6 ms·
Spare a Thought for Julian Assange Spending His Fifth Christmas Behind Bars
- ath3nd 3y agoThat man is a hero. I used to have alternating wallpapers of him and Navalny to remind me that doing the right thing can ruin your life, but it's still the right thing to do.
- generalizations 3y agoAnyone else remember those insurance files? Whatever happened to those?
- noonething 3y ago[flagged]
- gambiting 3y agoHow so? Can you explain what you mean please? Just to quote wiki(which quotes Assange): "The Kenya leak led to corruption being a major issue in the election that followed, which was marred by violence. According to Assange, "1,300 people were eventually killed, and 350,000 were displaced. That was a result of our leak. On the other hand, the Kenyan people had a right to that information and 40,000 children a year die of malaria in Kenya. And many more die of money being pulled out of Kenya, and as a result of the Kenyan shilling being debased". " How did this benefit Russia exactly? Please explain.
- infotainment 3y agoParent here was probably referring to the 2016 US election, in which all Wikileaks were generally targeted to benefit Russia’s preferred candidate. Since Assange would leak anything sent to him, it was relatively easy for Russia to selectively leak things that would benefit Russia.
- marcinzm 3y ago>Since Assange would leak anything sent to him, According to this he very much does not, only what aligns with his personal agenda: https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- graphe 3y agoI'm sure if these undesirable acts weren't committed it would have been even better.
- marcinzm 3y agoYou can Google for things but it's things like this: https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...
- gambiting 3y agoI'm not American so I don't really follow what Assange did for American elections - but I very much object to OP's claim that Assange "only" leaked things that benefited russia - it can be disproven with a 5 second google.
- noonething 3y agolet me guess, Russia? https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia...
- macinjosh 3y ago[flagged]
- rayiner 3y agoThe same people complaining about the impending demise of democracy are cheering Assange’s imprisonment.
- dctoedt 3y ago> The same people complaining about the impending demise of democracy are cheering Assange’s imprisonment. Apples and oranges.
- macinjosh 3y agoYeah, one side is a blow hard, the other is actively persecuting journalists. I judge by actions. Apples and oranges indeed.
- tptacek 3y agoGo on?
- arp242 3y ago"Authoritarian rule" is not a binary thing. This kind of false equivalence and denial of nuance just makes no sense, unless you somehow want to argue that the US is EXACTLY the same as Russia or North-Korea?
- macinjosh 3y agoI never said, nor implied it was. But a spade is a spade. Mr. Assange is being persecuted solely for an act of journalism. Even if the west is "nicer" about how they maintain authority and control, it is still authoritarian. Though, I wouldn't call solitary confinement for five years in Britain's harshest prison "nice". Besides, once you are arguing shades of grey you've at least admitted something is at least starting to rot at the core. I prefer my government to be pure of any authoritarianism. I will not tolerate authoritarianism lite any more than I would tolerate something like North Korea.
- ganzuul 3y agoUgly and a chilling effect on our image as the free world. Is this really a system worth fighting for?
- Tepix 3y agoIt's a disgrace and a major credibility debility for the US and its western allys that this journalist is not free.
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y agoI wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment, but one cant help but think that if he had been more methodological like Edward Snowden, and been more self-aware of his situation , it would have turned out so much better for him and freedom (because he would still be fighting for the cause). You could have a fighter on the field vs a martyr in jail. The freedom battle will be won on the field.
- grumbel 3y agoSnowden spend the last ten years in exile in Russia, that's not that much of an improvement.
- arp242 3y agoUnlike Snowden, Assange never leaked anything, he merely published leaks. A subtle but important difference. Someone like Glenn Greenwald is a more apt comparison, and he's still living his life in freedom.
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y agoAgreed. Yet, and Unlike snowden or arrange, Greenwald has not violated the veil of perceived inviolability of the national security caste in USA. Which is why Snowden & Assange have more in common with each other vs Greenwald. For the US natsec caste, laws and facts do not apply, the only thing that matters is the perceived status as above-the-law, and who is openly attacking such status
- Fatnino 3y agoGreenwald was in a relationship with a partner half his age.
- trinsic2 3y agoI'm not entirely clear how he is subject to any foreign country's laws? Wouldn't he be subject to his own country's laws?
- wmf 3y agoYou're subject to the laws of any country you set foot in. And extradition is one of the laws.
- ericfrazier 3y ago[flagged]
- inpdx 3y agoWhy did he release just Hillary's emails when he had dirt on both sides? That doesn't sound like a journalist.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 1oooqooq 3y agoit was not even a "leak". they just set up a search, like most major newspapers. from wikipedia: > A March 2, 2015 New York Times article broke the story that the Benghazi panel had discovered that Clinton exclusively used her own private email server rather than a government-issued one throughout her time as Secretary of State, and that her aides took no action to preserve emails sent or received from her personal accounts as required by law.[42][43][44] At that point, Clinton announced that she had asked the State Department to release her emails.[45] Some in the media labeled the controversy "emailgate."[46][47][48]
- jmyeet 3y agoAssange is a polarizing topic. I see two major issues: 1. What is a journalist? If you receive classified materials, filter out anything that might put lives in danger and release it (eg the Pentagon Papers) then that's journalism. If you provide material aid and instruction to someone to murder someone for information then that's no longer journalism, even though you may publish that information as a journalist. The point is that journalism isn't an absolute defense. So where does Assange lie on this scale? This debatable because he provided material aid to Manning (allegedly). 2. Bias. This is more of a PR issue than a journalism issue because journalists and publications have bias but it's a question of degree and transparency. At some point you're lon longer a journalist,, you're an operative for a particular cause or political party. In 2016, for example, Assange timed the email release quite deliberately to hurt the HIlary campaign and also (allegedly) didn't publish information embarrassing to the Republican Party. Importantly, this selective release of information and the deliberate timing of those releases for political or personal ends undermines Wikileaks' stated mission. It makes it easier to, for example, paint him as a Republican hack or a tool of Russian intelligence, whether that's true or not. Also, at a certain point, what did you think was going to happen? Of course, the long arm of US law enforcement was going to smack you down.
- skissane 3y ago> At some point you're lon longer a journalist,, you're an operative for a particular cause or political party. In 2016, for example, Assange timed the email release quite deliberately to hurt the HIlary campaign and also (allegedly) didn't publish information embarrassing to the Republican Party. Don't you think a lot of professional media outlets do that too? Be eager to publish negative stories about people they dislike, sit on or suppress negative stories about people they do like? Imagine it is late October next year, and the New York Times or Washington Post uncover a new scandal about one of the presidential candidates - if it is about the Republican (probably Trump), they'll be eager to publish it; if it is about the Democrat (probably Biden), they'll likely get stuck into debating whether they should, double-checking and triple-checking it, and by the time that's all done the election is over. Whereas, I'd expect the Wall Street Journal or Fox News to do the exact same thing, just the other way around.
- snvzz 3y agoAssange isn't even a US citizen. This is such insanity.
- ath3nd 3y agoHis government is basically one of the US's many lapdogs, so for all intents and purposes, he is whatever the US wants him to be.
- helph67 3y agoThe current Australian government has a different attitude than previous ones, there's also considerable concern by members of the Australian parliament. https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/latenightlive/laura-tingle-canberra-30-oct/103041988 https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/latenightlive/laura-t... https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-21/assange-australian-political-delegation-in-washington/102872200 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-21/assange-australian-po...
- AdrenalinMd 3y agoWhy was this flagged?
- tupolef 3y agoThe way in which it was treated internationally, politically and in the media, is a fairly good indicator of the control the USA has over NATO countries. But it is in France that it is the most blatant and disturbing, many people do not yet realize to what extent France is now a colony. Fifty, or maybe even Thirty years ago, France would have defended and sheltered Julian Assange, as it did with others before. Instead most people pretend not to know, they almost claim the right not to know.