4 ms·
He did significant help in showing a major war crime that was covered up. That is, without doubt, more important. As a journalist, you sometimes have to jump a
by mafuy 5y ago
He did significant help in showing a major war crime that was covered up. That is, without doubt, more important.
As a journalist, you sometimes have to jump a fence - that is generally, and legally, accepted. Else writing 'do not view or publish' on your crime diary would be sufficient to conceal it.
- jollybean 5y agoThe video that showed the deaths of journalists in Iraq was not an example of a war crime. Just because it's tragic, and maybe one might not like 'the war' etc. doesn't make it a 'war crime'. It was a glimpse into the horrors of war for many and that can be enlightening, but doesn't necessarily justify whistelblowing, even if the information does materially shape our views. The issue with Assange boils down a bit to whether or not Assange 'published' or 'stole' the information along with Manning, there's a material difference there. I'll gather he was on the side of publishing, not stealing, but I have not seen the evidence.
- at_a_remove 5y agoWell, Wikileaks also revealed the US involvement in funding bacha bazi "parties." Warcrime-a-licious.
- elif 5y agoit is also worth noting that julian didnt jump any fence. He received and published data full stop. The only espionage was on part of the whistleblowers.
- plandis 5y ago> In 2010, Assange gained unauthorized access to a government computer system of a NATO country. In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked materials would be from the CIA, NSA, or the New York Times. WikiLeaks obtained and published emails from a data breach committed against an American intelligence consulting company by an “Anonymous” and LulzSec-affiliated hacker. According to that hacker, Assange indirectly asked him to spam that victim company again. > In addition, the broadened hacking conspiracy continues to allege that Assange conspired with Army Intelligence Analyst Chelsea Manning to crack a password hash to a classified U.S. Department of Defense computer. 10 seconds of perusing the indictment against Assange alleges he actively did things other than merely publish data that was given to him.
- belorn 5y ago> leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI) Is this the same hacker who has gone on public record that he got paid by the FBI to lie , and as a result was later redacted from the court documents? Paying for false witnesses is such a classic and really makes for a strong case.
- elif 5y agousing an indictment as a form of evidence is intellectually bankrupt.
- elif 5y agoUsing the language of the prosecution's summary of a classified indictment issued by a state shown to have orchestrated 2 failed false indictments on this individual in the last decade particularly does not convey considerable confidence.