You realize he may be a Russian spy, don't you?
And many others, including former CIA director Pompeo too: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/mike-pompeo-c... Google 'pompeo wikileaks' and you'll get a ton.
You seem to be ignoring the evidence people are putting in this post and continually defending WikiLeaks. They're not an altruistic organization.
Pompeo is a liar, and Clapper was to. Check out all of Clapper's statements he'd make before being nearly immediately contradicted during the whole Snowden thing. After paying attention to statements from national security heads for decades, they are just straight up lying an alarming amount of the time.
And do I need to track down the lies CIA directors have told congress for you, or Pompeo specifically?
But it's much more unlikely that he'd be an actual Russian intelligence employee since they're usually Russian I think.
The more simple answer is that he's just being run by them through money, blackmail, extortion, or some other leverage. Why employ someone when you can just get them to do what you want with simple threats?
His hatred towards the US goes back a very long time and has certainly only grown stronger given how he’s been treated.
No...they are not protecting themselves. Their crimes have already been exposed. They are prosecuting someone for something that was criminal.
> who uncovered their crimes", and the reply was "but Assange is a Russian asset, so he's not so great either". Asset or not, the crimes were still committed, and the people who committed them are still guilty.
Ok, and how does that bear on the issue of Assange's extradition? Your response was the whataboutism that Assange shouldn't be extradited because the US committed war crimes.
Where did I say that?
If I understand the thread correctly, you also seem to be committing textbook gaslighting[0]. If I am misinterpreting the thread, please correct me.
Please review carefully the chain of comments, because it seems there could be some misunderstanding there: consumer451 was answering to darawk, not to you. Maybe instead of "to textbook whataboutism" was meant to be "with textbook whataboutism"?
Otherwise this thread is total nonsense to me. No surprise either...
"If A then B. B therefore A"
Btw, personal opinion: I am completely biased against Assange given his lack of openess against everyone but the Democratic Party. I used to think he was one of my heroes, now I think that he is just someone trying to save his own skin. His actions and reading his AMA’s on Reddit really changed my opinion regarding the idea that he might be an unbiased arbiter of truth. Assange is no Snowden.
I believe the hero-worship of such persons is not useful. But they have changed the landscape and raised the bar for transparency from governments worldwide, which is undeniably a good thing.
Look, I am a US civil servant. When I travel internationally I have to use a special passport. It’s maroon instead of the usual blue, and it has a stamp in it that states that I am a representative of the US government and am on official business. And this is exactly why. When I present it at a border crossing, that is an official legal declaration to the country I am visiting that I am a declared agent of a foreign government. If I attemp merely to enter the country using my personal passport I am committing an arrestable offence.