The USA is to give the UK diplomatic “assurances” regarding Julian Assange's possible extradition. What to make of these? And what about Joe Biden's recent statements on Assange's home country Australia?
The Embassy suddenly alleged to the media that it had all these problems with him after Ecuador had a change of government to a right wing that would be more sympathetic to US objectives.
“Julian Assange has launched a case against the Ecuadorian government for alleged “violation of fundamental rights”, the latest episode in an escalating row between the Australian founder of anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks and his host government.”
This spat between Ecuador and Assange began months before
Correa left office. Below is the reasoning why the leftist president began putting more rules in place over the embassy.
"We did notice that he was interfering in the elections and we do not allow that because we have principles, very clear values, as we would not like anyone to interfere in our elections,” he said. “We are not going to allow that to happen with a foreign country and friend like the US.”
Correa granted asylum in 2012 to Assange, who took refuge in the country’s London embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden on sexual assault allegations, which he denies. Correa fueled his rise to power on anti-US vitriol and aligned with Assange after WikiLeaks published highly classified Pentagon materials.
Correa’s comments came one day after CNN published an exclusive report about surveillance reports that describe how Assange transformed the Ecuadorian embassy into a command center and orchestrated a series of damaging disclosures that rocked the 2016 presidential campaign in the United States.
The report cited hundreds of surveillance documents detailing Assange’s time inside the embassy. The documents describe how Assange met with Russians and world-class hackers at critical moments and acquired powerful new computing and network hardware to facilitate data transfers just weeks before WikiLeaks received hacked materials from Russian operatives.
“WikiLeaks’ justification was that they were providing truthful information,” Correa told CNN. “Sure, but (it) was just about Hillary Clinton. Not about (Donald) Trump. So, they were not saying all the truth. And not saying all the truth is called manipulation. And we are not going to allow that.”
No worries, there’s a lot of narratives about assange being pushed around lately.
As I said originally, I don’t think he deserves to be put in a black box or anything. But I do believe he’s a self important ass, who is probably extremely unpleasant to be around.
Most of my opinions on him were formed around how he treated his original team at wikileaks. He did release information that needed to released, but the way the dude released the information was against the wishes of his very capable (at the time) team, who were highly (rightly) concerned about endangering their sources.
Hell, his original security architect stole their servers and destroyed them afterwards because Assange was constantly going rogue and ignoring security protocols.
Any “journalist” willing to endanger their sources or their opsec for headlines and personal glory isn’t a journalist imo.
“Julian Assange has launched a case against the Ecuadorian government for alleged “violation of fundamental rights”, the latest episode in an escalating row between the Australian founder of anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks and his host government.”
This spat between Ecuador and Assange began months before Correa left office. Below is the reasoning why the leftist president began putting more rules in place over the embassy.
"We did notice that he was interfering in the elections and we do not allow that because we have principles, very clear values, as we would not like anyone to interfere in our elections,” he said. “We are not going to allow that to happen with a foreign country and friend like the US.” Correa granted asylum in 2012 to Assange, who took refuge in the country’s London embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden on sexual assault allegations, which he denies. Correa fueled his rise to power on anti-US vitriol and aligned with Assange after WikiLeaks published highly classified Pentagon materials. Correa’s comments came one day after CNN published an exclusive report about surveillance reports that describe how Assange transformed the Ecuadorian embassy into a command center and orchestrated a series of damaging disclosures that rocked the 2016 presidential campaign in the United States. The report cited hundreds of surveillance documents detailing Assange’s time inside the embassy. The documents describe how Assange met with Russians and world-class hackers at critical moments and acquired powerful new computing and network hardware to facilitate data transfers just weeks before WikiLeaks received hacked materials from Russian operatives. “WikiLeaks’ justification was that they were providing truthful information,” Correa told CNN. “Sure, but (it) was just about Hillary Clinton. Not about (Donald) Trump. So, they were not saying all the truth. And not saying all the truth is called manipulation. And we are not going to allow that.”
I stand corrected. Thanks! My memory is at fault here.
No worries, there’s a lot of narratives about assange being pushed around lately.
As I said originally, I don’t think he deserves to be put in a black box or anything. But I do believe he’s a self important ass, who is probably extremely unpleasant to be around.
Most of my opinions on him were formed around how he treated his original team at wikileaks. He did release information that needed to released, but the way the dude released the information was against the wishes of his very capable (at the time) team, who were highly (rightly) concerned about endangering their sources.
Hell, his original security architect stole their servers and destroyed them afterwards because Assange was constantly going rogue and ignoring security protocols.
Any “journalist” willing to endanger their sources or their opsec for headlines and personal glory isn’t a journalist imo.
Yeah, I’m on broadly the same page as you. Human rights aren’t dependent on being a likeable person or even on lack of criminality.
I also think bad, reckless and immoral journalists are still journalists.