I don't know much about Wikileaks/Assange beyond the basics but it seems basically impossible to discuss because of the amount of astroturfing I suspect is happening. Depending on who you ask,...
I don't know much about Wikileaks/Assange beyond the basics but it seems basically impossible to discuss because of the amount of astroturfing I suspect is happening. Depending on who you ask, Assange is a corrupt nutcase or he's been portrayed in an unfair light
Judging just off of my personal experience with wikileaks and the various court documents that have made reference to them/Assange (plus the Mueller report), he's not exactly a savory person. His...
Judging just off of my personal experience with wikileaks and the various court documents that have made reference to them/Assange (plus the Mueller report), he's not exactly a savory person. His actions belie a Chaotic Neutral sort of personality, fueled at its core by a desire to expose wrong-doing which in practical effect is self-serving moral relativism.
He's great at obtaining secret documents, and some of Wikileak's information dissemination has resulted in morally dubious decisions and actions rightfully being made public, but he cherry picks which ones to release to further his own agenda.
My own take is that in the beginning he seemed to be acting out of a sincere motivation to expose wrongdoing. But after he embarrassed the U.S. and was confined to the Ecuadorian Embassy I think...
My own take is that in the beginning he seemed to be acting out of a sincere motivation to expose wrongdoing. But after he embarrassed the U.S. and was confined to the Ecuadorian Embassy I think he had to start thinking about some sort of long-term arrangement and that led to Russia, who would of course be more than happy to stick there finger in the U.S.'s eye like they did with Snowden.
You may recall news reports and Reddit threads from a couple years back after the Russia rumors started where Assange's hashes didn't match between the file that was released and the one he published. This was widely speculated to be a sign that he'd been compromised.
His involvement with Russia led him to participating in releasing the hacked DNC emails while withholding the RNC ones as that's what Russia deemed most advantageous in their current Cold War against the West. Or perhaps the GRU just didn't provide those emails to Assange in the first place.
Now something hasn't worked out for him as it was planned, or maybe it worked out exactly as Russia planned. Regardless, these are very interesting times.
And please know that much of what is above is speculation hung around some key facts.
The problem I have with Assange's/WikiLeaks actions is that they took no care to redact the names of people unquestionably at risk of retaliation in Afghanistan - Afghan translators, drivers, and...
The problem I have with Assange's/WikiLeaks actions is that they took no care to redact the names of people unquestionably at risk of retaliation in Afghanistan - Afghan translators, drivers, and other local "collaborators". That doesn't meet standards for journalistic responsibility. Otherwise, yes, the document releases were journalism and shouldn't be criminalized.
IANAL - I can see a legitimate case on the collaboration to crack passwords, but again, Chelsea Manning has already served a term of imprisonment and shouldn't be subjected to double jeopardy.
I'm not saying it's easy, but there is some judgment involved among actual professional journalists when publishing leaks and hacks, at least dating back to the Pentagon Papers. It's possible to...
I'm not saying it's easy, but there is some judgment involved among actual professional journalists when publishing leaks and hacks, at least dating back to the Pentagon Papers. It's possible to publish classified information of public interest, without impacting the nominal reason for classification.
And from the prosecutors: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/23/doj-accuses-assange-of-violating-espionage-act-1342653
And from the prosecutors:
Still, Zach Terwilliger, the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, stressed that the government was “not charging Assange for passively obtaining classified information.” Rather, he is being prosecuted for publishing “a narrow set of classified documents in which Assange also published the names of innocent people who risked their safety” to help the United States.
“Assange is not charged simply because he is a publisher,” Terwilliger told reporters on Thursday.
The EFF's response: The Government’s Indictment of Julian Assange Poses a Clear and Present Danger to Journalism, the Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Speech
I don't know much about Wikileaks/Assange beyond the basics but it seems basically impossible to discuss because of the amount of astroturfing I suspect is happening. Depending on who you ask, Assange is a corrupt nutcase or he's been portrayed in an unfair light
Judging just off of my personal experience with wikileaks and the various court documents that have made reference to them/Assange (plus the Mueller report), he's not exactly a savory person. His actions belie a Chaotic Neutral sort of personality, fueled at its core by a desire to expose wrong-doing which in practical effect is self-serving moral relativism.
He's great at obtaining secret documents, and some of Wikileak's information dissemination has resulted in morally dubious decisions and actions rightfully being made public, but he cherry picks which ones to release to further his own agenda.
He also does the complete opposite in some cases. Like the Podesta emails where he just dumped everything, which led to the pizzagate conspiracy.
My own take is that in the beginning he seemed to be acting out of a sincere motivation to expose wrongdoing. But after he embarrassed the U.S. and was confined to the Ecuadorian Embassy I think he had to start thinking about some sort of long-term arrangement and that led to Russia, who would of course be more than happy to stick there finger in the U.S.'s eye like they did with Snowden.
You may recall news reports and Reddit threads from a couple years back after the Russia rumors started where Assange's hashes didn't match between the file that was released and the one he published. This was widely speculated to be a sign that he'd been compromised.
His involvement with Russia led him to participating in releasing the hacked DNC emails while withholding the RNC ones as that's what Russia deemed most advantageous in their current Cold War against the West. Or perhaps the GRU just didn't provide those emails to Assange in the first place.
Now something hasn't worked out for him as it was planned, or maybe it worked out exactly as Russia planned. Regardless, these are very interesting times.
And please know that much of what is above is speculation hung around some key facts.
Mike Masnick of Techdirt's thoughts: New Assange Indictment Makes Insane, Unprecedented Use Of Espionage Act On Things Journalists Do All The Time
The problem I have with Assange's/WikiLeaks actions is that they took no care to redact the names of people unquestionably at risk of retaliation in Afghanistan - Afghan translators, drivers, and other local "collaborators". That doesn't meet standards for journalistic responsibility. Otherwise, yes, the document releases were journalism and shouldn't be criminalized.
IANAL - I can see a legitimate case on the collaboration to crack passwords, but again, Chelsea Manning has already served a term of imprisonment and shouldn't be subjected to double jeopardy.
I'm not saying it's easy, but there is some judgment involved among actual professional journalists when publishing leaks and hacks, at least dating back to the Pentagon Papers. It's possible to publish classified information of public interest, without impacting the nominal reason for classification.
And from the prosecutors:
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/23/doj-accuses-assange-of-violating-espionage-act-1342653
The EFF's response: The Government’s Indictment of Julian Assange Poses a Clear and Present Danger to Journalism, the Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Speech