Just reported on CNBC. His 8 year residency in the Ecuadorian embassy in London is finally over: In a sovereign decision Ecuador withdrew the asylum status to Julian Assange after his repeated violations to international conventions and daily-life protocols. #EcuadorSoberano pic.twitter.com/pZsDsYNI0B— Lenín Moreno (@Lenin) April 11, 2019 "Violating Daily-Life protocols" LOL. He probably kept forgetting to flush the toilet. Discuss.
Like the UK being told off by the EU for the fact the dog ate our homework, (we've been given an extension until October to do it again), I've been told off by teacher Doc 'W' so am cross-posting my post in the other thread, here... The significance of him is the information he released about the actions of various western governments, mainly the US. Other than that, he HAS no significance. Of course, personally he seems to be a bit of a scumbag from what we can gather but the veracity of that claim has still yet to be tested in court, (albeit the reasons for which he's entirely responsible). So this constant concentration on him as an individual is completely missing the point, IMO, and diverts attention from the fact we were being routinely watched by 'big brother'. Whether the russkies are doing the same with their people and have gained enormously from his actions doesn't change THAT!!!!
WL and Assange blew cover when they conspired to help get Trump elected Doesn't really seem like the actions of freedom campaigners
Your post does not make any more sense here than it did in the other thread where you posted it. Thanks for playing, though. The significance of him is him being (in your words), a bit of s scumbag. As for the value if wikileaks as an organization, I agree that it shines a light into certain things governments and other do, however, it traffics in stolen merchandise.
If only we could get the Saudis to question him about the Russian involvement in the Trump campaign... Oh wait... What?
I'm just trying to get people to recognise that people and organisations can have significance in one area and not another. Really? Isn't that the same with ANY whistleblower? I've been reading increasingly hysterical and OTT posts about him since he released the stuff about Hildawg and, rather irritatingly for me, from people who were MORE than happy to applaud his actions when he was having a pop at the 'deep state'. These are the SAME people who are also quite happy about the DS when they think it will rein in donny tiny hands' latest lunacy. I just don't think we can be so.... I'm gonna go with 'flexible'...with our moral outrage. If releasing stuff about the CIA watching all of us and Russia's rampant criminality, (all of which was fine, apparently), was bad then so is Hildawg's manipulation of the DNC.
I think you are missing the point: Assange, WikiLeaks and Snowden, went from whistle blowers to Russian Assets. The way Wikileaks dropped the information on Hillary (which for the most part was inconsequential) was obtained through Russian sources and leaked at Putin-Trump's convenience and weaponized using Russian intelligence tactics, much in the same way it was done with Brexit. Yes, we need to protect whistle-blowers to some extent, except when they run to your swore enemy and give them all the information they have and then act on their behalf.
I would feel sorry and be seriously concerned if Wikileaks was still a honest broker and whistleblower, but this dude is basically a Trump and Putin ally, a bigot and an enemy of democracy. The dude used and abused the tools of his organization to help a racist, fascist and crooked moron elected. That is unconscionable. No hero to me and to a lot of minorities.
Remember kids, if you see something say something* *really embarrassing somethings to the ruling class not included
Not really. The swing portions of Michigan and Wisconsin are not hotbeds of Wikileaks activity. Trump got elected because Hillary took a knee on the 3 yard line.
Stop saying "Hilldawg." It just makes you sound foolish. There is not "deep state," not at least in the way the right wing media and Trump portray it. This is not the same as "any whistleblower," as not all whistleblowers deal in illegally obtained information. Wikileaks should be the source of leaked information about "Russia's rampant criminality." That should come from legitimate intelligence and news sources. Hillary Clinton did not "manipulate" the DNC. She was the DNC's chosen candidate. Hell, in 2016, she essentially WAS the DNC. There is a huge difference there.
Not everything is about the United States. The rest of the world being made aware of how they do politics and diplomacy was very useful in my opinion
So, as I re-read this a 5th time (because it is garbled), you seem to be blowing off the significance of the rape charge (not just allegation, but actual charge) because he exposed the significant of the US information gathering. It is equally possible that he did expose the US information gathering, and equally significant is a rapist.
I agree that not everything is or should be about the United States. However, the topic of conversation specifically is about the United States. Once again, what "favor" has Julian Assange ever done for anybody?