5 ms·

Disclaimer: I dont have much of an opinion on the topic of Assange himself since years after in his "embassy prison" he certainly went nuts in a way. It's not t

by SXX 5y ago

Disclaimer: I dont have much of an opinion on the topic of Assange himself since years after in his "embassy prison" he certainly went nuts in a way. It's not the same person you could talk with on IRC years ago. He was also pretty much okay back in 2011 durign his iterview with Eric Schmidt. Yet here is the idea for your mind: all around the world including Russia political leaders of authoritarian countries trying to sell bullshit like every single problem their regime has is caused by some US conspiracy. They'll of course tell you that all independent journalist and activists work for US and spread only lies. Does Snowden going for asylum in Russia make what he exposed unimportant? What if famous Iraq civilians killing video would be provided not by someone from US, but Russian FSB or Islaeli Mossad? Will it make people less dead? So obviously any whistleblower or journalist can be biased and some country will benefit more than other. There is absolutely no point of arguing who working for whom - only facts are important.

chronicsunshine 5y ago
This is a fair take. I appreciate your input.
- metalliqaz 5y ago
  Your first post should not have been removed, it did not violate any rules
jollybean 5y ago
"There is absolutely no point of arguing who working for whom - only facts are important." I don't think so. There's generally no such thing as 'individual blocks of truth' as independent things. The truth is always contextual. New Orgs have biases that exhibit themselves in all sorts of ways, and they matter. I'm not fully sure if either of these things are fully true but if 1) Assange was actively trying to help people steal sensitive information form the US and 2) has some kind of implied relationship with an American adversary whereupon they support him politically or with information - and whereby he returns the favour by suppressing leaks on their behalf - then what does this look like? This person basically becomes a foreign agent, intent on discrediting one party over another. The 'facts' released are ultimately selective. It'd be 'journalism' in the same way that Putin could use his powers to 'uncover' information and then frame and leak the information selectively. Again: I don't know if 1 and 2 are true. I'm also not fully on board with the notion that information about Assange is suppressed in the conspiratorial sense it'd be interesting to see more behind the scenes mechanics of how that might work.
- ben_w 5y ago
  > There's generally no such thing as 'individual blocks of truth' as independent things. The truth is always contextual. On the one hand, I absolutely agree with this statement in isolation. On the other, I don’t need him to be unbiased, as he isn’t the only journalist in the world — if he wants (or needs) to keep Russia happy, so long as he has a counterpart that doesn’t, between them the public is informed.
  - giardini 5y ago
    Yes. And why is the USA trying to take him into custody? While in the USA for a US citizen to work as a foreign agent is illegal, I fail to see why Assange, who is a citizen of Australia and mostly has resided in other countries, should be arrested by yet another country and shipped to the USA. Did Assange commit a crime in the USA? Wasn't it Manning who got the supposed "classified" info and gave it to Assange? How about a little goddamn proof? How about a valid legal case that follows the laws of the USA? This whole Assange thing is just a streaming shit-show of nonsense and a shameful attempt to drive one man to ruin and worse. Both Democrats and Republicans have other problems to worry about every day b/c they don't have their acts together. All this trouble comes b/c a cabal of jerks somewhere (probably the intelligence community) has a hard-on to fuck Assange over and is somehow tolerated. Just for comparison: would it be ethical for the USA to bushwhack and extradite a street vendor in Egypt who cries "Kill the USA!" and burns Uncle Sam in effigy? Hell No! This stuff happens all the time. The USA bureaucracy is like an information sieve. If you wanna fix it, find a better way to work. Give Assange his freedom. Drag into the sunlight those fools who are perpetuating this nonsense and terminate their employment. Brand their foreheads with a giant letter "A" so they're identifiable forever. Anything Assange has revealed is by now "water under the bridge". To use another metaphor, "the genie is out of the bottle" and you can't put it back. Grow up!
    - ben_w 5y ago
      > How about a little goddamn proof? How about a valid legal case that follows the laws of the USA? In theory, that’d be the job of the court case he’s fighting an extradition to not face. And, to be clear where I stand, in the (unlikely) event that anyone’s secret services care what I think, they’d have to be a lot more open and honest about their mistakes for me to trust them when they say “we need X secret, trust us” — almost everything that people like me get to hear about them are their mistakes, and a whole lot of hubris to go with those mistakes; while I like to assume they can’t all be that bad, the fact is I can only form opinions by what I learn, and whatever good any of them might do is kept secret (or so vague it might as well be) and is unlearnable, while the bad stuff is writ large. (None of this is relevant to the judicial systems in any country or Assange).
pphysch 5y ago
> all around the world including Russia political leaders of authoritarian countries trying to sell bullshit like every single problem their regime has is caused by some US conspiracy. This "bullshit" has a Pentagon-sized kernel of truth to it. Washington is the only regime with hundreds of foreign military bases. Washington is the only regime that directly funnels hundreds of millions of dollars in resources to foreign rebel groups through channels such as NED, DRL. Washington is the only regime capable of unilaterally blockading entire economies through crushing sanctions. So yes, it does really matter to 90%+ of the world population if the "journalists" they trust are actually paid couriers of Washington's foreign agendas.

by SXX 5y ago

chronicsunshine 5y ago

This is a fair take. I appreciate your input.

metalliqaz 5y ago
Your first post should not have been removed, it did not violate any rules

jollybean 5y ago

"There is absolutely no point of arguing who working for whom - only facts are important." I don't think so. There's generally no such thing as 'individual blocks of truth' as independent things. The truth is always contextual. New Orgs have biases that exhibit themselves in all sorts of ways, and they matter. I'm not fully sure if either of these things are fully true but if 1) Assange was actively trying to help people steal sensitive information form the US and 2) has some kind of implied relationship with an American adversary whereupon they support him politically or with information - and whereby he returns the favour by suppressing leaks on their behalf - then what does this look like? This person basically becomes a foreign agent, intent on discrediting one party over another. The 'facts' released are ultimately selective. It'd be 'journalism' in the same way that Putin could use his powers to 'uncover' information and then frame and leak the information selectively. Again: I don't know if 1 and 2 are true. I'm also not fully on board with the notion that information about Assange is suppressed in the conspiratorial sense it'd be interesting to see more behind the scenes mechanics of how that might work.

ben_w 5y ago
> There's generally no such thing as 'individual blocks of truth' as independent things. The truth is always contextual. On the one hand, I absolutely agree with this statement in isolation. On the other, I don’t need him to be unbiased, as he isn’t the only journalist in the world — if he wants (or needs) to keep Russia happy, so long as he has a counterpart that doesn’t, between them the public is informed.
- giardini 5y ago
  Yes. And why is the USA trying to take him into custody? While in the USA for a US citizen to work as a foreign agent is illegal, I fail to see why Assange, who is a citizen of Australia and mostly has resided in other countries, should be arrested by yet another country and shipped to the USA. Did Assange commit a crime in the USA? Wasn't it Manning who got the supposed "classified" info and gave it to Assange? How about a little goddamn proof? How about a valid legal case that follows the laws of the USA? This whole Assange thing is just a streaming shit-show of nonsense and a shameful attempt to drive one man to ruin and worse. Both Democrats and Republicans have other problems to worry about every day b/c they don't have their acts together. All this trouble comes b/c a cabal of jerks somewhere (probably the intelligence community) has a hard-on to fuck Assange over and is somehow tolerated. Just for comparison: would it be ethical for the USA to bushwhack and extradite a street vendor in Egypt who cries "Kill the USA!" and burns Uncle Sam in effigy? Hell No! This stuff happens all the time. The USA bureaucracy is like an information sieve. If you wanna fix it, find a better way to work. Give Assange his freedom. Drag into the sunlight those fools who are perpetuating this nonsense and terminate their employment. Brand their foreheads with a giant letter "A" so they're identifiable forever. Anything Assange has revealed is by now "water under the bridge". To use another metaphor, "the genie is out of the bottle" and you can't put it back. Grow up!
  - ben_w 5y ago
    > How about a little goddamn proof? How about a valid legal case that follows the laws of the USA? In theory, that’d be the job of the court case he’s fighting an extradition to not face. And, to be clear where I stand, in the (unlikely) event that anyone’s secret services care what I think, they’d have to be a lot more open and honest about their mistakes for me to trust them when they say “we need X secret, trust us” — almost everything that people like me get to hear about them are their mistakes, and a whole lot of hubris to go with those mistakes; while I like to assume they can’t all be that bad, the fact is I can only form opinions by what I learn, and whatever good any of them might do is kept secret (or so vague it might as well be) and is unlearnable, while the bad stuff is writ large. (None of this is relevant to the judicial systems in any country or Assange).

pphysch 5y ago

> all around the world including Russia political leaders of authoritarian countries trying to sell bullshit like every single problem their regime has is caused by some US conspiracy. This "bullshit" has a Pentagon-sized kernel of truth to it. Washington is the only regime with hundreds of foreign military bases. Washington is the only regime that directly funnels hundreds of millions of dollars in resources to foreign rebel groups through channels such as NED, DRL. Washington is the only regime capable of unilaterally blockading entire economies through crushing sanctions. So yes, it does really matter to 90%+ of the world population if the "journalists" they trust are actually paid couriers of Washington's foreign agendas.