WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to his homeland Australia aboard a charter jet on Wednesday, hours after pleading guilty to obtaining and publishing U.S. military secrets in a deal with Justice Department prosecutors that concludes a drawn-out legal saga.

The criminal case of international intrigue, which had played out for years, came to a surprise end in a most unusual setting with Assange, 52, entering his plea in a U.S. district court in Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands. The American commonwealth in the Pacific is relatively close to Assange’s native Australia and accommodated his desire to avoid entering the continental United States.

Assange was accused of receiving and publishing hundreds of thousands of war logs and diplomatic cables that included details of U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. His activities drew an outpouring of support from press freedom advocates, who heralded his role in bringing to light military conduct that might otherwise have been concealed from view and warned of a chilling effect on journalists. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.

Assange raised his right fist as he emerged for the plane and his supporters at the Canberra airport cheered from a distance. Dressed in the same suit and tie he wore during his earlier court appearance, he embraced his wife Stella Assange and father John Shipton who were waiting on the tarmac.

  • @NOT_RICK
    link
    English
    285 months ago

    A real journalist would have redacted the names of Afghani informants so they wouldn’t run the risk of being killed by the Taliban

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -115 months ago

      that doesn’t make him not a real journalist. sloppy, unprofessional, maybe, but he’s still a real journalist.

        • @Psychodelic
          link
          55 months ago

          I’m sorry if this is a bit too unrelated but would you say the same about Snowden?

          I’m not as well informed on Assange but I tend to find the “espionage” criticism lacking, personally, since it seems to mainly favor the generally terrible foreign policy actions of the US empire and not so much the people of the US who are for the most part against those actions but have little recourse what with the 2 party system and having a plutocratic system of government

            • @Psychodelic
              link
              15 months ago

              Oh weird, that was not the impression I got from the many comments you made criticizing them for their brave actions.

              I would tend to blame any negative fallout on the US government, personally. If they weren’t committing atrocities regular people wouldn’t have had to take the huge risk/be put at risk.

              It’s like getting upset at a victim of police brutality for not working with the police

              • @disguy_ovahea
                link
                0
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Their actions were brave until they became clouded by fame. Then both of them made it about leverage and made crucial mistakes that lead to threatened lives. I supported them in the past, prior to their dangerous missteps. I no longer comment in support of either of them.

                A good example of responsible whistleblowing would be from the recent resignations from the Department of Defense. They gave very detailed accounts of information suppression while they were tasked with collecting information on civilian casualties in Gaza. None of the information they disclosed exposed confidential informants or put lives at risk.

                It’s not just possible to be a responsible whistleblower, it’s imperative.

                • @Psychodelic
                  link
                  -25 months ago

                  You’re saying they should’ve just resigned? How would we have learned about PRISM without evidence?

                  I don’t know what you’re referring to about info suppression. Did we learn anything or just that we don’t know everything? How is that more helpful? Or, for who is it more helpful?

                  • @disguy_ovahea
                    link
                    2
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    No, I’m saying they shouldn’t have left the names unredacted in their leaks. That put people in danger.

                    Assange was a journalist. He wasn’t a government official.

          • @disguy_ovahea
            link
            95 months ago

            He leaked unredacted confidential information that directly led to the assassination of Afghani informants.

            That’s a little more than just “sloppy journalism.”

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -15 months ago

                  do you see another way for him to go home? i don’t believe any guilty pleas, given how malicious prosecution is used as a cudgel.

                  • @disguy_ovahea
                    link
                    3
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    That’s your prerogative, and your opinion. If he were responsible in his duties as a journalist, and redacted the names of informants and agents, I’d have a different opinion. I think his actions were reckless and irresponsible.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    15 months ago

                    Chelsea Manning faced trial was convicted, and has been free since 2017, and she got to cuck Elon Musk, that is a true hero. She didn’t handle leaking the information in the best way, and was given bad advice by Assange, but she didn’t get kicked out of an embassy for running an election interference campaign.

                  • @afraid_of_zombies
                    link
                    05 months ago

                    Should have thought of that before taking Putin’s side. Espionage is a messy business where the government that funds you will abandon you.

          • @afraid_of_zombies
            link
            25 months ago

            He helped a government get the candidate of their choice elected by manipulation of data dumps and spent a month before the election screaming how he had more dirt on one candidate.

              • @afraid_of_zombies
                link
                15 months ago

                Don’t gaslight me. I remember that Russian agent in October 2016 yelling about Hillary Clinton and stuff he said he had on her. Literally every single time I heard, read, or watched the news his fucking face was there going on and on about the embassy bombing or the emails.

                Sorry your boy sucks Putin off but I am willing to bet when he does the condom doesn’t mysteriously break.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  25 months ago

                  it’s not gaslighting. you are making assumptions about motivations that directly contradict what he has said.

                  • @afraid_of_zombies
                    link
                    05 months ago

                    Did he or did he not repeatedly claim to have dirt on Hillary Clinton one month before the election?

                    No evasions, no reframing, answer the question please.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              I object to the supposition that Russia wanted trump to win. I believe Russia wanted Americans divided and trump was simply a means to that end.

      • @NOT_RICK
        link
        English
        85 months ago

        Sloppy would be missing some punctuation and grammar. The guy has blood on his hands just like the US government does. Also, he aided (some would say manipulated) Manning in her leak of the documents in a way that no journalist would or should do. Journalists report the story, Assange has repeatedly shown himself to be a self aggrandizer that is the story.

          • @NOT_RICK
            link
            English
            45 months ago

            I never said it was. Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is. Not something journalists make a habit of doing, either.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -35 months ago

              Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is.

              but shouldn’t be if the goal is to expose wrongdoing in a journalistic publication.

            • @[email protected]OP
              link
              fedilink
              -45 months ago

              Journalists do it all the time. That’s where they used unnamed sources and have gone to jail to protect those sources. Or maybe you’re too young to remember Deep Throat.

              • @NOT_RICK
                link
                English
                45 months ago

                I know who deep throat is. There’s a big difference between refusing to cooperate with an investigation and name names of confidential sources that have provided information versus actively aiding a person in absconding with information. The courts agree with me too, considering John Lawrence was released after a day by an appellate court. Also notable that his charge was merely contempt whereas Assange’s was espionage.

                • @[email protected]OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -25 months ago

                  Please explain how Assange ‘actively aided’ his source in getting the info.

                  I’ll wait.

                  • @NOT_RICK
                    link
                    English
                    85 months ago

                    You can read about “Nathaniel” here and how the relationship between Manning and WL started. Manning herself implies the relationship was manipulative.

                    Over the next few months, I stayed in frequent contact with Nathaniel. We conversed on nearly a daily basis, and I felt we were developing a friendship. The conversations covered many topics, and I enjoyed the ability to talk about pretty much anything, and not just the publications that the WLO was working on.

                    In retrospect, I realize these dynamics were artificial, and were valued more by myself than Nathaniel. For me, these conversations represented an opportunity to escape from the immense pressures and anxiety that I experienced and built up throughout the deployment. It seemed that as I tried harder to “fit in” at work, the more I seemed to alienate my peers, and lose respect, trust and the support I needed.

                    In their chat logs Nathaniel assisted Manning in attempting to crack a password hash to attempt to cover up the source of the leaks. Thats where the journalistic line was crossed in my eyes.

              • @NOT_RICK
                link
                English
                55 months ago

                I’d say because most follow an ethics code, as much as I feel there was a public interest in those documents coming out, but with proper sanitation to protect lives.

                  • @NOT_RICK
                    link
                    English
                    10
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    I was talking about protecting the Afghani informants from the Taliban.

                    We knew about the spies and people who collaborate with U.S. forces. We will investigate through our own secret service whether the people mentioned are really spies working for the U.S. If they are U.S. spies, then we know how to punish them.

                    — Zabihullah Mujahid

                    I reviewed the statement of someone that a London paper claimed to be speaking for some part of the Taliban. Remember, the Taliban is actually not a homogenous group. And the statement, as far as such things go, was fairly reasonable, which is that they would not trust these documents; they would use their own intelligence organization’s investigations to understand whether those people were defectors or collaborators, and if so, after their investigations, then they would receive appropriate punishment. Now, of course, that is — you know, that image is disturbing, but that is what happens in war, that spies or traitors are investigated.

                    — Julian Assange

                    Assange is so casual about the potential human cost of his actions. The guy is a prick.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      -125 months ago

      As stated by ikidd above, it was up to the publishers to clean up the releases before printing/posting them.