3 ms·
> But recently its clear his actions aren't some noble crusade to speak truth to power and promote freedom of speech and otherwise promote civil liberties. How
by gragas 10y ago
> But recently its clear his actions aren't some noble crusade to speak truth to power and promote freedom of speech and otherwise promote civil liberties.
How could WikiLeaks be interpreted as anything other than promoting civil liberties? Its sole purpose is to expose the corrupt behind-the-curtain dealings of leaders and political elite---to give power to the people and remove it from the corrupt.
> Why can't other people be rational like me.
You really need to get out of your own head.
- hackuser 10y ago> How could WikiLeaks be interpreted as anything other than promoting civil liberties? Its sole purpose ... Perhaps taken at face value that's true, but I judge them by their actions: * They consistently advocate for one political point of view, an anti-US government one. Where are leaks about Putin? Bernie Sanders? Jill Stein? For comparison, the NY Times is hard on both candidates: For example, they both broke the Clinton email server story and Trump's tax return. * They are cooperating in what appears to be a Russian intelligence disinformation campaign to disrupt U.S. democracy. Assange seems too smart to be an unwitting participant. * There are reports it's due to a vendetta Assange has against Clinton. Based on the above and other actions, I question whether their mission really is to promote civil liberties.
- Kristine1975 10y agoWikileaks can only publish what they are given. If nobody gives them leaks on Putin, Sanders etc. they can't publish any.
- hackuser 10y agoA good point, but how do we know it's true? Does Wikileaks solicit material? Are they selective about what they publish? I see what they claim to do, but it's too important to take at face value.
- tedunangst 10y agoWhat possible corruption is revealed by the quoted email?
- harry8 10y agoContext for the remainder so you can know they aren't cherry-picked and your reading of whatever you get out of any of them is through your own bias alone and not Assange's, the NYT editorial team's or whoever else. You only need to trust that Assange will publish you don't have to care what he thinks about anything else.
- tedunangst 10y agoThis would be more convincing if Assange wasn't always talking up the next batch, the contingency files, etc. Not only is he withholding publication, but he's bragging about it, which really does make it hard to believe he's just passing everything along.
- harry8 10y agook so your problem is as a publisher he shouldn't promote his publication. And he by doing so he's withholding publication of something unspecified that we can't know about. I'll disagree with that and get on with life.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]