this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024

25 points (76.6% liked)

GenZedong

4294 readers

131 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Was Assange an asset for the US government? (criticalresist.substack.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It is also not my goal to conclusively prove or even allege that Assange is a federal asset. Rather, I think there are enough worrying questions that should be made known more broadly

Please don't do this. This is a right-wing tactic: "I'm not making any claims, I'm just asking questions."

At the same time, the two leaks were not entirely damaging to the US government.

"Collateral murder" absolutely was damaging to the US government. It showed the callous disregard the US military had for (non-white) human life and it put them under a lot of scrutiny. It also helped a lot of "fence-sitters" take a side opposing the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The murderers were never prosecuted.

Because that's US policy. Not prosecuting them was also a bad look for US govt.

Wikileaks, however, was never formed to build credibility around damaging the US or the West in general; it was purposely founded to go after the enemies of the US government.

What? This claim needs arguments.

confined to a small room in the Ecuadorian embassy with no possibilities of ever leaving — a golden prison.

"A golden prison." lmao. As someone who has experienced prison, his freedom taken away, you can lock a person up in a 5-star resort for 10 years and I guarantee you that person will go crazy, experience negative mental and physical effects. When criminals commit crime, they expect and are ready for the consequences, Assange never expected to be prosecuted by thr US never having stepped foot on US soil.

I think Assange’s release signals a new chapter for Wikileaks

I assume part of the plea deal is that Assange will not engage in any similar activities that landed him in trouble the first time. And even if it wasn't, if I were Assange, I'd probably take a loooooong break from it all and spend time with my family.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Please don’t do this. This is a right-wing tactic: “I’m not making any claims, I’m just asking questions.”

It's literally not. The article makes it clear there are facts many people are not aware of, and they need to know these to then be able to make an informed decision. I have defended Assange and his character at several points in the article. And frankly I don't really care what tactics the right wing decides to use, it's not gonna prevent me from living my life.

“Collateral murder” absolutely was damaging to the US government. It showed the callous disregard the US military had for (non-white) human life and it put them under a lot of scrutiny. It also helped a lot of “fence-sitters” take a side opposing the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So nothing happened.

Because that’s US policy. Not prosecuting them was also a bad look for US govt.

So nothing happened.

What? This claim needs arguments.

This is proven in the article by Wikileaks' own webpage from 2006 which is linked earlier in the article.. sorry but did you actually read through it?

“A golden prison.” lmao

We agree with each other though?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

So nothing happened.

Yeah, no shit. What did you expect? The US to go "oh sorry, we'll stop existing now"? The US empire won't crumble after one embarrassing video. You can't make the claim Assange/Wikileaks is a US asset just because their leaks didn't lead to the collapse of the US or significant change.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You can’t make the claim Assange/Wikileaks is a US asset just because their leaks didn’t lead to the collapse of the US or significant change.

Did ye just handwave a bunch of evidence right here in the article?

Again, notably absent were US soldiers, intelligence analysts, senatorial aides or anything of the sort. But somehow, Wikileaks easily found Chinese dissidents to help them (despite Chinese dissidents saying for years that speaking up against the Chinese government is very dangerous to their lives!)

John Young, the founder of cryptome.org and a member of Wikileaks from the start, left the group in early 2007, calling it a “CIA conduit.” He has since rescinded that statement, but leaked more than 150 pages of emails sent between Wikileaks founders when he left.

It is however concerning that in 2011, Assange told Reuters that “China is [Wikileaks’] real enemy” and that Wikileaks was looking at ways to circumvent their “censorship”,

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is however concerning that in 2011, Assange told Reuters that “China is [Wikileaks’] real enemy” and that Wikileaks was looking at ways to circumvent their “censorship”,

That could be his "free speech absolutist" stance or perhaps his Australian/Anglo bias seeping in. I don't think it proves or indicates that he was a CIA asset. Hardcore Maoists also hate the current Chinese government/system, are they CIA assets too?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

But consider the other evidence I just told ye;

if he wasn't indirectly an asset,

why tf did he join it when the website seemed to pried open to CIA influence as 'CIA conduit' and the acceptance of Chinese dissidents as such, according to co-founder John Young?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

What do you mean join it? Didn't he start Wikileaks? As I said, the whole supporting Chinese dissidents thing is his free speech absolutist stance: if he supports US dissidents leaking stuff about the US govt. he also supports Chinese dissidents doing the same. That's what the idea behind Wikileaks was, a global dissident platform.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I never made the claim that Assange is a US asset but I did say in the original article, and still say, that nothing happened after the Collateral Murder video, so what is even your argument? Did something happen after Collateral Murder, or not?

In the broader picture that the US military may have leaked Collateral Murder themselves, it would have played right in their hands to release it. That's the argument.