"Julian Sheikh Mohammed"

By Tariq Alhomayed
This commentary was published in Asharq al-Awsat on 8/12/2010
 
There is an Arab proverb that says that "a rock thrown by a maniac can burden a hundred sane people" and this is the situation that the world is currently facing following the publication of the leaked US diplomatic cables on the WikiLeaks website. The WikiLeaks founder should be called "Julian Sheikh Mohammed" rather than Julian Assange, for his actions make him a spiritual brother to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Al Qaeda terrorist who masterminded the 9/11 attacks.
 
For among the documents published recently by WikiLeaks, is a document that includes a list of sensitive sites that the US fear could be targeted by Al Qaeda. These sites are not just within the US, but located throughout the world. The US considers the infrastructure listed in this document to be critical to its national security interests, and so it would be extremely dangerous if these sites were targeted. Al Qaeda could have been unaware of these sites, and so this man – Julian Sheikh Mohammed – has provided Al Qaeda with a free list of targets around the world. If this is not enough for him to be brought to trial, then what is?
 
The WikiLeaks crisis is an ongoing one which will not end today. This is a topic that deserves a lot of analysis, study, and press coverage. This is something that also requires serious consideration be given to bringing this man – who condemned the New York Times for publishing a critical profile of him whilst at the same time he is prepared to set fire to the entire world in the name of freedom – to trial. How can somebody who cannot bear a story criticizing him being published in a newspaper claim that he wants to spread truth around the world? The only truth today is that this man has struck a heavy blow to international politics, diplomacy, and security.
 
This man, Julian Sheikh Mohammed, is the source of all the crises around the word, for he stuck a blow to international diplomacy and its customs, he destabilized joint cooperation between the countries combating terrorism, and he put the lives of those who call for human rights at risk. He also intensified the crises between many countries, and whilst it is true that some of what he published helps us to see the world of politics clearly, any rational person knows that "not everything that is known should be said" otherwise one would become insane and unable to deal with anything.
 
With every document that is published, one becomes more and more certain that this man should be brought to trial, and not portrayed as being a supporter of freedom, for freedom means responsibility. As for those who say that the majority of what was leaked serves public interest, how can anybody defend the leaking and publication of sensitive security information that aids Al Qaeda, like the list of the most sensitive sites [for US security] which could put people at risk and also put the security and stability of a number of countries in danger. How can we accept the publication of [information revealing the vital status] of factories producing special medicine [like an Insulin plant in Denmark] for example, as these could then be targeted?
 
The question that now comes to mind is: does this man have any prior history with the US which would cause him to want to gain revenge against this country in the manner of a spy movie, especially given that he is a former hacker? This is a question that we don't have an answer for, however what is a fact is that this man has put a lot of innocent lives and indeed countries at risk, and therefore should stand trial for this!