5 ms·

"All of this is the cocktail of ingredients that produces 2016’s incarnation of WikiLeaks. Julian Assange mistrusts the US government, dislikes Hillary Clinton,

"All of this is the cocktail of ingredients that produces 2016’s incarnation of WikiLeaks. Julian Assange mistrusts the US government, dislikes Hillary Clinton, and has spent years trapped in a small embassy flat in west London, in declining physical and psychological health, monitored minute-by-minute in reports filed by his wary Ecuadorian hosts." I'm not sure about Americans but I would say the majority of the the world mistrusts the US Government. While I'm not saying Assange doesn't have flaws, this isn't exactly a point in time I would believe anything I read about him, Wikileaks or his character, this is the time for character assassinations. We also need to keep in-mind (as the article states) the guy is practically in jail, him and other whistle blowers are being seriously screwed over by the US Government, so IMO most of these profile pieces are going to paint a picture of someone who isn't in a great place right now. I often here people complain about the state of Wikileaks, but what do people expect? On character assassinations, another example I could give right now is Trump, maybe it's just because he is low hanging fruit, but boy is the media giving it to that guy like I've never seen, it's to the point where I've pretty much stopped reading the news in Australia right now because there are just constant trump bashing articles, it feels like the work of "The Ministry of Truth" in 1984. Yeah he is controversial, but is he worthy of so much attention ? From what i understand Hillary is far from flawless also. To conclude my rant, I'm taking this with a grain of salt :)

scottkduncan 10y ago
> Yeah he is controversial, but is he worthy of so much attention? He is running to be the most powerful political figure in the world...so yes.
- pmyjavec 10y ago
  There is a difference between quality, informative journalism which allows people to make up there own mind and endless character assassinating, speculative tabloid smut; However, I trust you know that. The reason I used Trump as an example is because from what I've read and seen of Clinton she doesn't seem much better but is largely ignored in some media outlets in Australia.
  - mcv 10y ago
    What have you read and seen about Clinton? Because the bad things she actually has done are not remotely in the same league as those of Trump. She gets accused a lot by conservatives who clearly have a chip on their shoulder about her, but none of those accusations turned up anything serious. There have been 7 congressional hearing on Benghazi to try to bring her down, but nobody could find anything she's actually done wrong. The email server was certainly sloppy, but hardly worse than anything other government officials have gotten away with. The things Trump has done wrong, like the Trump University scam, not paying his contractors, opportunistic bankruptcies to get out of paying his debts, while he still gets to keep his own profits, and the rape case with a 13 year old victim against him, get barely any attention at all. Most of the attention he gets, is about things that he personally has actually said. And that's already bad enough for most people.
    - pmyjavec 10y ago
      With those candidates, there is no "lesser of two evils" in my opinion, though the media has us believe so. That is my point. My point is about media bias and, it's rampant.
      - jacalata 10y ago
        Well, yea. One of them is an actual good candidate and the other is Trump. The media is just trying to make them look competitive so people keep reading stories on the election.
      - mcv 10y ago
        If there's no "lesser of two evils", it's because Clinton is not really evil. She gets lots of bad press, but all things considered, she's actually pretty good. Certainly by the unfortunately low political standards of US. I'd certainly like the US to elect more progressive politicians, but that seems unlikely to happen. In any case, Trump is sub-par even for US standards. He should be completely unacceptable, and fortunately even people of his own party are finally starting to see that.
Ensorceled 10y ago
Character Assassination: the malicious and unjustified harming of a person's good reputation. The Trump example fails on all counts: it's not malicious, he's running for President where character is critical; it's not unjustified, he's a piece of work; he doesn't HAVE a good reputation to begin with, even with his supporters. As a Canadian observer, I've been gobsmacked by how much of pass Trump has been given for terrible behaviour until very recently.
CalChris 10y ago
You said US Government. Both America and the US Government are actually held in some regard around the world. http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/
- DominikR 10y ago
  In 2015 almost half of Germans disliked the US, you do that poll again after we have received millions of Arabs and I can guarantee you that 75% of Germans dislike (or hate) you now. Saying anything pro US today will make you a social outcast. In ten years from now the EU will be run by the far right and you guys wont even be able to visit us out of fear from being attacked by random people on the streets. That's how popular the US foreign policy is. It will be like visiting the Middle East, only that we have nuclear weapons.
  - scottkduncan 10y ago
    It turns out Pew found the opposite in their 2016 poll of global opinion of the United States. Favorability of the U.S. increased from 50% favorable to 57% in Germany from 2015 - 2016, while unfavorable views declined from 42% to 38%. http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/28/americas-international-image/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/28/americas-international-i...
    - DominikR 10y ago
      Great, then everything must be fine! Continue arming Jihadists and keep creating a mess in the Middle East so we receive more of these fine people! It will only fasten the process I described before.
      - saalweachter 10y ago
        I hereby nominate "Europe blaming the US for the state of the Middle East" as the new "pot calling the kettle black".
Natsu 10y ago
> this is the time for character assassinations. Speaking of that, a weird UN "partner" / extra shady porn site was caught doing something like that just last week with fake CP allegations that got picked up by a few media outlets: https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/58o29r/text_summary_toddclare_accuser_of_julian_assange/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/58o29r/text_summ...
tssva 10y ago
Choosing to hide in an embassy to avoid a rape investigation isn't being practically in prison.
- pmyjavec 10y ago
  If he actually is innocent, then you can't blame him though can you? If they didn't get him for that, the US would get him for something else. I dare say a lot of people would probably take a similar approach if given the opportunity.
  - tssva 10y ago
    The US isn't getting him for anything. The US has filed no charges against him. He is wanted by Sweden to answer questions regarding rape allegations and not regarding any charges in the US. His claim that the rape allegations are a setup by the US make little sense. If the US were to set him up in order to have him extradited from another country Sweden would be far down the list of countries to chose. The terms of Sweden's extradition laws and previous court rulings on extradition cases make it very unlikely the US would be successful in extraditing him. His behavior strikes me more as that of someone guilty and desperate to avoid punishment. Maybe I am wrong but he could have cleared the whole thing up long ago by returning to Sweden.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      Yeah, it would be more likely that the US would extradite directly from the UK then try to get Sweden to extradite him on some pretext so that they could get him from Sweden.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  Well, practically under house arrest then. He's actually there because he will not be granted assurances he won't be extradited to the US for far more serious charges. I'm not saying rape charges are not serious by the way, just that these rape charges seem ... odd ... and he will probably get off.
lnrdgmz 10y ago
> him and other whistle blowers are being seriously screwed over by the US Government What has the US government done to Assange?
ArkyBeagle 10y ago
Trump's simply grist for the mill. 24 hours a day is a lot of time to fill. What boggles my mind is that otherwise seemingly intelligent people talk about him as if they have to be "fair" about the stuff he spouts. Information elements with process problems produce bad information. Trump's process is mind-bogglingly bad. What does anyone mean by "trust the government"? And how does anyone think they could trust Assange more? It's funny; when the brothers Dulles ran Washington, we were overthrowing governments. But people's trust of the government was at an all-time high. Some of that is just lag but ... what does it mean to "trust the government", anyway?
mcv 10y ago
This being the time for character assassinations also means you shouldn't trust anything from him. He's only doing it for character assassination too. The time he was doing it merely for transparency and accountability is far behind us. And this is hardly the first time a former associate points out Assange's own lack of transparency and accountability, and his dictatorial attitude. Though it contains information I didn't know yet, nothing in this article seems out of character for him. While the US government seriously screwed over Manning and Snowden (and I'd really like to see a pardon for both of them), they haven't actually done anything to Assange. He's only wanted by Sweden for rape. I don't doubt some people in the US want to see him hang, but it's doubtful there's even a good case against him, as he only published information, and didn't personally steal anything. And he didn't do so on US soil or as a US citizen either. (Though it's true that recent US governments haven't been overly concerned with the rule of law.) On Donald: the media is mostly giving him a lot of free publicity. The worst things about him are coming out of his own mouth. He's worthy of so much attention because he's running for president. Clinton is hardly a saint, but her actual crimes and misconduct are rare and minor in comparison to those of Donald. There are certainly a lot of accusations flying about, but they've been investigated to death (excessively so, in the case of Benghazi), and little to nothing stuck.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> On character assassinations, another example I could give right now is Trump Except as a practitioner, Trump is hardly a noteworthy example of character assassination. Bad press sometimes is a result of unfavorable facts.

scottkduncan 10y ago

> Yeah he is controversial, but is he worthy of so much attention? He is running to be the most powerful political figure in the world...so yes.

pmyjavec 10y ago
There is a difference between quality, informative journalism which allows people to make up there own mind and endless character assassinating, speculative tabloid smut; However, I trust you know that. The reason I used Trump as an example is because from what I've read and seen of Clinton she doesn't seem much better but is largely ignored in some media outlets in Australia.
- mcv 10y ago
  What have you read and seen about Clinton? Because the bad things she actually has done are not remotely in the same league as those of Trump. She gets accused a lot by conservatives who clearly have a chip on their shoulder about her, but none of those accusations turned up anything serious. There have been 7 congressional hearing on Benghazi to try to bring her down, but nobody could find anything she's actually done wrong. The email server was certainly sloppy, but hardly worse than anything other government officials have gotten away with. The things Trump has done wrong, like the Trump University scam, not paying his contractors, opportunistic bankruptcies to get out of paying his debts, while he still gets to keep his own profits, and the rape case with a 13 year old victim against him, get barely any attention at all. Most of the attention he gets, is about things that he personally has actually said. And that's already bad enough for most people.
  - pmyjavec 10y ago
    With those candidates, there is no "lesser of two evils" in my opinion, though the media has us believe so. That is my point. My point is about media bias and, it's rampant.
    - jacalata 10y ago
      Well, yea. One of them is an actual good candidate and the other is Trump. The media is just trying to make them look competitive so people keep reading stories on the election.
    - mcv 10y ago
      If there's no "lesser of two evils", it's because Clinton is not really evil. She gets lots of bad press, but all things considered, she's actually pretty good. Certainly by the unfortunately low political standards of US. I'd certainly like the US to elect more progressive politicians, but that seems unlikely to happen. In any case, Trump is sub-par even for US standards. He should be completely unacceptable, and fortunately even people of his own party are finally starting to see that.

Ensorceled 10y ago

Character Assassination: the malicious and unjustified harming of a person's good reputation. The Trump example fails on all counts: it's not malicious, he's running for President where character is critical; it's not unjustified, he's a piece of work; he doesn't HAVE a good reputation to begin with, even with his supporters. As a Canadian observer, I've been gobsmacked by how much of pass Trump has been given for terrible behaviour until very recently.

CalChris 10y ago

You said US Government. Both America and the US Government are actually held in some regard around the world. http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/

DominikR 10y ago
In 2015 almost half of Germans disliked the US, you do that poll again after we have received millions of Arabs and I can guarantee you that 75% of Germans dislike (or hate) you now. Saying anything pro US today will make you a social outcast. In ten years from now the EU will be run by the far right and you guys wont even be able to visit us out of fear from being attacked by random people on the streets. That's how popular the US foreign policy is. It will be like visiting the Middle East, only that we have nuclear weapons.
- scottkduncan 10y ago
  It turns out Pew found the opposite in their 2016 poll of global opinion of the United States. Favorability of the U.S. increased from 50% favorable to 57% in Germany from 2015 - 2016, while unfavorable views declined from 42% to 38%. http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/28/americas-international-image/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/28/americas-international-i...
  - DominikR 10y ago
    Great, then everything must be fine! Continue arming Jihadists and keep creating a mess in the Middle East so we receive more of these fine people! It will only fasten the process I described before.
    - saalweachter 10y ago
      I hereby nominate "Europe blaming the US for the state of the Middle East" as the new "pot calling the kettle black".

Natsu 10y ago

> this is the time for character assassinations. Speaking of that, a weird UN "partner" / extra shady porn site was caught doing something like that just last week with fake CP allegations that got picked up by a few media outlets: https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/58o29r/text_summary_toddclare_accuser_of_julian_assange/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/58o29r/text_summ...

tssva 10y ago

Choosing to hide in an embassy to avoid a rape investigation isn't being practically in prison.

pmyjavec 10y ago
If he actually is innocent, then you can't blame him though can you? If they didn't get him for that, the US would get him for something else. I dare say a lot of people would probably take a similar approach if given the opportunity.
- tssva 10y ago
  The US isn't getting him for anything. The US has filed no charges against him. He is wanted by Sweden to answer questions regarding rape allegations and not regarding any charges in the US. His claim that the rape allegations are a setup by the US make little sense. If the US were to set him up in order to have him extradited from another country Sweden would be far down the list of countries to chose. The terms of Sweden's extradition laws and previous court rulings on extradition cases make it very unlikely the US would be successful in extraditing him. His behavior strikes me more as that of someone guilty and desperate to avoid punishment. Maybe I am wrong but he could have cleared the whole thing up long ago by returning to Sweden.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    Yeah, it would be more likely that the US would extradite directly from the UK then try to get Sweden to extradite him on some pretext so that they could get him from Sweden.
Ensorceled 10y ago
Well, practically under house arrest then. He's actually there because he will not be granted assurances he won't be extradited to the US for far more serious charges. I'm not saying rape charges are not serious by the way, just that these rape charges seem ... odd ... and he will probably get off.

lnrdgmz 10y ago

> him and other whistle blowers are being seriously screwed over by the US Government What has the US government done to Assange?

ArkyBeagle 10y ago

Trump's simply grist for the mill. 24 hours a day is a lot of time to fill. What boggles my mind is that otherwise seemingly intelligent people talk about him as if they have to be "fair" about the stuff he spouts. Information elements with process problems produce bad information. Trump's process is mind-bogglingly bad. What does anyone mean by "trust the government"? And how does anyone think they could trust Assange more? It's funny; when the brothers Dulles ran Washington, we were overthrowing governments. But people's trust of the government was at an all-time high. Some of that is just lag but ... what does it mean to "trust the government", anyway?

mcv 10y ago

This being the time for character assassinations also means you shouldn't trust anything from him. He's only doing it for character assassination too. The time he was doing it merely for transparency and accountability is far behind us. And this is hardly the first time a former associate points out Assange's own lack of transparency and accountability, and his dictatorial attitude. Though it contains information I didn't know yet, nothing in this article seems out of character for him. While the US government seriously screwed over Manning and Snowden (and I'd really like to see a pardon for both of them), they haven't actually done anything to Assange. He's only wanted by Sweden for rape. I don't doubt some people in the US want to see him hang, but it's doubtful there's even a good case against him, as he only published information, and didn't personally steal anything. And he didn't do so on US soil or as a US citizen either. (Though it's true that recent US governments haven't been overly concerned with the rule of law.) On Donald: the media is mostly giving him a lot of free publicity. The worst things about him are coming out of his own mouth. He's worthy of so much attention because he's running for president. Clinton is hardly a saint, but her actual crimes and misconduct are rare and minor in comparison to those of Donald. There are certainly a lot of accusations flying about, but they've been investigated to death (excessively so, in the case of Benghazi), and little to nothing stuck.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> On character assassinations, another example I could give right now is Trump Except as a practitioner, Trump is hardly a noteworthy example of character assassination. Bad press sometimes is a result of unfavorable facts.