3 ms·

> In its heyday Wikileaks was lauded by the left mainly because it provided evidence that the US did “bad things”. That's because it's a valuable service. Loo

> In its heyday Wikileaks was lauded by the left mainly because it provided evidence that the US did “bad things”. That's because it's a valuable service. Look, I'd love it if sunshine could shine equally into all corners of the world, but if an ideologically impure weirdo with bad hygiene and some vile sexual habits wants to shine sunshine just into my own country's dark corners.... then fine! I want my country to live up to its own ideals, and that requires making everyone aware of when it doesn't. Justice isn't a zero-sum international game of tit-for-tat.

simiones 5y ago
> some vile sexual habits If you're referring to the allegations made against Assange and investigated by the Swedish prosecutor's office that forced him to remain confined in the embassy in the UK, then those were dropped, and the UN special investigator who looked at Assange's case found that the whole investigation was conducted in bad faith: https://www.exberliner.com/features/julian-assange-trial-2020/nils-melzer-assange/ https://www.exberliner.com/features/julian-assange-trial-202... > But that’s exactly the point. I don’t know whether Julian Assange committed sexual assault or not, but what I do know is that Sweden never cared to find out. They wanted to use these allegations to discredit him. And once they had actively spread these allegations into every corner of the world, they then made sure that there would never be a proper trial because, as the prosecutor finally admitted in November 2019, they never had sufficient evidence to even press charges against Julian Assange.
- knodi123 5y ago
  Quoting the source you linked, > Sweden went out of its way to make sure the public was informed of the allegations against Assange, even against the will of the concerned women, So- these women (plural) DID make allegations. And if publicizing them was against the womens' will, then we know that they didn't make these claims for the sake of publicity. I'll readily believe that Sweden publicized them with political intent, and that they didn't have enough evidence to successfully prosecute. But what evidence there is (regardless of legal standards) definitely exists, and has not been recanted, and I have seen nothing to suggest it was a lie. And in general, I believe women. Just because it's not up to a legal standard of convincingness doesn't mean we have to just ignore it.
  - tsimionescu 5y ago
    Normally I fully agree with you, but when the allegations are against such a high-profile international declared enemy of some of the most powerful nations on Earth, I do reserve judgment. Similarly if Bielorussian authorities were investigating claims made by women against Roman Prostaevich, I would be less inclined to automatically believe that he had doone something to some women than I am for women telling their stories against Jeffrey Epstein.

simiones 5y ago

> some vile sexual habits If you're referring to the allegations made against Assange and investigated by the Swedish prosecutor's office that forced him to remain confined in the embassy in the UK, then those were dropped, and the UN special investigator who looked at Assange's case found that the whole investigation was conducted in bad faith: https://www.exberliner.com/features/julian-assange-trial-2020/nils-melzer-assange/ https://www.exberliner.com/features/julian-assange-trial-202... > But that’s exactly the point. I don’t know whether Julian Assange committed sexual assault or not, but what I do know is that Sweden never cared to find out. They wanted to use these allegations to discredit him. And once they had actively spread these allegations into every corner of the world, they then made sure that there would never be a proper trial because, as the prosecutor finally admitted in November 2019, they never had sufficient evidence to even press charges against Julian Assange.

knodi123 5y ago
Quoting the source you linked, > Sweden went out of its way to make sure the public was informed of the allegations against Assange, even against the will of the concerned women, So- these women (plural) DID make allegations. And if publicizing them was against the womens' will, then we know that they didn't make these claims for the sake of publicity. I'll readily believe that Sweden publicized them with political intent, and that they didn't have enough evidence to successfully prosecute. But what evidence there is (regardless of legal standards) definitely exists, and has not been recanted, and I have seen nothing to suggest it was a lie. And in general, I believe women. Just because it's not up to a legal standard of convincingness doesn't mean we have to just ignore it.
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  Normally I fully agree with you, but when the allegations are against such a high-profile international declared enemy of some of the most powerful nations on Earth, I do reserve judgment. Similarly if Bielorussian authorities were investigating claims made by women against Roman Prostaevich, I would be less inclined to automatically believe that he had doone something to some women than I am for women telling their stories against Jeffrey Epstein.