so what was the FalseFlag?
(the Fist or the Apology)
- I feel sorry for the poor bastard, felt torn about him since i first became aware of his activities (a long time ago) but feel empathy for most bastards (suspect i might well be one myself) :sigh:
The stages of Assange:
Uncompromising idealist supporting whistleblowers - Woohoo!
Possible rapist - Oh dear. Well, Wikileaks is not one man.
Tool of the GRU - Lost my support.
It doesn’t matter who released it, it matters what was released.
What is not released is also important. When things are released is also important. This line gets political fast.
@4udr4n is right. Wikileaks refused to publish and indeed criticised the Panama Papers due to its implications for Putin, and have refused to release other caches of documents damaging to the Russian state. They have repeatedly acted as an “information launderer” for the GRU, and now openly act as a propaganda wing of the Russian government. If they were truly only concerned with openness, then they would applaud any release of this type of secret documentation.
I initially was a supporter of Wikileaks, however, I started to become concerned when they refused to redact the names of at-risk individuals currently on operations in the initial leak. Naming these individuals had no public interest value whatsoever, and a significant human cost. Contrast this with how newspapers treated the Pentagon Papers. They disclosed responsibly, making sure that the information in the public interest regarding illegal or controversial government activity was released, without naming active service members or putting anyone at risk.
The bigger concern was the interference in the US election. If you receive information that might sway an election, but that which you are concerned is a weaponised and selective attempt by a nation-state to influence an outcome (which was already well known at that point), as a responsible journalist, you do not release prior to the election, but rather do so afterwards after vetting the accuracy of the information thoroughly.
Not to mention the dumping of information regarding US-developed targeted malware frameworks. How is that in the public interest? The Vault 7 dumps essentially did not tell us anything new about the activities of the NSA or CIA, while disclosing detailed operational information, setting back security agencies in their legitimate use of these targeted tools against other nation-state rivals (who I might add are conducting the same operations).
Julian Assange has clearly become a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda, spending considerable time on sputnik and RT, and has not once been critical of Putin’s increasingly firm grip on the Russian state, internet and media. Contrast this to Snowden, who stridently criticises unjust surveillance in western societies, but also extensively criticises other states, including Russia and China. Snowden retains my admiration for this reason.