The arrest and imminent deportation of the Wikileak’s Messiah is a crass attempt to wipe out an army of ants with a mallet.

As Julian Assange sits in his Wandsworth cell  this morning, I have little doubt the powers that be feel they have acted swiftly to neutralise this strange man. Equally, I’m quite sure that Assange himself is himself pleased to have achieved the status to which he has always aspired: global martyrdom. But in truth, it is the fight against secret duplicity and power mania that has taken a giant leap forward.

If the arrest of Assange was meant to encourager les autres, then I must observe that this is precisely what it will do. Not only do many in Wikileaks think The Great One is an unnecessary distraction a lot of the time, they are already demonstrating that the release of files will continue. Secret government cannot cut off the information supply by imprisoning one finger on the hand tapping out morse code. One would’ve thought ‘They’ might already have learned this from the Osama Bin Laden episode. But ‘They’ never learn.

I posted last week to the effect that Julian Assange is very probably a sociopathic attention-seeker – and thus the wrong person to lead a movement dedicated to discreetly unmasking the indiscretions of those who would control us. But although his choice of document release is a little too eclectic for most tastes, what I think we should do is think about how events might have been different during 2008 – as madness and duplicity on an epic scale very nearly did for us all – had Assange been up to his tricks then.

Imagine, for example, that Wikileaks had hacked into the emails between Lloyd Blankfein and his henchman Cohen in 2007 – busy in Athens teaching the Greeks how to cheat Brussels. Or picture a scenario in which a mobille phone conversation between Brown and Darling (cancelling the Election Brown had been assiduously planning) had been made public. It’s hard to argue other than that we would all have been better off for it.

The Americans think Assange has an agenda, but this is an assertion I still find risible. His organisation has embarrassed everyone equally. No: what’s going on here is every shade and style of Executive power kicking Assange out of the game.

The Swiss – that fine nation of amoralists – froze the guy’s bank account because he gave them ‘false information’. Their vaults are full of numbered accounts deposited by folks who gave them nothing but false information.

And the Swedes are charging him with ‘rape’ and molestation, but as his lawyer correctly points out, they haven’t as yet told him what the charges are. Perhaps Wikileaks should find out for him. And perhaps Sweden should stop behaving like the legal system in Kafka’s The Trial.

The situation is made all the more bizarre by the sheer amount of information about the two female ‘rape victims’ that is already circulating in the public domain. Even here, there are disturbing details that need to be explained. There seems, for example, to be evidence that one woman contacted the other with a view to joint prosecution. ‘Miss A’ (as yet unnamed) has a long history of extreme feminist activities. She wrote an anti-Castro dissertation at University in the States, and used to work for the Swedish Embassy there. She invited Assange to speak at a meeting, and allegedly targeted him for the consensual sex that followed in short order. It sounds more like the actions of a security agent than a wronged, innocent female.

The charge will almost certainly not be one of rape: this is a suitably dramatic word done to death by governments in a further attempt to demonise the Wikileaks founder. Rather, it will be misogyny by deliberating using a split condom in both cases. If I may say so, this is a uniquely feminist fantasy about male control via the production of children against the woman’s will. And lest you find this unbelievable, remember that Sweden is the country that started demolishing urinals some years back, on the grounds that male micturation while standing up was a secret form of dominating the sitting female. These people are, truly, stark staring tonto.

Julian Assange’s odd childhood and equivocal relationship with his frequently absent parents might well have hatched a dangerous sexual perversion. But in Britain, given the air of unhinged conspiracy and widespread public discussion surrounding the charges, it would be unlikely ever to reach a Court.

What seems more likely is that Assange will be deported to the land of never-ending Elks (ha he been an Islamic, his safety would’ve been assured) and thence swiftly extradited to the US, where a fair trial most definitely is not awaiting him. But as I wrote at the outset, I still need someone to explain to me why this will do anything more than create a wronged victim – and make the Wikileaks army even more reckless.

It seems that the US national security case against the Wikileaks leader will be equally problematic. The best the Government legal team have come up with so far is a 1917 statute passed during America’s late and somewhat brief appearance at the First World War. Attorney General Eric Holder has a problem in that there is no clear law designed to punish the distribution of classified information where the person involved is neither a US official, nor the agent of a foreign power.

Their task would thus be to demonstrate beyond doubt that Julian Assange is acting for a foreign power. The legal basis for this is flimsy, and the universally embarrassing nature of the leaks directly contradicts any such theory: Wikileaks is as nasty about China as it is about Hillary Clinton. I  suspect the case would collapse without a great deal of Federal jiggery-pokery – and in time (depending on what emerges) strain relations between the US and its increasingly important ally Australia. The American Justice System is far too big a deal to resort to a show trial.

Rather than cutting off the head of a snake, the Establishment is in fact splitting a hydra: a near-invisible creature that will keep on splitting and leaking bile as it does so. The very megalomanic nature of Assange has already caused a schism in Wikileaks, and the likelihood of a rival leaker start-up is now very real. Rival to Wikileaks or not, this is very bad news for every security agency on the planet.

Wikileaks itself (using the rallying cry “Keep us strong – help WikiLeaks keep governments open”) keeps enabling the reappearance of its site. It claims that its contents are mirrored around the world on around 750 servers registered in the Netherlands, Lithuania, New Zealand, Germany, America, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, France and elsewhere.

This morning’s Guardian is pessimistic about Wikileaks’ future, pointing out that ISPs and banks are steadily squeezing it to death. But the Guardian doesn’t get the internet – as evidenced by its blog section. Techies and libertarians are always one step ahead of the latest firewall or censorship cloud. Rivals and copycats will continue to appear as the world and his mother try to emulate the achievements of the most hunted oddball on Earth.

The genie is out of the bottle now. Where we go from here is anyone’s guess. But it is, at last,a  chink in the armour of the Secret State.