3 ms·

Regardless of who provides them, he published them and they happened to be true. Other intel agencies are free to leak as they please. But don't paint Assange

Regardless of who provides them, he published them and they happened to be true. Other intel agencies are free to leak as they please. But don't paint Assange as anything other than a person who publishes the truth. Unless you have the proof that it isn't.

macspoofing 8y ago
>But don't paint Assange as anything other than a person who publishes the truth. But he isn't that. Even in the most charitable interpretation you have to admit that both Assange and WikiLeaks editorialize, curate, and time releases, usually for political goals. In the last few years, they've also been shown to coordinate with Russian intelligence to the point where they are see as either a front, or a willing patsy. This is the conclusion that multiple western intelligence agencies come to, including American, British, French, Dutch and German. Wikipedia has a good write-up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russian_influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russi... At this point, this doofus has no credibility.
- starik36 8y ago
  > his is the conclusion that multiple western intelligence agencies come to, including American, British, French, Dutch and German Well, isn't that a bit self serving. > Assange and WikiLeaks editorialize, curate, and time releases, usually for political goals. As far as I've seen they curate so that people don't get in harm's way (see Bradley Manning's dump). They do time their release to get the biggest bang for the buck. I don't even understand why that's a criticism. Products from apple/google/samsung are released in time for xmas to get the biggest reception. NYT doesn't publish scoop on Nov 7th - they do it before the election. You cannot be serious with this criticism. As far as editorializing, I've seen very minimal amount of that (namely Collateral Murder data dump), but even with that the entire video was released, so you could make up your own mind. > this doofus has no credibility Disagree. His credibility will continue to be high as long as what he publishes is the truth.

macspoofing 8y ago

>But don't paint Assange as anything other than a person who publishes the truth. But he isn't that. Even in the most charitable interpretation you have to admit that both Assange and WikiLeaks editorialize, curate, and time releases, usually for political goals. In the last few years, they've also been shown to coordinate with Russian intelligence to the point where they are see as either a front, or a willing patsy. This is the conclusion that multiple western intelligence agencies come to, including American, British, French, Dutch and German. Wikipedia has a good write-up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russian_influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russi... At this point, this doofus has no credibility.

starik36 8y ago
> his is the conclusion that multiple western intelligence agencies come to, including American, British, French, Dutch and German Well, isn't that a bit self serving. > Assange and WikiLeaks editorialize, curate, and time releases, usually for political goals. As far as I've seen they curate so that people don't get in harm's way (see Bradley Manning's dump). They do time their release to get the biggest bang for the buck. I don't even understand why that's a criticism. Products from apple/google/samsung are released in time for xmas to get the biggest reception. NYT doesn't publish scoop on Nov 7th - they do it before the election. You cannot be serious with this criticism. As far as editorializing, I've seen very minimal amount of that (namely Collateral Murder data dump), but even with that the entire video was released, so you could make up your own mind. > this doofus has no credibility Disagree. His credibility will continue to be high as long as what he publishes is the truth.