Senator Mitch McConnell called Assange a "high-tech terrorist" on NBC's Meet the Press Sunday and said, "if it's found that Assange hasn't violated the law, then the law should be changed."

Over the weekend, an insightful article by Zen Gardner exposed how WikiLeaks resembles an establishment creation. The article correctly pointed out that the WikiLeaks storyline was conforming nicely to the elite's problem-reaction-solution method, with the solution of more tyranny for our safety.

WikiLeaks is being used to bring in the agenda on so many levels, but most importantly by setting the precedent of shutting down websites for politically "dangerous" content. Gardner writes:

After all, if information is now the enemy, we must carefully police any and every aspect of this dangerous medium -- all for the safety and protection of 'we the people.'

Oh, we'll still have the Internet, just like you can still fly. You'll just have to be on the 'approved' list, screened, stamped, zapped, mugged and molested if you want to get 'on the net.'  No biggie. Thanks Julian -- job well done.

First, let's be clear, the 250,000 pages of cables amounted to some geopolitical Jerry Springer he-said-she-said nonsense to make countries look petty and stupid.  They revealed nothing new that wasn't already known or well suspected.  The information simply stoked existing flames by airing geopolitical dirty laundry, nothing more -- no secret weapons, no major arms deals, no tactical locations of troops, and no revealing the ID of secret agents, etc.

Yet, the government has used its corporate muscle to illegally limit access to WikiLeaks.  It was recently revealed that Amazon, the server host for WikiLeaks, caved to political pressure to drop the website.  Then, in dictatorial fashion, PayPal removed its service for donations to WikiLeaks, and now their bank account has been frozen.  And all this comes a week after the shutdown of 80-plus websites for "copyright infringement," apparently in preparation for passing the "Blacklist" bill.

Now, Gardner's weekend speculation and McConnell's call for action has turned into political reality. The Hill reports today that Senators unveil anti-WikiLeaks legislation, which seems to be a sort-of "Patriot Act" for the Internet.  It's astonishing how fast these guys can write legislation when major events occur. And again, it's tyranny-saurus rex, Joe Lieberman, leading the charge with scandal-ridden Ensign (R-Nev.) and empty-suit Scott Brown (R-Mass.).  Ensign was quoted:

WikiLeaks is not a whistleblower website and Assange is not a journalist.

That, we agree with.  Yet, therein lies the concern for establishing new Internet rules of what can and can't be discussed, and who qualifies as a "journalist."  Look, Assange is clearly either a kinda-smart "useful idiot" or a brilliant insider to the elite. He is certainly not a genuine whistleblower.  Admittedly, though, for those of us who hoped he was the real thing, the elite have used some savvy tactics to boost WikiLeaks' rogue credibility in order to confuse us.

The White House has sent down a warning to government agencies to restrict employee access to WikiLeaks in order to make Assange and crew appear dangerously off limits. Apparently, this warning has already trickled down to "potential" government employees as well.  It was revealed that the State Department warned Columbia University students who may apply for a Federal job:

DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter. 

In other words, the Thought Police are out in full force telling job-hungry students to not apply if they discuss current events if authorities label those events dangerous or harmful to America.  Soon, they'll most likely publicly fire a mid-level employee who went over the line to prove how serious they are. After all, they desperately need to keep the slaves on the plantation.

Furthermore, an Interpol arrest warrant has been issued for Julian Assange for shady rape charges, making him an internationally "wanted" man.

And Assange is playing the clever but likable villain part so well, too, claiming to have an encrypted "insurance" file in case anyone kills him or terminates the website.  Assange is the perfect international man of mystery with the dark shades in press conferences; endless mainstream media interviews with his exotic accent and short temper; and his famous silver-blond locks. What a great show they're putting on for us.  I'm sure the movie industry is already clamoring for the rights to the script.

In the meantime, it has become the typical political game show. Only in America could Cablegate become such a divide-and-conquer partisan issue.  The Right have successfully defined WikiLeaks as a dangerous terrorist organization and desire the assassination of its leader, while the Left defends the public's right to knowledge, but disparages the damage the documents may cause, thus setting up the obvious bipartisan compromise: tighter control and surveillance of the Internet.

It will go down like this: the Right's extreme calls for Assange's execution will give the establishment the publicly defensible compromise to at least shut down their website by way of pressuring their service providers, etc. And the wimpy Left will compromise by letting it happen, while Assange will be allowed to remain alive and free.

It fits ever so perfectly for them to extend the definition of an "enemy combatant" to a website that publishes "anti-government" material.  Enter Attorney General Eric Holder, who has authorized "significant" action into the probe of WikiLeaks.  Can't you just smell the tyranny coming to the Internet?

Ron Paul said it best in his book Revolution: A Manifesto: "Truth is treason in an empire of lies." Paul reiterated this principle of transparency in a recent interview.  Paul said we need more WikiLeaks if we expect to live in a free society:

'In a free society we're supposed to know the truth,' Paul insisted.  'In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble.'

Given the angry calls for action and today's developments of government proposals, not to mention the blight of Internet legislation already on the table, we will likely get the exact opposite of the free-flow of information that Paul is advocating.  In fact, if history is any indicator, get ready for nothing less than the Patriot Act for the Internet