My report won’t be a full recount of the proceedings as these can be found quite profusely on the Internet now – both from major newspapers and activists, freelance media and WikiLeaks supporters. I will talk about what has stricken me during the debate – and afterwards: personal psychological considerations if you will.
Several people stood out for me during the debate. Julian Assange wasn’t in top form yet he was still inspirational, amusing at times – especially during the times he would interject and be sent back, like an unruly child, to his chair –, passionate and well, just himself.
The other people who emerged from the debate were, for all the good and bad reasons, Mehdi Hasan, from the New Statesman, who matched Assange’s passion, if not surpassed it; Paul Moore, whistleblower from the HBOS, and Douglas Murray from the Henry Jackson Society.
Paul Moore gave us the sentence that in my opinion encapsulates the whole function of whistleblowing, ‘We are transformed by truth’. I was so impressed by that, since truth is a major moving force in my life, that I felt I had to thank him for it only to be told that it was a sentence from the Bible. If only I read it I would have spared myself the embarrassment. Apart from my faux pas-inducing sentence, Moore possibly appeared the most emotional of the speakers, recounting with brutal honesty the effects of his whistleblowing and showed the real face of the whistleblower – not the one who tells on an organisation for a matter of personal vendetta –, a person with high values and morals who feels they cannot anymore live a life of lies. That was the most apt answer, especially with the tale of his problems with depression and suicidal thoughts following the ostracising from HBOS, to the opposition side’s conviction of whistleblowers as people who most times don’t know what they’re doing and after ruining an organisation go on live an easy life. The fact that Moore had brought one of his children along gave a more real dimension to his story. You could feel the pain Moore had felt – and possibly still feels today – brought on by these events. The fact that his daughter was such a sweet-natured woman made me wonder if whistleblowers are led by values of moral honesty, genuineness, courage and empathy that spread to all the aspects of their life – embracing their love for life and generosity towards society. Thinking of what Bradley Manning had told in one of his unfortunate chat conversations with Adrian Lamo, the fellow hacker who informed the FBI to Manning's cable leaking which caused him being detained as a political prisoner since last July 2010, this makes sense.
Something to ponder for the future.
I had not seen Douglas Murray from the Henry Jackson Society before but I must say he didn’t leave a positive impression. He seemed to frequently veer from the subject at hand by blowing attacks – or cheap shots if you will – against Assange which were both not in any shape or form the theme of the debate and full of wrong and misleading information such as the 'infamous' rumour produced by The Guardian that Assange was happy informants would die. Assange rightly put him in his place by inviting him to at least get the names of The Guardian journalists involved right before making any defamatory remarks. He also asked him if he wanted to join the queue of the organisations WikiLeaks was planning to sue, right after The Guardian. When reading this one might wonder if Murray had been sent by Davies and friends to avenge them for their ongoing feud with Assange and their defeat at the hands of Kristinn Hrafnsson at the SKUP Conference just a mere two weeks before.
Murray was conclusively the most 'vocal' of the speakers for the opposition: at times verging on bullish and patronising but again being put in his spot for not showing a great knowledge of the subject and just talking from hearsay.
What I sensed from the clash of personalities is that while the people opposing whistleblowing do seem to have less intensity about them, less passion – and if they have any is misdirected (see Murray) –, and feel less the injustice perpetrated from the ‘authority’ the pro-whistleblowing faction seem to have more passion for life, a drive to live and see the truth actualised, right or wrong that this might be. This is not easy but they still strive for life and feel a higher communion with society and the people in it.
The debate ended on a high note when Murray again asked – inviting trouble for his side – why Assange believed to be better than most governments. From the second row a lady replied back, possibly exasperated by the umpteenth unnecessary attack from the bullish Murray, 'Because he is. That’s why!’. Words that every supporter in the audience wanted to shout. We thank you, Lady in the second row for saying what everybody had died to say for the previous two hours of debate. This proves that Assange's motto – ‘Courage is contagious’ - is right. As it should be.
I must say that in my personal acquaintance, even if limited, with the WikiLeaks staff and friends I have noticed nothing but friendliness, respectfulness, lack of condescension (the same can’t be said by The Guardian journalists, especially David Leigh who has many times insulted WikiLeaks supporters) and essentially a warm, open heart. Which I think you cannot not have when you so much suffer the consequences of brave, dangerous and life-affirming decisions.
Some pictures from me can be found here.
Some pictures from me can be found here.
