow Dawn's work at our Facebook or Twitter.


More in Editor's Choice

Top Tier Gear USA
To Top