The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJonathan Cook Archive
Those Angry at Rushdie’s Stabbing Have Been Missing in Action Over a Far Bigger Threat to Our Freedom
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Nothing I am about to write should be read as diminishing in any way my sympathy for Salman Rushdie, or my outrage at the appalling attack on him. Those who more than 30 years ago put a fatwa on his head after he wrote the novel The Satanic Verses made this assault possible. They deserve contempt. I wish him a speedy recovery.

But my natural compassion for a victim of violence and my regularly expressed support for free speech should not at the same time blind me or you to the cant and hypocrisy generated by his stabbing on Friday, just as he was about to give a talk in a town in Western New York.

British prime minister Boris Johnson said he was “appalled that Sir Salman Rushdie has been stabbed while exercising a right we should never cease to defend”. His Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, one of the last two contenders for Johnson’s crown, concurred, describing the novelist as “a champion of free speech and artistic freedom”.

Across the Atlantic, President Joe Biden stressed Rushdie’s qualities: “Truth. Courage. Resilience. The ability to share ideas without fear… We reaffirm our commitment to those deeply American values in solidarity with Rushdie and all those who stand for freedom of expression.”

The truth is that the vast majority of those claiming this as an attack not only on a prominent writer but on Western society and its freedoms, have been missing in action for the past several years as the biggest threat to those freedoms unfolded. Or, in the case of Western government leaders, they have actively conspired in the undermining of those freedoms.

Prominent figures and organizations now expressing their solidarity with Rushdie have kept their heads down, or spoken in hushed tones against – or, worse still, become cheerleaders for – this much more serious assault: on our right to know what mass crimes have been committed against others in our name.

Rushdie has won trenchant support from Western liberals and conservatives alike, not for being a brave articulator of difficult truths, but because of who his enemies are.

Holding up a mirror

If that sounds uncharitable or nonsensical, consider this. Julian Assange has spent more than three years in solitary confinement in a high-security prison in London (and before that, seven years confined to a small room in Ecuador’s embassy), in conditions Nils Melzer, the former United Nation’s expert on torture, has described as extreme psychological torture.

Melzer and many others fear for Assange’s life if British and US authorities succeed in dragging out much longer the Wikileaks founder’s detention on what amounts to purely political charges. Assange has already suffered a stroke – as Melzer notes, one of the many potential physical reactions suffered by those enduring prolonged confinement and isolation.

And all of this is happening to him, remember, for one reason alone: because he published documents proving that, under cover of a bogus humanitarianism, Western governments were committing crimes against peoples in distant lands. Assange faces charges under the draconian Espionage Act only because he made public the gruesome truth about Western military actions in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, there are differences between Rushdie and Assange’s respective cases, but those differences should elicit more concern for Assange’s plight than Rushdie’s. In practice, the exact opposite has happened.

Rushdie’s right to free speech has been championed because he exercised it to imagine an alternative formative history of Islam and implicitly question the authority of clerics and governments in far-off lands.

Assange’s right to free speech has been ridiculed, ignored or at best supported weakly and equivocally because he exercised it to hold up a mirror to the West, showing exactly what our governments are doing, in secret, in many of those same far-off lands.

Rushdie’s right to life was threatened by distant clerics and governments for questioning the moral basis of their power. Assange’s right to life is threatened by Western governments because he questioned the moral basis of their power.

Worthy victims

If we lived in functioning democratic societies in the West – ones where power is not so deeply entrenched we are largely blind to its exercise – no journalist, no media commentator, no writer, no politician would fail to understand that Assange’s plight deserves far more attention and expressions of concern than Rushdie’s.

It is our own governments, not “mad mullahs” in Iran, who threaten the free society that permitted Rushdie to publish his novel. If Assange is crushed, so is the basis of our fundamental democratic rights: to know what is being done in our name and to hold our leaders to account.

If Rushdie is silenced, we will still have those freedoms, even if, as individuals, we will feel a little more nervous about saying anything that might be construed as an insult to the Prophet Mohammed.

So why are the vast majority of us so much more invested in Rushdie’s fate than Assange’s? Simply because our sympathy has been elicited for one of them and not the other.

Ultimately, that has nothing to do with whether one or the other is more worthy, more of a victim. It has to do with how much they have, or have not, served the interests of a Western narrative that constantly reinforces the idea that we are the Good Guys and they are the Bad Guys.

Rushdie and the fatwa against him became a cause célèbre for Western elites because he offered a literary sensibility to one of the West’s most cherished modern pieties: that Islam poses an existential threat to the values of an enlightened West. Here was a man, born to a Muslim family in India, attacking the religion he supposedly knew best. He was an insider spilling the beans, stating what other Muslims were allegedly too cowed to admit in public.


Though it was doubtless not his intention or his fault, Rushdie was quickly adopted as a literary mascot by Western liberals who were pushing their own “clash of civilizations” thesis. That is not a judgment on the merits of his novel – I am not equipped to make that assessment – but a judgment on the motivations of so many of his champions and on why his work resonates so strongly with them.

Racist worldview

In a real sense, that is true of all literature. It earns its status within a cultural milieu, one policed by media elites with their own agendas. It is they who decide whether a manuscript is published or discarded, whether the subsequent book is reviewed or ignored, whether it is celebrated or ridiculed, whether it is promoted or falls into obscurity.

We tell ourselves, or we are told, that this process of weeding out is decided strictly on the basis of merit. But if we pause to think, the reality is that a work finds an audience only if it stays within a socially constructed consensus that gives it meaning or if it challenges that consensus at a time when challenges to the consensus are overdue.

George Orwell is a good example of how this works. He prospered – or at least his reputation did – from the fact that he questioned certainties about the “natural order” that had long been enforced by Western elites but had become hard to sustain after two world wars in quick succession. At the same time, he exposed the dangers of an authoritarianism that could be easily ascribed to the West’s main adversary, the Soviet Union.

Orwell’s body of work contains ideas that speak to universal values. But that is only part of the reason it has endured. It also benefited from the fact that the ambiguity inherent in those universal lessons could be recruited to a much narrower agenda by Western elites, readying for a Cold War that was about to become the tragic legacy of those two preceding hot wars.

Much the same is true of Rushdie. His novel served two functions: First, its main theme chimed with Western elites because it reassured them that their prejudice against the Muslim world was fully justified – not least because the novel provoked a violent backlash that appeared to confirm those prejudices.

And second, The Satanic Verses indemnified Western elites against the accusation of racism. Rushdie inadvertently provided the alibi they so desperately needed to promote their racist worldview of a civilized West opposed by a barbaric, insecure East. It served as midwife to the rantings of Islamophobic tracts like Melanie Phillips’ Londonistan and Nick Cohen’s What’s Left?.

Literary sedition

For the past two decades, we have been living with the appalling consequences of the West’s smug condescension, its wild posturings, its violent humanitarianism – all masking a thirst for the Middle East’s most precious resource: oil.

The result has been the wrecking of whole countries; the ending of more than a million lives, with millions more made homeless; a backlash that has unleashed even more terrifying forms of Islamist extremism; a deepening self-righteousness among Western elites that has ushered in an all-out assault on democratic controls; an entrenchment of the power of the war industries and their lobbies; and a relentless undermining of international institutions and international law.

And all this has served as an endless excuse to delay addressing the real issue plaguing humanity: the imminent extinction of our species, caused by our addiction to the very resource that got us into this mess in the first place.

Sadly, the attack on Rushdie, and the ensuing indignation, will only intensify the trends noted above. None of that is Rushdie’s fault, of course. His desire to question the authority of the clerical bullies he grew up among is an entirely separate matter from the purposes to which Western elites have harnessed his personal act of literary sedition. He is not responsible for the fact that his work has been used to underpin and weaponize a larger, flawed Western narrative.

Nonetheless, Friday’s violent assault will once again be used to shore up a fearmongering narrative that empowers politicians, sells newspapers, and, if we can still see the bigger picture, rationalizes the West’s dehumanization of more than a billion people, its continuing sanctions against many of them, and the advancement of wars that fabulously enrich a tiny section of Western societies that continue to evade major scrutiny.

Hollow joke

Those elites have evaded scrutiny precisely because they are so successful at vilifying and eliminating anyone who seeks to hold them to account. Like Julian Assange.

If you think Assange brought trouble upon himself, unlike Rushdie, who is simply a hapless victim caught in the crossfire of a menacing “clash of civilizations”, it is because you have been trained – through your consumption of establishment media – into making that entirely unfounded distinction. And those training you through their dominant narratives are not a disinterested party, but the very actors who have most to lose should you arrive at a different conclusion.

In Assange’s case, there has been an endless stream of lies and misdirections that I and many others have been trying to highlight on our marginal platforms before we are algorithmed into oblivion by Google and Facebook, the richest corporations on the planet.

As Melzer pointed out at length in his recent book, the Swedish authorities knew from the outset that Assange had no case to answer on sex allegations they had no intention of ever investigating. But they made a pretence of pursuing him anyway (and left the threat of onward extradition to the US hanging over his head) to make sure he lost public sympathy and looked like a fugitive from justice.

Anyone who writes about Assange knows only too well the army of social media users adamant that Assange was charged with rape, or that he refused to be interviewed by Swedish prosecutors, or that he skipped bail, or that he colluded with Trump, or that he recklessly published classified documents unedited, or that he endangered the lives of informers and agents.

None of that is true – nor, more significantly, is it relevant to the case the US, aided by the UK government, is advancing against Assange through the British courts to lock him up for the rest of his life.

For Assange, the West’s much vaunted principle of free speech is nothing more than a hollow joke, a doctrine weaponized against him – paradoxically, to destroy him and the free speech values he champions, including transparency and accountability from our leaders.


There is a reason why our energies are so heavily invested in worrying about a supposed menace from Islam rather than the menace on our doorstep, from our rulers; why Rushdie makes headlines, while Assange is forgotten; why Assange deserves his punishment, and Rushdie does not.

That reason has nothing to do with protecting free speech, and everything to do with protecting the power of unaccountable elites who fear free speech.

Protest the stabbing of Salman Rushdie by all means. But don’t forget to protest even more loudly the silencing and disappearing of Julian Assange.

(Republished from Jonathan Cook by permission of author or representative)
Hide 58 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Skeptikal says:

    If Rushdie is serious, he will now speak up louidly and publicly in defense of Julian Assange.
    He is perfectly situated now to do so.
    Conversely, if he does NOT speak up for Assange, and blows this opportunity to strike a blow for freedom of expression everywhere, he will lose credibility in my eyes and many others’.

    There are those who argue that Rushdie actually set the stage for the Danish cartoons and the Charlie Hebdo violence (and the Islamophobic backlash) by targeting Islam in a pretty outrageous book.
    I think this is a reasonable argument.

    Whether or not I agree with it is immaterial.
    Anyhow, I am not a Muslim.
    According to our new woke “trigger” standards, what matters is what Muslims think, not what I think. Right?? Muslims have a right not to be offended, just like any snowflake in a US university. Right?

    So, who is going to urge Rushdie to use the current moment to do good?

  2. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:

    Very true. Assange is a human rights defender, specifically of Article 19, Article 17, and Article 6. Rushdie is a Judy doll dangled up for clubbing by Punch jihadis in the Zionazi Punch and Judy show. He’s defending rights by exercising them, of course, and we need literary provocateurs, but Izzies will exploit and pervert anything to re-enact their genocidal origin myth.

    Assange is a secular saint. Not to divert attention from him, but you know who also really gets forgotten? Josh Schulte. Vault 7 and 8 (, ) are enormously important, and Schulte has been tortured for them and denied his rights of trial. Despite the fact that his guilt is not proven. Schulte was convicted on CIA’s unsupported say-so.

    • Agree: RobinG
    • Thanks: nosquat loquat
  3. Like the Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, and MLK, Salman Rushdie served the interests of the western liberals for a while and will be cast aside when he has served his purpose. The very fact that these western “liberals” haven’t supported Assange to the hilt, shows that their real interests mesh with the interests of the elites.

    • Thanks: Chuck Orloski
    • Replies: @Anon
  4. The MSM presstitute SCUM in Austfailia gave Assange a Walkley Award, the highest in journalism here, in 2011, and within months had turned on him like the VERMIN that they are, led by the feminazi she-devils. Today you will not find a single MSM pos who will defend Assange, because their jobs depend on 100% ideological reliability.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  5. @Skeptikal

    Who heads PEN America? Suzanne Nossel. Says it all.

    • Thanks: RobinG
    • Replies: @nosquat loquat
  6. anonymous[715] • Disclaimer says:

    JONATHAN COOK is a citizen of Israel naively said:
    [Those who more than 30 years ago put a fatwa on his head after he wrote the novel The Satanic Verses made this assault possible. They deserve contempt. I wish him a speedy recovery.]

    The zionist propagandist Suzanne Nossel from ‘Pen America’ said:
    Suzanne Nossel
    @SuzanneNossel Aug 14
    we’ve been raising alarms for the last few years about the long arm of Iranian repression, reaching into the US to target.

    Nossel currently serves as Chief Executive Officer of the literary and human rights organization PEN America. She traces her interest in human rights to her growing up Jewish in America, and her visits to apartheid South Africa in her youth. She has frequently visited relatives in Israel, saying “It’s a place where I feel very comfortable and at home.” She lives with her husband and two children in Manhattan.
    I guess both feel comfortable ‘at home’, that’s why both spread false accusation and discarding the possibility that this attack could have been designed and staged by Israel and its agents to prevent JCPOA. Therefore, this attack is 100% politically motivated and has nothing to do with ‘fatwa’.
    Salman Rushdi, like Bernard Henri Levy, is a CIA/Mosad asset who has been part of the zionist propaganda campaign against Islam and Muslims for decades. Is it possible that Cook not aware of it?
    Salman Rushdi is an ambitious man who has chosen the easiest path to success. That’s why he is very close to the zionists and Israel lobby and its terrorists like Bernard Henry Levy. He should condemn the Israel lobby and its army not others.

    [So why are the vast majority of us so much more invested in Rushdie’s fate than Assange’s? Simply because our sympathy has been elicited for one of them and not the other.]
    Because Salman Rushdi is a close associate of Bernard Henri Levy and the Israel lobby and works for the CIA/Mosad campaign against Islam and Muslims and Assange is NOT.

    Suzanne Nossel Retweeted
    Bernard-Henri Lévy
    @BHL 13h
    In solidarity with my friend #SalmanRushdie, I read this passage from #JosephAnton today, participating in the @PENAmerica
    @NYPL reading. #NobelPrizeforRushdie #StandwithSalman #freedomofexpression ⁦@SuzanneNossel

  7. Ghali says:

    The first Paragraph of this this rubbish is evident than Jonathan Cook is nothing more and nothing less than an opportunist propagandist serving Zionism. In fact, Cook has been in service of Zionism all his life masking his Zionist propaganda with a veneer of half truth and misleading lies. His support for the dirty racist Rushdie and Rushdie’s ilk is anti-Muslim racism in all its form.

    • Agree: BuelahMan, Chuck Orloski
    • Thanks: Justrambling
  8. Sam Smith says:

    “Sympathy for Salman Rushdie” is that “sympathy for the devil”?

    Rush-to-Die is a media creation of the US/West to attack Islam. He is a media darling and tool and useful idiot.

    Julian Assange is a true hero of old fashion journalism aka real investigative reporting, exposing the genocidal nature of the American empire.

    There is no comparison between these two.

    One is as fake as a two dollar bill. The other is a political prisoner.

    • Agree: Bro43rd, Skeptikal
  9. @Skeptikal

    You have really hit the nail on the head. Let rushdie call for the release of assange, if he is a champion of “free speech”.

    • Agree: Hrw-500
  10. anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:

    Endless bizarre things about the Assange case make it clear it is not what it seems, data links below

    It was CIA-MI5-MI6-tied media, the same oily New York Times & UK Guardian who spread so many war-mongering lies, who pumped ‘brave hero Assange’ fame on the world in the first place
    – As Jewish Israeli-British Jonathan Cook is aware, Bibi Netanyahu directly told Israeli media that the pro-Israel, anti-9-11-truth, anti-Palestinian Assange was a Mossad asset who would always be protecting Israel in his ‘leaking’
    – Zbig Brzezinski admitted in 2010 that ‘Wikileaks was an intel feed’ on the USA PBS News Hour
    – People who trusted Assange with leaks, such as Peter W Smith and Seth Rich, have turned up dead, Assange and Wikleaks even denying they got Smith’s files
    – Rothschild family members have posted Assange bail, and Rothschild lawyers have worked for Assange etc
    – Assange lawyer John Jones was thrown under a train and killed, possibly after he learned much of the Julian Assange story was fake, with Assange never actually ‘living in the London Ecuador Embassy’ all those years, and perhaps not living in Belmarsh prison now
    – The initial decision of UK Judge Baraitser that Assange should not be extradited, was the fact Judge Baraitser was presented with a file on how much of the Julian Assange story seems to be an intel agency hoax, with Assange’s own ‘lawyers’ clearly working for US intel agencies, joining to hide the key story of the political bribery corruption of the US Virginia federal judges who would put Assange on trial
    – The key part in the UK Appeals reversal of Judge Baratiser’s anti-extradition decision, was the recent ‘story’ Cook indulges above, that Assange had gotten affianced and had children and thus was mentally stable enough to go to US trial, whereas it is argued here and here that this ‘Assange spouse Stella Moris’ is another fake intel hoax … with some thinking that Assange is held captive in such a way that his fake lawyers and fake wife are not saying what Julian really thinks

  11. meamjojo says:

    Can’t wait to see Assange in a USA jail for the rest of his life!

    • Troll: Tom Welsh
  12. @mulga mumblebrain

    I’m not sure about your explanation but I find successive Australian governments inertia deplorable, most notably Julia Gillard’s which was worked the inert.

  13. Ghali says:

    The comparison by Zionism apologist Jonathan Cook is misleading and aimed at manipulating public opinion. Rushdie lacks any of Assange’s human characteristics. Assange is an intellectual who sacrificed his career and possibly his life to expose U.S.-Zionist war crimes.
    By contrast, Rushdie is an Indian liar born in a racist society. India is the mother of everything racism. He is an- anti-Muslim racist, who made a lucrative career out of inflaming anti-Muslim sentiment by fabricating lies and insulting Islam. Rushdie was/is happy to be used – by the U.S.-Israel and Europe – to justify U.S.-Zionist horrendous war crimes against Muslims and Islam. All the racism, violent against Muslims. The chaos and war against that followed the Satanic Verses publication were orchestrated and financed by Israel and Jews. Jews use the attacks on Islam and Muslims for their own benefits.
    Please read The Timing behind the Attack on Salman Rushdie by Michael Jones on UNZ. Anyone knows why Rushdie’s attacker Hadi Matar has a Jewish lawyer? He actually pleaded not guilty.

    • Thanks: Chuck Orloski, KrisP
    • Replies: @Sam Smith
  14. The craven, faux empire doing Zionist Israel’s bidding has turned freedom of expression and the public right to be informed of its diabolical crimes on its head: truth seekers and truth tellers are hounded or incarcerated. Liars, agents provocateurs and war criminals are being rewarded with knighthood (Britain) and provided with security detailing with taxpayer funds (US).

    • Replies: @Arminius1933
  15. Tom Welsh says:

    The Assamge case has demonstrated conclusively that there is no such thing as “justice” in the UK, Sweden, or the USA.

    Also that the vast majority of Westerners have absolutely no clue about which way is up, who is good and who is bad, or even where their own interests lie.

    It would be frightening to see their eagerness to bite the hand that fed them – if their sheer contemptible laziness, ignorance, and cowardice did not make it impossible to care what happens to them.

    • Agree: Realist
  16. @Justrambling

    BBC, NPR and PBS are the same Jewish controlled mass media propaganda that you will find in the rest of yhe godawful alphabet soup of mass media corporations controlled by the organized Jewish minority, its just that the propaganda is packaged to cater to an audience several IQ scores above the football and game show fans. And sure enough, those highly paid shills for the kikes maintain a deafening silence over the Julian Assange fiasco railroad.
    Is it just me ,or does Judy Woodruff appear to have an extra vein popping out of her already geriatric and cadaverous neck?🪆⚰🪦🪦🪦🪦⚰⚰⚰⚰

    • Replies: @JR Foley
  17. lavoisier says: • Website

    Excellent article and very true.

    Our champions and our enemies are decided for all of us by the Tribe and their acolytes.

    Why do you think hate whitey books by recent immigrants are championed today as great works of art full of wisdom?

    Why is an obvious mediocrity like Coates celebrated as some sort of literary genius?

    Western civilization is under the control of a hostile Jewish elite that sets the rules and the cultural milieu we are all forced to live under.

    Such a milieu has not shown itself to be a force for good or creativity, but a force for evil, closed mindedness, and darkness.

    Forget about Plato’s cave. We live in Zion’s dungeon.

  18. Sam Smith says:

    Anyone knows why Rushdie’s attacker Hadi Matar has a Jewish lawyer? He actually pleaded not guilty.

    You will discover that most lawyers in the US and the West are Jewish. It’s one of their preferred vocations like pharmacy, dentistry, pornography, drug industries, financial “services”, etc.

    But lawyering is one of their most preferred vocations. I think it has something to do with their Tamud. If you read the Babylonian version, it’s all about precedents: this rabbi said this, that rabbi said that, this one has precedent over that one, and so forth and so on. The Tamud is really a lawyering book on how to deal with the goyim in the here and now, it’s not a religious text like other religions that deal with the hereafter as in heaven and hell.

    This may explain why the Jews are so focused on getting everything here and not so worried after what happens after they die. Or maybe they know that they are going to hell and to their father, so let’s stick it to the goyim as much as they can now!

  19. Anonymous[896] • Disclaimer says:

    Salman Rushdie is a self-serving shyster whose writing skills are only touted because he has served as an useful idiot to the cause of the Jew vis a vis the desired destruction of Iran, the latest archenemy of Israel.

  20. anonymous[377] • Disclaimer says:

    Palestinian elderly man Salah Sawafta (60 y/old) was shot in the head by the lsraeli occupation forces in Tubas. No condemnation or sanction on the Jewish mafia tribe. Where are the zionist propagandists?

  21. MLK says:

    Rushdie has won trenchant support from Western liberals and conservatives alike, not for being a brave articulator of difficult truths, but because of who his enemies are.

    That’s succinct and insightful.

    Assange is the flip side of the same coin. The at best radio silence of “Western Liberals and conservatives alike” concerning his treatment is “because of who his enemies are” — intelligence services that have made it rather clear a price will be paid by any attempting to distinguish between whatever the allegations are against him (at any moment) and what he has been subjected to.

    Worse, like other examples I won’t mention since they trigger, it has been in our faces. With ‘our’ being the entire globe. His country of citizenship, Australia, abandoned him as thoroughly and publicly as a former Soviet satellite would and did to the dominion of the former Soviet Union during the Cold War. Sweden played a different yet equivalent role with a rape investigation intended to give the UK government a face-saving out to the same persecution plan . . .

    It’s impossible to overstate the damage that this has done and continues to do to the reputation of the US and the USG. Though having gone from bad to worse, that apparently has become a feature not a bug of the current regime in DC.

    • Thanks: Wizard of Oz
  22. KrisP says:

    Excellent article but ME wars aren’t motivated primarily by greed for oil. Saddam would have been more than happy to sell us all the oil we wanted. Instead, we’ve spent trillions bombing Muslims all over the world, even in countries that have no significant oil reserves, including Afghanistan.

    Who benefitted the most from Muslims being demonized and weakened? Hint: The same people now benefit from whites being demonized and weakened.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  23. Cui bono?

    Condemning a fatwa attack on Rushdie confirms the Iranians are psychopaths.

    Condemning an attack on Globohomo war crimes confirms (((we’re))) the real victims here.

    Either way the Jews win.

  24. The stabbing of Rushdie reeks of false flag. So the same who have stabbed him, are torturing Assange. Rushdie has sided with them. Assange has sided with the truth. Siding with them may provide material benefits but it by no means guarantees that they won’t harm you if they find it expedient. Siding against them, with the truth, guarantees a clear conscience. Of course, to have a clear conscience, you must have one in the first place, which doesn’t seem to be their case.
    Afaic, I am both moved and angered by Assange’s predicament. I don’t give a toss for Rushdie’s.

  25. You actually believe that Rushditz was attacked in NY? I think it’s as real as the phony Shamtanic Verses and Fatwa hullabaloo. An Am I Sick production from beginning to end in each instance.

  26. HT says:

    Being unable to identify the real threat is why America is dying. We destroy 600,000 white lives ending slavery and then expend massive resources to defeat Hitler only to see our country destroyed by blacks and their Jewish benefactors.

  27. Realist says:

    The fact that Trump chose to not pardon Assange and Snowdon is indefensible and unforgivable.

  28. bert33 says:

    when they find supposed journalits acting as spies, insitgators, agitators, agents-provocateurs, thieves, etc., i really have no problem with them being arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and incarcerated for years. SORRY

    • Replies: @Sam Smith
  29. Agent76 says:

    “Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence.” Leonardo da Vinci


    In this Whistleblower Newsroom editorial, host Kristina Borjesson discusses the illegal actions to which Assange has, and continues to be, subjected to by three nations—the US, UK and Sweden, working to fulfill the American government’s aim to get him to the US to face espionage charges.

    Video Link

  30. Sam Smith says:

    You mean every single “journalist”–I call them presstitute–in the mainstream US/Western media?!?

    Of course, they are “spies, insitgators, agitators, agents-provocateurs, thieves, etc.” acting on behalf of your beloved United States!

  31. Anonymous[296] • Disclaimer says:

    Salman Rushdie, Danger Seeker

  32. RobinG says:

    ME wars aren’t motivated primarily by greed for oil. Saddam would have been more than happy to sell us all the oil we wanted.


    • Agree: Chuck Orloski
  33. PJ London says:

    “I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offences against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.”

    As you can see, the pardon was not specific about which offences were being pardoned, but rather granted a blanket pardon of all potential offences which Nixon may have been guilty of during his tenure as President. Nixon was not required to be formally charged with any offences in order to receive this pardon.
    Let us hope that Trump can rectify his omission in his second term.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @meamjojo
  34. Vfy says:

    Hadi Matar > Leo Frank

  35. @Skeptikal

    Rushdie is a darling of the Western powers for his attack on Islam. I suspect he has become quite wealthy from it as well. There is no way this publicity seeking sycophant is going to do anything to displease his benefactors.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  36. Jim H says:

    ‘Rushdie and the fatwa against him became a cause célèbre for Western elites because he offered a literary sensibility to one of the West’s most cherished modern pieties: that Islam poses an existential threat to the values of an enlightened West.’ — Jonathan Cook

    This is rather a calumny against ‘the West.’ Allow me to fix it with a single substitution:

    ‘Rushdie and the fatwa against him became a cause célèbre for Western elites because he offered a literary sensibility to one of the Jews’ most cherished modern pieties: that Islam poses an existential threat to the values of an enlightened West.’

    [Publisher: insert bibliography citing dozens of Jewish authors here.]

    Now, in a true literary high-wire act, let’s bravely attempt a triple substitution:

    ‘For the past two decades, we have been living with the appalling consequences of the West’s smug condescension, its wild posturings, its violent humanitarianism – all masking a thirst for the Middle East’s most precious resource: oil.

    Edited, truthified version:

    ‘For the past two decades, we have been living with the appalling consequences of Israel’s smug condescension, its wild posturings, its violent humanitarianism – all masking a thirst for Israel’s most precious resource: stolen land.

    Oil is not the villain.


  37. The article, the bunch

    Is there anybody including the algorithmic Andrew Anglin, that can serve a blob of analysis that includes Assange, Rushdy, Ukraine, Syria, Jemen, Sudan, Venezuela, Israel, 911, C19, vaxxing, Deep State, religion, democracy, economics and futurism. Pardon the random list. And align the ongoing issues and “news interpretation” into something sensical, as in who has agency? Is this too much to ask? Are all these journo chatterboxes (here at unz as much) just that, and afraid of what then comes next?

    –Civil disobedience, shadow organizing, globalism of a different kind? The outliers, the only ones, not the public, the ones that scare the vested powers and wealthy, was there only a single one on the whole of the Planet? Was catering to the capable of change, what made Assange and Wikileaks mortal enemies? Only one of both is waisted, regardless of his extradition or not. Wikileaks, the method (and it is not understood @alt-media as is), stands no harm. Who dares to carry the flame, re-organize, and work deep down on an alternative society? Even Alkada, and Isiez are capable of living another day after a slain leader.

    As to the sentimental side, for those who never met, or read Assange (most), he might get an incredible boost out of the above, and it would, as the single utmost item, boost his case into a different direction. Action is wanted, not Jewish loyers!

  38. Realist says:
    @PJ London

    Let us hope that Trump can rectify his omission in his second term.

    As I said, indefensible and unforgivable.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  39. meamjojo says:
    @PJ London

    “Let us hope that Trump can rectify his omission in his second term.”

    Sad for you but Trump can’t blanket pardon himself. He has to get someone else to do it and that will only happen if a Republican gets elected president.,

  40. Voltara says:

    If it promotes division it will be celebrated (Rushdie). If it creates unity/understanding it will be vilified (Assange)

  41. Anon[230] • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Paluka

    The very fact that these western “liberals” haven’t supported Assange to the hilt, shows that their real interests mesh with the interests of the elites.

    Some unkind commentators might even have the audacity to put forth a view that the western “liberals” are the elites.

  42. JR Foley says:

    Rupert Murdock is not Jewish and FOX is not exactly informative–only spews CIA hatred and propaganda with lots of noise and ignorant bimbos like Nikki Haley and half wits like Tucker Carlson—

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  43. All those lowlife libertarian, conservative, and MAGA types who bitch about censorship, well, where are they on the issue of BDS being suppressed in the US? Isn’t that violation of First Amendment?

    Even as Jews silence them, they remain cucks of Jews. Totally sickening.

    • Agree: Chuck Orloski
    • Replies: @Arminius1933
  44. Skeptikal says:

    FWIW, here are Rushdie’s marriages:

    “Rushdie has been married four times. He was married to his first wife, Clarissa Luard,[14] Literature officer of the Arts Council of England,[15] from 1976 to 1987 and fathered a son, Zafar (born 1979),[16] who is married to the London-based jazz singer Natalie Rushdie.[17] He left Clarissa Luard in the mid-1980s for the Australian writer Robyn Davidson, to whom he was introduced by their mutual friend Bruce Chatwin.[18] His second wife was the American novelist Marianne Wiggins; they were married in 1988 and divorced in 1993.[19][20] His third wife, from 1997 to 2004, was British editor and author Elizabeth West;[21][22] they have a son, Milan (born 1997).[23] In 2004, he married Padma Lakshmi, an Indian-American actress, model, and host of the American reality-television show Top Chef. The marriage ended in 2007.[24]”

    Food for thought.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  45. Skeptikal says:

    If Assange is still alive by then.

    Like Rushdie, Trump *could*—right now—call for the freeing of Julian Assange.

    • Replies: @Realist
  46. If David Irving were stabbed onstage over books he has written, would so many people be lining up to condemn the attack? The consensus would be, “the bastard got what he deserved.”

    • Thanks: Chuck Orloski
  47. The U.S. Government alleges that Julian Assange committed a crime when he revealed their crimes.So by this tortuous logic a criminal should be able to indict the detective who built a case against him.

    The persecution of of Julian Assange has elevated him to the status of Hegel’s “World Soul.”
    You tell me what you think about Assange and I’ll tell you if there is anything of value in your psyche.

    The jackals have run Julian to ground and he may be near the end,but history will vindicate him and his tormentors will be cursed and forgotten.

  48. I think you are giving too much credit to these “defenders” of Rushdie. At the time of the fatwa, where were they? There were many demonstrating against him, but no one demonstrating for him. It was like a deer-in-the-headlights moment for them. It was easy for them to complain about the Christmas decorations in the town square, but when confronted with people who might fight back, they said and did nothing.

    Nor did any of these supposed defenders do the obvious thing to help him, which was to prevent anyone likely to kill him from coming into the West. Instead, they have almost all insisted that we have open borders. Well, with open borders, anyone can come in, including those who hate the freedom of speech of the West.

    The fatwa was basically an announcement by the Muslim world that they want to rule us. And so far, the West has never told them that no, we will never allow that. Accordingly, Muslims believe that one day they will be in control, and I agree with them. Why should I believe differently?

  49. Excellent article from Cook, who is getting better and better at reading the writing on the wall.

    The following statement, however, did give me pause:

    “And all this has served as an endless excuse to delay addressing the real issue plaguing humanity: the imminent extinction of our species, caused by our addiction to the very resource that got us into this mess in the first place.”

    Imminent? Is it really that easy to kill off 7 billion?

    The “real issue plaguing humanity” is the predatory US-Euro-military-financial empire. It is a much, much greater menace than “climate change” or fossil fuels. And in the past 20 years, its policies have killed many more millions than bad weather. (Not to mention causing nearly eternal pollution with their munitions.)

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  50. @mulga mumblebrain

    I am a member of PEN. Ever since Nossel became “CEO” of PEN (before her, the position was called “president,” and it was chiefly honorary), their weekly announcements in my email box read like talking points of the US State Dept. I spammed them long ago. And, indeed, it was when I realized they had never spoken so much as a whisper in Julian’s defense that I decided to spam them. (I only maintain membership in case I’m ever forced to move back to the US and need a group health-insurance plan.)

    • Thanks: mulga mumblebrain
  51. Realist says:

    Like Rushdie, Trump *could*—right now—call for the freeing of Julian Assange.

    It would have no more meaning than if I called for it. And Trump will not do that because he is a minion of the Deep State. And the Deep State does NOT want Assange or Snowden free.

  52. @nosquat loquat

    The US Reich is an imminent threat, but anthropogenic climate destabilisation and ecological collapse is INEVITABLE, because ignoramuses and idiots, for ideological reasons and innate stupidity, refuse to face facts.Sorry to thank you, then abuse you, but I’m a little fractious these days.

    • Replies: @nosquat loquat
  53. @Skeptikal

    The marriages since the fatwa, ie 1989, were under unusual strain. Why does he insist on, or consent to, formalising his liaisons?

  54. @JR Foley

    Rupert’s mother was Jewish, ergo he is-for what that is worth. I have never seen or heard of him professing ANY faith but insatiable ego and greed, but perhaps he’s a little bit cryptoid.

    • Replies: @Arminius1933
  55. @mulga mumblebrain

    I have been aware of climate destabilization for at least the last 35 years, thank you very much, but until the authorities and chattering classes admit to their vast ongoing weather modification programs, I refuse to take any of their proposed “solutions” seriously.

  56. Dumbo says:

    Actually, I don’t remember seeing anyone very angry at Salman’s stabbing. Most seem to see him as an annoying prick who had it coming, or at least as just another empty celebrity. Perhaps 33 years ago more people would have cared. If the idea was to make people angry at Iran, it didn’t really work.

  57. @mulga mumblebrain

    “Rupert Murdoch is not Jewish! “, is probably the weakest response that you will encounter from the apologists and shabbos goyim in attempting to deflect attention from the fact and painful reality of Jewish controlled mass media. And indeed, the weakness of the response can be countered by the spuriousness of the claim: Elizabeth Joy Greene, Rupert Murdoch’s mother, was indeed Jewish, which according to Jewish religious law itself makes Rupert a bona fide member of the mephitic Semitic Middle Eastern tribe . However, even if Murdoch wasn’t Jewish, it would be totally irrelevant given the preponderance of Jewish ownership and control over the news and entertainment mass media corporations, and the incestuous corporate managerial relationship between those mass media behemoths. Newscorp’s divisions are chock full of kikes at every level of media production, and perhaps most famously, the COO of Newscorp was Peter Chernin, a driven and meticulous micromanage who oversaw the content of the various mass media products for Newscorp literally for decades . Like Master Blaster from the Mad Max movie “Beyond Thunderdome”, Chernin and Murdoch worked in tandem as a unit, even though Chernin was far less visible as a household name and recognizable public figure. That is what must be made much more widely known amongst the white masses who are opposed to the Jewish led genocide campaign against them: the vast majority of healthy whites distrust and loathe the controlled mass media;what they need to do now is to identify the inordinate and disproportionately heavy Jewish ownership of those mass media corporations, and then take all necessary steps to destroy them.

  58. @Priss Factor

    Many in the same MAGA crowd continue to suicidally “Back the Blue”, when the Blue exist to Back the Jews, and arrest, entrap, harass, illegally surveil ,stalk , arbitrarily imprison and kill white Americans who oppose mass immigration, CRT, the homosexual and transgender lunacy,Antifa /BLM terrorism etc. And all at the direction of that repulsive, diminutive little Jewish troll, Merrick Garland, with an assist of course from the ADL ,SPLC and other quasigovernmental, Jewish spying organizations, most of which have capillary networks within all levels of American law enforcement. Back the Blue and you also Back the Jews.Support the police, the right arm of the Jews ✡, as they transform the United States into a totalitarian, third world Marxist shithole.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Jonathan Cook Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV