Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by nirakar, Dec 1, 2010.
Hehe, I think he looks more like:
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Welcome to the double standards freakshow. Nobel Peace prize theatrics.
We have the U.S. calling for Chinese laureate Liu Xiaobo`s release, who won the award for his human rights and political reform work in China, the US saying peaceful expressions are at the core of human rights... on the one hand.
And on the other, laws are being re written to imprison and silence Assange (& Wikileaks) who is exposing gross human rights abuses, war crimes, and grotesque endemic political cynicism and abuse. :m:
find out how that stinking meme started. who is talking shit about him? what are their motivations? agenda?
meanwhile...The man behind WikiLeaks has won the most votes in this year's Person of the Year poll.
suck on that fuckers
Its not a democracy, its a hypocrisy, a nation with it's head up it's own rear end.
So I guess Senator Lieberman has been talking to Time magazine lately.
Michael Moore is an Academy-Award winning filmmaker and best-selling author who has put up 20k of his own money towards Mr. Assange's bail.Mr Moore has also offered more help and has made his opinion known about how he feels towards the US,Pentagon,Congress etc.
No laws are being re-written. Quit lying.
It's funny -- as in typical of the bilge and the chummers on this site -- that just the US anger is referenced here. No mention is made of the numerous other countries who are unhappy about the leaks.
This is what they are doing to Bradley Manning:
Thanks for reminding me why I don't read Salon or Greenwald.
Yeah, military confinement sucks. What of it? He's a soldier in military custody and has been charged. No law has been broken here and he's receiving exactly the same kid of treatment others in similar circumstances receive. Throwing in a bunch of academic chum hardly bolsters whatever case this writer is trying to make.
Stay safe, Julian... and if your lawyers are really all that, go beat the charges in Stockholm and let Brad Manning's counsel keep the change.
Oh, I think Julian is safe. He's hanging out with his rich friends on a 600 acre estate. I am sure they have a few hounds there that can be released.
>>How will Assange be punished ???
By leaking the details of his sexual life to the public. Poetic justice, I guess....
Moderator Note: I'm hoping to assist in keeping discussions on topic with some redirection. We have 3+ threads pertaining to WikiLeaks running right now. I am moving/redirecting these, to where I hope they may undergo further focus, examination and discussion in topical context.
•Ethics, Morality, & Justice: New Wikileaks Dump is Unconscionable (this thread you are reading here has been moved also)
•Politics:Whistleblowing and Patriotism
•World Events: WikiLeaks Stories
Assange's self-interest continues to upstage, contradict, and undermine his activism and journalistic integrity:
The Peninsula: Many Arab officials have close CIA links: Assange
Making allegations that he is not prepared to substantiate, and contradicting his own assertions of source protections, Assange increasingly demonstrates that he is not a competent partner for whistleblowers and investigative journalists. Proponents of secret government must be gratified that (in a wide major-media footprint) Assange's ego and personal unaccountability continue to eclipse the issues of freedom of information that the WikiLeaks phenomenon has raised.
I disagree. The man has had death threats made against him, other wikileaks staff, his son and the rest of his family. I would say his response to such threats against his person and that of his loved one's are quite tame.
He has substantiated it. The journalist who interviewed him viewed the files and also did not publish the names of those involved. After what happened last time he revealed the names of informers and spies, I don't blame him for being cautious. From your link:
Top officials in several Arab countries have close links with the CIA, and many officials keep visiting US embassies in their respective countries voluntarily to establish links with this key US intelligence agency, says Julian Assange, founder of the whistle-blowing website, WikiLeaks.
“These officials are spies for the US in their countries,” Assange told Al Jazeera Arabic channel in an interview yesterday.
The interviewer, Ahmed Mansour, said at the start of the interview which was a continuation of last week’s interface, that Assange had even shown him the files that contained the names of some top Arab officials with alleged links with the CIA.
Assange or Mansour, however, didn’t disclose the names of these officials. The WikiLeaks founder said he feared he could be killed but added that there were 2,000 websites that were ready to publish the remaining files that are in possession of WikiLeaks after “he has been done away with”.
Do you think he should release the names and put the lives of those individuals and their families in danger? I'd say that was irresponsible myself. But what do you think Hype?
He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
He is attempting to insure his safety as well as that of his family and staff.. Are you are, for example, that his son has had to go into hiding because of the threats made against him? No? His mother and other relatives have also had countless threats made against their lives. Such is the cost of freedom of information. Instead of condemning those who threaten him and his family and staff, you condemn him for not releasing what you think he should be releasing? He is being accountable and responsible..
As I said before, his actions have been tame. But then again, I am a vengeful person who'd go after anyone who threatened my loved ones. Thankfully for you, Mr Assange is not like me.
I don't consider Assange a model Family Man, or protective of his family. Most of his high-visibility has been by his own personal choices in enjoyment of the limelight, and not necessary for advancing the WikiLeaks mission.
It would be more cautious for Assange not to make such accusations in the context of his personal safety. Assange is using information provided to WikiLeaks in a personal game of chicken with a shifting variety of powerful targets, this time un-named. This is recklessness, and not caution.
If WikiLeaks has a story to break about national leaders, this is an inappropriate context (as a threat should Assange be harmed) and irresponsible journalism: If WikiLeaks is not substantiating allegations of conspiracy, then no WikiLeaks representative should be advancing them for any purpose.
No, WikiLeaks is damned if Assange keeps abusing it as a vehicle for a reckless personal joyride.
Assange is not in hiding. If he were behaving responsibly, his family and associates would not be much endangered. If Assange were more self-disciplined, then none of the WikiLeaks phenomenon would have become so personalized. I think it would be in the best interests of Assange, his family, and WikiLeaks if he would resolve his most immediate legal matters in Sweden directly and expeditiously, and then step out of the limelight to contribute to the cause of information freedom (if he chooses) in a less prominent and narcissistic way.
On the contrary, Assange is a dysfunctional leader of an organization that broke new ground in whistleblower advocacy, but he's now doing more harm than good. Assange obviously enjoys the limelight, so much that he endangers his purported cause of accountability, and he endangers those who collaborate and associate with him. He's just not up to the task of human rights leadership in the freedom-of-information cause. Too much cyberpunk, and not enough moral credibility for prime-time in my view. For more insight into Assange's mentality and ideology, I suggest reviewing his manifestos and interaction with his staff and supporters. For example:
Assange @ Herbert Snorasson: "I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier and all the rest. If you have a problem with me, piss off."
Assange: "They called me the James Bond of journalism"
Birgitta Jonssdottir: "If he could just focus on the important things he does, it would be better.
oneindia.in: Ex-WikiLeaks staff to launch rival site
theothermccain.com: worst sex ever
telegraph.co.uk: Julian Assange is a Glamorous Hero- For Now
No, it doesn't seem to me that Assange is very much like you at all, Bells- especially when it comes to personal/family honor and protection. Your characterizations of Assange as a responsible family and journalistic figure are a little bit misinformed (IMO).
The man is very private and very quiet as an individual. He is hounded and boxed in by the press wherever he goes. HIs usual high visibility has been when he was doing a document dump .. after which, he'd be hounded by the press..
Whether he fits into the role "family man" by your personal definition is really no one's business. His parenting skills or attitudes as a son have no bearing about Wikileaks.. I think his actions are protective of his family. There were kidnap threats against his son for goodness sake. But listening to his family and friends, they speak highly of him as an individual and are proud of him.
What do you think the Wikileaks mission is? You don't think as its founder he has a bit of an idea about its mission?
Quite the contrary. He is telling everyone that if harm comes to him, his loved one's or his staff or their loved one's, then they will release all the documents.
But how do you think he should deal with threats against himself? The accusation are a blunt warning to those who seek to harm him or others about the document dumps.
I disagree. He is using the only tool he has at his disposal agains threats to himself and his staff.
Do you doubt what he claims is incorrect? I would imagine that most of what he releases is pretty much common knowledge now, isn't it?
You seem to feel that the release of such information should only occur if it fits into this particular little box.. Information is a great tool and he is using it to ensure his safety as well as informing the public. He does not strike me as an individual who would make empty accusations.
Because being threatened with death, having loved one's threatened, being called a terrorist is a joyride?
You mean if he did not release any information at all?
Again, in other words, if he just shut up and never released any information at all lest it offends delicate sensibilities..
Tell me, when should information be made public? What criteria has to be met for such a release to be acceptable? Obviously using some information to ensure one's personal safety and that of one's loved one's is not acceptable. Would the release or threat be more acceptable if he was assassinated for example?
How is he doing more harm than good? By holding Governments and individuals responsible for their own actions?
You seem to blame him for his own death threats.. What harm is he doing exactly? Should he have bypassed the media and just released it en masse, with out allowing the media to double check the veracity of the information itself? Is that acceptable and functional?
How so? By releasing the information in a manner that does not sit well with you?
It is the information that is deemed dangerous and it is the information that resulted in the threats.
Do you honestly think the threats would have been the same if he'd released the recipe for KFC's 11 or whatever spices?
He never claimed to be the leader of anything. Those are labels the media assigned to him. He has always stated was that his cause was to ensure the availability of information and State accountability.
No offense, but how American are you? What moral credibility do you want exactly? Lily white and innocent and pure of heart? His sole crime in the eyes of States is that he released information they wanted to remain secret. That is all he does. People give him information, he releases it.
What is his ideology or mentality?
You expect me to take comments made by his rivals (people who have for the most part started similar organisations) seriously?
Former WikiLeaks supporters at odds with founder Julian Assange will shortly launch OpenLeaks, a rival project aiming to get secret documents directly to media, one of them said Friday.
“I can confirm that we will be operating under the name ‘OpenLeaks’,” said former Icelandic WikiLeaks member Herbert Snorrason.
In SVT’s “WikiRebels — The Documentary” to be broadcast Sunday, Daniel Domscheit-Berg and Herbert Snorrason explain how they quit WikiLeaks because of disagreements with Assange on how to run the site and because of personal conflict with the 39-year-old Australian.
From your link..
In other words, they didn't like him personally because he liked his organisation run in a particular way, so to get even, they start a rival business?.. And we're supposed to take what they say seriously because they supposedly have no feeling of malice towards Assange?
And I think that you should take off the rose coloured glasses and realise that there are no super heroes but mere human beings using what tools they have at hand to make the world go round. In short, you seem to be disappointed because he does not fit into this mould you have in your mind about what a hero should be like.
thank you bells
it is disgusting the way hype projects his pathology on to assange
I think he has lost his way.
That threat is in direct conflict with the mission of WikiLeaks.
Take reasonable precautions. Modify his behavior to avoid personalizing the work of WikiLeaks.
So blunt as to be counterproductive in my view- like trying to eat ice cream with an excavator.
No, in his business his primary tool is protecting sources.
No. Yes. (what?)
There is an important relationship between common suspicion and corroborating evidence, but they are not the same thing.
A "box" has long been developed and used effectively by responsible investigative journalists. [edit: searching citation(s)...]
Alfred Harmsworth: -or promotion of the nanny-society/state, or "father knows best".
Greenwald (salon.com): Wired's Refusal
Lots more: http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/Microsites/SecrecyAndJournalismInTheNewMediaAge/Resources.aspx
I am not suggesting that Assange's allegations are empty. I am saying that his methods have become highly problematic because he can't separate his narcissism from his work.
For Assange, yes.
No, Assange would be more effective if he could keep his personal affairs from interfering with WikiLeaks.
Secrecy for the purposes of crime is not legitimate.
Concealment of crime- War crimes, and subversion of democracy for example. Exposing massive crimes requires a certain professionalism to remain effective in the long run, and through a succession of cases.
That's right. Investigative journalism involves protecting sources at least as diligently as protecting the journalist's safety. Many of the implications of WL leaks are much larger, affecting many more people than Assange and his personal circle.
His irresponsible and self-absorbed behavior has been distracting mightily from more important issues raised by WikiLeaks.
Assange would be more effective by being accountable himself to the law.
Assange's indescretions (personal and professional) have motivated and provided a focus for mistaken, wrongful personalization of larger issues, including howls for the blood of this imperfect messenger.
Distracting from the important cause of promoting the freedom of information, and removing secrecy, where secrecy conceals criminal activity.
No. There are well-established means in journalism and law for protecting whistle-blowers, while exposing unlawful/criminal public deceptions.
Yes, there is much precedent for this in the annals of professional investigative journalism. Assange is making very conspicuous mistakes that a serious journalist would never do.
By releasing information in a manner that compromises whistleblowers, and persons not implicated in criminal conspiracy.
Yes, and if sources and facilitators of sources are better isolated from the issues raised, then personification of WikiLeaks and whistle-blowing in general do not result in angry focus on the individuals exposing truth about criminal conspiracies.
Assange displays an obsession with portraying himself as a leader.
No, there is ample evidence in Assange's writing, interviews, and interaction with his associates, that he has much difficulty separating his self-image from his purported cause.
That may be true, but he can't seem to keep his ego out of it.
I am referring to the world media limelight.
I am a U.S. Citizen.
I would like for the most harmful crimes of our times to be exposed- Especially crimes on a global scale against the most basic human rights.
I'll settle for professional on-message journalism.
Assange has not been charged with any crime under U.S. law.
No, Assange has abused the information in very personal ways.
I might characterize it as narcissistic cyberpunk-anarchist. I offered some evidence of that in my last post here.
Assange has severe staffing difficulty because his ego gets in the way of his work. His "rival" former associates believe in the WikiLeaks mission, but disagree with Assange's personal conduct.
In a manner of speaking, yes.
We should take all who behave more professionally in investigative journalism more seriously than Assange.
I think that I am aware of that, and that such awareness does not interfere with a critique of Assange's effectiveness as a champion of public accountability.
I am disappointed in Assange for that reason, and much more.
bring them to the table
writings and interviews only
i like to see where you are coming from
Separate names with a comma.