251–260 of 432 posts
I think this really kills the idea that Assange was ever a real journalist. Directing cyber attacks and theft of information is not journalism.
Being a journalist is not an endorsement of character. You can be a criminal and a journalist, a thief and a journalist, a horrible person and a journalist.
> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…
Not really relevant. Assange was acting directly against the interests of the United States. He was indiscriminately dumping large quantities of classified (or otherwise secret) information on the internet for the world to see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry I must have missed where anyone in this thread-chain has asserted that statement at all.
WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... >In the summer of 2016, as WikiLeaks was publishing documents from Democratic operatives allegedly obtained by Kremlin-directed hackers, Julian Assange turned down a large cache of documents related to the Russian government, according to chat messages and a source who pr…
For matters about Assange you should definitely look for more independent sources than only FP. A lot has happened since 2016/17, and there's been cases which show that certain groups within the US establishment been wrong for alleging Assange of a Russia connection[2].
[0] https://search.wikileaks.org/?q=Russia
[1] https://wikileaks.org/spyfiles/russia/
[2] https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/07/31/assa-j31.html
It is not unexpected. Annoying, but not unexpected. Incidentally, since Assange technically helped current president win, I am surprised he is not getting more lenient treatment. With Hillary I fully expected a vendetta.
“Hi Don if your father ‘loses’ we think it is much more interesting if he DOES NOT conceed [sic] and spends time CHALLENGING the media and other types of rigging that occurred—as he has implied that he might do."
These are the words of a political actor, not a journalist.
A month after the election, Wikileaks requested an extraordinary favor from Trump: to ask the Australian government for Assange's appointment as ambassador to the U.S.
“Hi Don. Hope you’re doing well! In relation to Mr. Assange: Obama/Clinton placed pressure on Sweden, UK and Australia (his home country) to illicitly go after Mr. Assange. It would be real easy and helpful for your dad to suggest that Australia appoint Assange ambassador to [Washington,] DC.”
With requests like these, it becomes clear why Assange was helping Trump win the election. It was to improve his chances to escape detention in the UK. It had little to do with exposing the truth.
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing your saying in this thread is true.
Since they have provided links and supporting evidence for their assertion I would have to say that right now it seems to look like you are the one engaging in blatant propaganda and deception.
> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…
>> I hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never published anything that has been proven false. Not really relevant. Assange was acting directly against the interests of the United States. He was indiscriminately dumping large quantities of classified (or otherwise secret) information on the internet for the world to see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure I understand your point, he is not being indicted for publishing false information. Assuming he never did, why would that make the charges bullshit?
I'm not saying his record means the charges are bullshit, but I'm saying if the charges are bullshit and his record is infallible then the implication is that we live under a government without freedom of the press, where truthful hard-hitting journalism gets you put in prison. If you don't believe that Assange has done truthful hard-hitting journalism, or you believe that he isn't a journalist at all, then you can m…
Example, as a journalist you cannot just walk into a US Army base and start reporting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're going to make such grand accusations against the Swedish police then at least cite a damn source. With all the baseless claims this thread almost reads like /r/conspiracy ffs.
I thought this was well established and obvious for anyone who followed the case. The timeline for this whole ordeal, the motivation for the original complaints, the contact the suppose victims had and the messages they wrote after the fact. Not to mention the breach in anonymity for these cases in Sweden. As such, I don't think these are "grand accusations", this is more what one should reasonably conclude, if you f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, to answer your question: they do not try to extradite the foreign operators responsible to the leaks Do you think that would change if they had more power? It's like criticizing the response of a super corporation like Microsoft and saying a smaller company like GitLab handles the same scenario better. Probably true, but also if you scaled GitLab to the size and power of Microsoft, maybe they would've had a dif…
I honestly don't know. It really is very difficult to resist the temptation to misuse power, when a lot of it is concentrated in one's hands. On the other hand, let's analyse: - on the "means" side: France certainly has a lot of military power. It does drone-killing of terrorist heads in African Sahel. It launches successful intelligence operations abroad. It also succeeds to counter foreign agents on its own soil (r…
If they are more offended by treatment of Assange than innocents kept in Guantanamo Bay 'camp' without a trial and summary drone executions with huge collateral death toll I'm not sure I would call them that intelligent.
I mean really, US government has a huge assassination list whose targets are taken down by bomb raids killing and maiming civilians and one hacker being manhandled pushes you over the edge? Those are some sick values.
> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…
You need an edit for that incorrect statement as well, as many comments have already pointed out.