Mea Culpa

Recently I published a post, which I’ve since deleted. It was quite an angry post because I was quite angry when I wrote and published it. In point of fact, I’m still angry about Julian Assange’s and Wikileaks’ behavior and their willingness to harm, or potentially harm so many people.

That’s not likely to change any time soon.

The problem is that I went too far in my rage and suggested methods of uncovering Julian Assange that went outside the pale of acceptable rhetoric. Doing so hurt some people and angered a great deal more people. For both the hurt and the anger please allow me to tender my apologies.

For that I’m sorry.

Some will now say that I’m apologizing because they believe that they can do me harm. That’s actually sort of true. The effort people have went to in order to attempt to do me that harm showed me more than anything else how hurt and angry they were – and none of them that I know of were people I was angry at myself, so they were, to my mind, all innocent collateral victims of my anger.

For that I’m truly sorry.

I’ve also gone to great and very creative but less than empathic or completely ethical pains to separate my digital persona from my real life. This has resulted in some erroneous beliefs about who I am and may well result in further innocents being inconvenienced, harassed, or harmed in some fashion since the anger of the responses has reached levels even beyond what I showed.

For that I’m truly sorry as well.

Daniel Assange deserves my apology perhaps more than anyone else, but I don’t really want to drag him back into something that I never should have drug him into in the first place, so I won’t belabor that point and risk drawing him back into this.


It would be both pathetic and hypocritical for me to expect anyone’s forgiveness but those that were harmed or angered needlessly still deserve this apology to accept or spurn as they choose.

Tags: | | |

21 Responses to “Mea Culpa”

  1. Arwen Says:

    Well you did a lot of publicity out of the previous blog post. Julian even made a reference to your blog in a recent interview. But I am happy that you understand killing isn’t the answer to everything!

    It’s fine if you don’t like Julian or WikiLeaks, but crying murder is not beneficial for anyone.

  2. dear me Says:

    you’re nothing but an effing moron, jon.

    Booohoooo….everyone is going to see your government’s beloved secrets…boohooooo…so damn sad.

  3. Bob Says:

    You got the title of this post wrong. It should be ‘mens rea’, not ‘mea culpa’.

  4. jonolan Says:


    I was angry, and while I still think Julian Assange needs to be nailed in some manner, I went over the line when I thought of how to get to him.

    Frankly I wish this would all settle down.

  5. UncleRaymond Says:

    Apology accepted.

    There, thats the end of it.

    You can all go away now, nothing to see here. Go, shoo!

  6. kymmyp Says:

    Well done mate ;), good way to move forward

  7. jonolan Says:

    Thanks. Hopefully everyone else will as well. I’ve already been granted more exposure and “authority” than the original post deserved.

  8. Arwen Says:

    Well I’m sure you are happy now, since Julian has been arrested!

  9. CMarie Says:

    I imagine you ARE sorry as there are legal entities now working to charge you with incitement to murder and/or harm an innocent civilian. Who wouldn’t be sorry about facing jail time? What I find puzzling, however, is that you think you should be exempt from facing the legal consequences of issuing a public fatwah. You’ve committed a crime. Why should you be an exception to the law? Your suggestion that the son of Julian Assange be kidnapped and harmed was posted on the internet and read by millions all over the world; it has jeopardized the life of a young man, who now needs police protection. Perhaps the fact that you are likely to face serious criminal charges will inspire you to be more tolerant of the rule of law and right to due process.

  10. jonolan Says:


    No; I’m actually of mixed opinions about that. As odd as it might sound to many people, I’m more concerned about the law being suborned than about governments taking extra-judicial measure in self-defense. Misused law set more lasting precedents and have, in my opinion a greater corruptive influence on society.


    In general I have done nothing more illegal than a great number of people, most of whom are for more important than I and who could effect far more chance of something coming of their words. I’m fairly sure that my statements, though admittedly reprehensible and hence deleted and apologized for, didn’t broke any US laws.

    So yes, CMarie; to some extent I’m doing damage control and trying to mitigate my rage-driven mistake. That doesn’t change the fact that I’m sorry for the hurt to a bunch of people I caused through that rage.

  11. jonolan Says:

    BTW, CMarie, which legal entities would these be? If you have specifics, please share them.

    I’d like to contact them about this matter and see what can and must be done to move forward.

  12. P Says:

    It’s true–there is nothing to see here. You are a truly disturbed human being. I suggest you get some meds and some counseling. Your precious American military should be able to help you with that. After all, we all know that the military really cares about its vets. Oh, and delete this blog–all this pseudo intellectual “from the right” bullshit is just banal.

  13. Lee Says:

    All I can say is I hope Daniel forgives you. I am aware he has only ever spoken to the press on one occasion about his father and that was to a journalist he knew growing up. He has tried very hard to stay out of the media storm caused by his father and I wish people would respect that.

  14. Sanchez Says:

    Your response was but a reflection of many in your country. It’s nice that you can see your suggestion was misguided – but how long, if ever, until those ‘more important’ than you come to the same conclusion? Unfortunately, I am not hopeful.

  15. jonolan Says:


    My apologies and regrets are only for the vileness of pointing out one of Julian Assange’s supposed – proven wrong since then – vulnerabilities that never should have pointed out, suggested, or alluded to.

    I still stand by my assertion that the US Govt., or the Govs. of other Western powers should have green-lighted Julian Assange.

    Should have, as in past tense.

    Assange’s in UK custody now and will likely be extradited to Sweden to face charges for some alleged sexual crimes he committed, and it would be grossly stupid for any Gov agency to interfere with that process.

    Doing so would cause more harm to international relations than Assange has already done or that an extra-judicial response would have done.

    Ironically, we’re now in a position of having to expend the efforts of our intel community to make sure Assange isn’t assassinated, since various enemy groups might well try it in the hopes of the US getting blamed for it.

    It’s a strange and messed world.

  16. JS Says:

    I think the real moral of the story here is, when you call for violence against someone, you open the door to violence against yourself. Once you encourage violence as an answer to someone doing or saying something you don’t like, there is no logical reason for anyone who dislikes your words to refrain from disposing of you violently in turn. Indeed, stopping people who advocate violence is the only good reason for committing violence in the first place — stopping the Nazis, or the Taliban, is the only good reason for going to war. Stopping someone like you from beginning a cycle of violence that would undermine reason and spin out of control, is also a decent reason to use violence.

    When you’re the first to call for it, you open yourself up to the same vicious cycle that keeps African dictators getting shot and replaced every couple of years. Surely, a society ruled by vigilantism and violence without reason, is not where you’d hope to get by calling for attacks on someone whose speech you disagreed with. But you would be as short-sighted as those dicatators are to imagine that would not be the result.

  17. Bran Says:

    You say:

    ‘In point of fact, I’m still angry about Julian Assange’s and Wikileaks’ behavior and their willingness to harm, or potentially harm so many people.’

    Have you ever thought how many people ARE harmed every day because of the behavior that Julian Assange and Wikileak exposed to public? If you didn’t, how come? If you did, why are you wasting your time on Julian and Wikileaks.

  18. dgh Says:

    apologies denied
    he’s not telling lies he is revealing the secrets that no one dares to say and we all know

    JUSTICE FOR JULIAN!!!!!!!!!!!

  19. jonolan Says:

    You wouldn’t like justice, dgh. Justice would have Assange and all involved with Wikileaks sentenced to a slow and lingering death.

    Content yourself with spinning the legalisms involved in the law. Those will serve you better.

  20. ichabod Says:

    Hi jonolan;

    I replied to your comment on my blog and it may surprise you.

    I also posted this under the post “laying down the sword”

    Instead of people attacking one another, we should find common ground based on facts and try and fix the problem.

    To me, there has been some underhanded events going on in many countries and WikiLeaks exposed it.

    We have to fix it. Can we?

    Only through honesty, deliberation, respect, tolerance and using justice the way it was intended.

    America has a strong Constitution and Bill of Rights. It just needs to be obeyed.

    Yes, there is an enemy out there, but WikiLeaks is not it.

    We are being divided and should not be. None of us are perfect and when emotions get in the way on something like this, death isn’t far behind and this world is too precious to put up with that, is it not?

  21. Sanchez Says:

    Ah, so your apology is really nothing of the sort. You admit wrongdoing in calling for violence against Daniel, but stand by your call for extra-legal violence against Julian.

    I have no choice but to note then that you truly represent everything that is wrong with the US, particularly the arrogance with which it conducts itself in foreign relations. For so long as you feel it is perfectly acceptable to export violence around the globe, against indivduals and nations alike, to assert your ‘national interest’, then we have nothing more to say.

Leave a Reply