When corporate power is held accountable -- even as it seeks to make a large minority or more of our population redundant and destroy our planet -- we are better for it. I have written extensively about Clinton/her surrogates' media manipulation and DNC collusion before #DNCLeaks, yet faced extensive problems with Facebooks, the sites I've written for, my internet connectivity, etc. -- and it wasn't Assange or the Russians, much more likely Hillary and the DNC. In fact, today my modem stopped working. The US government is working extremely hard to cover up and distract from issues of corporate power -- even the Convention rarely addressed it head on. Worry less about the messenger, but when the message is valid for Goodness' sake address it America (and American media) to bring overdue peace, justice, and sustainability to our world!
14
Julian Assange is being confronted now because he is now dishonest with the press.
- In all his recent interviews, when confronted about the "effective" result that all his recent releases hurt only Democrats, he either dissembled, denied the effect, or pretended he was asked a different question. He even denied that logical arguments about those effects were even logical (even when they were simple or obvious.) All of these obfuscations of the facts are dishonesties.
- When Wikileaks' offer a "reward" for the killer of the DNS staffer, Assange effectively acknowledged "some" relationship with the staffer (direct or indirect). Yet he repeatedly denied that the reward even COULD POSSIBLY imply a relationship, when such a implication is definitely possible. This denial not just of facts but logic is dishonest. And reporters are getting sick of it.
- When confronted about his disclosure of personal information (like SS#'s, birthdays, cell # and home addresses) exposed these people to harassment or ID theft, he dissembled again or refused to acknowledge it. These refusals to acknowledge the consequences of his actions is yet another form of dishonesty.
Contrast this with Edward Snowden. Snowden disclosed full information, just enough to prove his claims were true, did not disclose personal information about citizens, and never obfuscated the consequences of his actions. Lumping Snowden's releases and Assange's recent release into the same category is bunk.
- In all his recent interviews, when confronted about the "effective" result that all his recent releases hurt only Democrats, he either dissembled, denied the effect, or pretended he was asked a different question. He even denied that logical arguments about those effects were even logical (even when they were simple or obvious.) All of these obfuscations of the facts are dishonesties.
- When Wikileaks' offer a "reward" for the killer of the DNS staffer, Assange effectively acknowledged "some" relationship with the staffer (direct or indirect). Yet he repeatedly denied that the reward even COULD POSSIBLY imply a relationship, when such a implication is definitely possible. This denial not just of facts but logic is dishonest. And reporters are getting sick of it.
- When confronted about his disclosure of personal information (like SS#'s, birthdays, cell # and home addresses) exposed these people to harassment or ID theft, he dissembled again or refused to acknowledge it. These refusals to acknowledge the consequences of his actions is yet another form of dishonesty.
Contrast this with Edward Snowden. Snowden disclosed full information, just enough to prove his claims were true, did not disclose personal information about citizens, and never obfuscated the consequences of his actions. Lumping Snowden's releases and Assange's recent release into the same category is bunk.
22
Media aims to discredit Assange before info comes out on their candidate. DNC tells media to implicate Russia. Media complies.
22
this article is nothing but an attempt to discredit Wikileaks. Everytime something reflecting incompetence or sheer stupidty on the part of our government the media sells it for eyeballs then goes its traitorous. Spy novels have long acknowledge how stupid organizations are in their efforts to discredit people whom point this out. Why the NYT has gone down this lane is not simply a matter of obtaining eyeballs but a question of credibility. clearly they want to lose it
19
It is taking the Times so so long to get to the point. Add it up, add it all up, and do it quickly, before the election:
Trump won't release his tax records. George Will says his tax records would show Trump's in financial cahoots with Russians. Think about that, that Trump might be financially afloat because of the Russians. Putin controlled Paul Manafort, paying him millions. Did Putin make Trump hire Manafort so that Putin could keep the clamps on Trump? Putin received from Snowden/Assange America's secrets and the keys to the digital vaults. Why did Putin suddenly become active in the Mideast? And why are those Russian hacks helping Trump by using digital keys to attack Hillary Clinton and other Democrats?
Why do you think all those former employees of America's intelligence agencies came out against Trump publicly? They are constrained from revealing anything that flows from the information their agencies developed of Putin's tentacles into the U.S. political system, so they don't say why they are against Trump. Just that they are against him. Extraordinary.
Follow the money - your own reporting where it leads you - and hurry up.
Trump won't release his tax records. George Will says his tax records would show Trump's in financial cahoots with Russians. Think about that, that Trump might be financially afloat because of the Russians. Putin controlled Paul Manafort, paying him millions. Did Putin make Trump hire Manafort so that Putin could keep the clamps on Trump? Putin received from Snowden/Assange America's secrets and the keys to the digital vaults. Why did Putin suddenly become active in the Mideast? And why are those Russian hacks helping Trump by using digital keys to attack Hillary Clinton and other Democrats?
Why do you think all those former employees of America's intelligence agencies came out against Trump publicly? They are constrained from revealing anything that flows from the information their agencies developed of Putin's tentacles into the U.S. political system, so they don't say why they are against Trump. Just that they are against him. Extraordinary.
Follow the money - your own reporting where it leads you - and hurry up.
20
NY Times knows Assange is about to unload material that will end Hillary's chances in this election, and are trying to neutralize it in advance. Good luck, she is toast
18
Would media attacks on Wikileaks be as intense if it was exposing corruption in Saudi Arabia?
DNC emails showed their influence over media talking points and it's not unusual for groups to lobby media to slant the story.
Encouraging accuracy and facts should be the role in media.
DNC emails showed their influence over media talking points and it's not unusual for groups to lobby media to slant the story.
Encouraging accuracy and facts should be the role in media.
13
A despicable individual.
14
This article may or may not present the facts of the issue in a truthful and insightful manner. I only wish that is sounded less like disinformation.
I think it's time the NYT hired someone to make sure that such articles don't come across as casting everyone who has something bad to say about the US as a commie Russia stooge...
I think it's time the NYT hired someone to make sure that such articles don't come across as casting everyone who has something bad to say about the US as a commie Russia stooge...
14
nyt celebrates this guy when it suits, and demonizes him when he doesn't suit their political agenda. the propaganda has begun to rapidly erode the once great journalism. nice work.
17
"If Mr. Assange appreciated the irony of the moment — denouncing censorship in an interview on Russia Today, the Kremlin-controlled English-language propaganda channel — it was not readily apparent."
I wonder whether the NY Times appreciates the irony of this moment--the pot mocks the kettle of its color. In what is essentially a propaganda piece, the Times accuses the Russians of propaganda. This seems now to have become a form of meta-irony in its concern with propaganda.
One thinks of motes and logs in eyes that are in need of removal.
I wonder whether the NY Times appreciates the irony of this moment--the pot mocks the kettle of its color. In what is essentially a propaganda piece, the Times accuses the Russians of propaganda. This seems now to have become a form of meta-irony in its concern with propaganda.
One thinks of motes and logs in eyes that are in need of removal.
17
The NYT has to attack anyone that makes it hard for their queen to rise to the presidency. I was wondering when they'd jump on Assange.
17
He's become petulant.
6
Wikileaks isn't perfect, and Assange isn't a saint. Big deal. The pragmatic question I ask as a member of the 99% is whether we are better off with or without the Assanges and Snowdens of this world. The world and it's elites need more accountability, not less.
20
I applaud Julian Assange for his journalistic integrity in exposing the lying of HRC and the treachery of the Democrat establishment in their rigging of the Dem primaries to the detriment of Sen. Sanders.
The American public must be allowed to understand the full breath of Democratic establishment's rigging of our elections.
Our MSM is just another corporate mimic for the Democrat establishment!
The American public must be allowed to understand the full breath of Democratic establishment's rigging of our elections.
Our MSM is just another corporate mimic for the Democrat establishment!
15
Apparently, Russia believes the US Republican Party is not a threat to their interests. This says a lot.
39
Julian Assange is a victim and prisoner of the global fascist ruling oligarchy that controls virtually everything, in the ugly old racist, fascist, greed-driven, war-mongering USA and its evil associates: fascist Zionist Israel, NATO, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Turkey, etc. Assange's exposure of the countless, lies, killings, greed, cheating and theft of the destructive forces reveals truth in the face of constant propaganda designed to control the masses, just as this New York Times propaganda piece seeks to assassinate the character of Assange who dares to speak truth to malevolent power!
38
Assange is a living warning on the dangers of taking as axiomatic the purity of one's own motives. His quest for truth and transparency has devolved into a mean-spirited and petty settling of personal scores, and the pursuit of his own increasingly crackpot personal agenda.
33
I don't care whether Russia, or China, or Gabon, or Pluto, benefit when WikiLeaks reveals our dirty laundry, such as invading other countries for no good reason, targeting civilians with bombs and drones, and mass spying on our own citizens. America benefits by its citizenry becoming enraged, holding their government officials accountable, and changing our practices. Oh wait. Never mind.
50
Some days, I thought I was the only person who wondered why Snowden moved to Russia. Putin is not known for being a friendly, welcoming guy, but he let Snowden in with no fuss. Moscow isn't a city of sunny beaches.
Someone needs to look at Snowden's off-shore bank records, starting before he got a job contracting for NSA.
Someone needs to look at Snowden's off-shore bank records, starting before he got a job contracting for NSA.
18
The real question for the New York Times is how its coverage of Assange and Russia is affected by the upcoming election -- specifically, their impact on the democratic candidate.
It's one thing to curate the news. It's quite another to steer readers in a certain direction and manipulate the news. There's a name for that. It isn't "newspaper."
It's one thing to curate the news. It's quite another to steer readers in a certain direction and manipulate the news. There's a name for that. It isn't "newspaper."
48
I am not so concerned with Assange's reasons for doing what he does as I am with the accuracy of the released documents which pretty much speak for themselves. Needless to say, such documents can prove to be embarrassing to governments and to individuals.
For example, the leaked DNC documents proved embarrassing to DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and caused her resignation from the DNC. But who and why the documents were leaked to Assange pose intriguing questions.
Was it the Russians who have been hacking U.S. government agencies for years? I don't think so because the Russians do not have a reputation for leaking their hacked documents. Or was it Seth Rich, a DNC employee who had access to the leaked documents and who was brutally murdered shortly after the leak? Assange has said it was Rich but Assange declines to provide details of the leak for fear of compromising his sources and methods.
Even more intriguing is why U.S. authorities are deeming the Rich murder to be a robbery when nothing of value was taken? Is it because they'd rather not delve into such politically sensitive issues as to who might have wanted to harm or kill Rich? I'm not a conspiracy nut but I think that the fact that a number of individuals connected to the Clintons have inexplicably ended up dead cannot be ignored.
For example, the leaked DNC documents proved embarrassing to DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and caused her resignation from the DNC. But who and why the documents were leaked to Assange pose intriguing questions.
Was it the Russians who have been hacking U.S. government agencies for years? I don't think so because the Russians do not have a reputation for leaking their hacked documents. Or was it Seth Rich, a DNC employee who had access to the leaked documents and who was brutally murdered shortly after the leak? Assange has said it was Rich but Assange declines to provide details of the leak for fear of compromising his sources and methods.
Even more intriguing is why U.S. authorities are deeming the Rich murder to be a robbery when nothing of value was taken? Is it because they'd rather not delve into such politically sensitive issues as to who might have wanted to harm or kill Rich? I'm not a conspiracy nut but I think that the fact that a number of individuals connected to the Clintons have inexplicably ended up dead cannot be ignored.
25
The fact that Wikileaks may have gotten Clinton's classified emails from the Russian after they hacker her server only underscores how much damage she's done to the US. She should be in prison, not running for President.
17
The wikileaks emails weren't from Clinton's server, they were from the DNC. Big difference.
19
The US is either the world leader or it isn't. If it is, it should be able to cope with criticism without trying to change the subject to what someone else is doing. Having taught and parented young children, this tactic is sadly very familiar. ("He was cheating too!" ) Russian officials are often charged with exactly this kind of answer to criticism. (It's called whataboutism.)
How is it a defense for the world's leading democracy that Russia or some other non-democracy has even more skeletons in its closet than we do?
How is it a defense for the world's leading democracy that Russia or some other non-democracy has even more skeletons in its closet than we do?
25
The hard right in this country, especially the CIA and Pentagon, blamed the loss of their murderous insanity in Vietnam on the press.
They couldn't dispute the truth of what happened at My Lai, the effects of napalm and Agent Orange, the truth about Tiger Cages torture, or the accuracy of the Pentagon Papers -- so they charged that people like Dan Ellsberg were traitors for revealing the information, and that the New York Times, et al. were traitors for having published it.
Now we have the Times attacking another journalist, Julian Assange, in the same way: agent of Moscow -- just as critics of the US invasion of Vietnam were denounced as agents of Hanoi.
We are through the looking glass. Like the Judith Miller-Iraq invasion propaganda, this story will go down in history.
They couldn't dispute the truth of what happened at My Lai, the effects of napalm and Agent Orange, the truth about Tiger Cages torture, or the accuracy of the Pentagon Papers -- so they charged that people like Dan Ellsberg were traitors for revealing the information, and that the New York Times, et al. were traitors for having published it.
Now we have the Times attacking another journalist, Julian Assange, in the same way: agent of Moscow -- just as critics of the US invasion of Vietnam were denounced as agents of Hanoi.
We are through the looking glass. Like the Judith Miller-Iraq invasion propaganda, this story will go down in history.
37
Assange is a bigot who hates the west. Maybe he works for Putin. Maybe he is just his unaware puppy.
21
The Kremlin aims and Assange pulls the trigger. For anybody who knows something about the ways the KGB/FSB operates, all the "coincidences" mentioned in this article are heavy enemy fire. The only question is exactly what description better befits Assange: "useful idiot" (Lenin) or "petty thief running around on the Internet" (Serguey Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, in a remark made before Wikileaks and the Kremlin got in bed together).
16
Well it's obvious what we need to do. We need to stop the truth from being revealed. We need to cover up, hide, conceal, and if necessary, destroy the truth in order to give the US the advantage over the mean, vicious, nasty, Russians who have refused to kiss the hind quarters of every powerful nation that ever existed including Nazi Germany, Prussia, France, England and worst of all the "exceptional", "exclusive" USA despite the fact that as every American knows WE are the side that God plays on. Yes, Jesus said "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free" but He had His fingers crossed knowing that some day the USA would exist and be forgiven for lying, overthrowing democratically elected governments, slavery, imperialism etc. In OUR case leaking the truth is just plain wrong. Hey smart guys: If the truth hurts us, is it possible that we might not be so "holy" after all?
35
Well, this is rich. The paper that published the Pentagon Papers now is getting all weepy about Assange. Could it be that the Pentagon Papers hurt a Republican administration, which made them happy enough to make a hero out of Daniel Ellsberg, but "leaks' hurts a democrat administration so all of a sudden, even though Ellsberg is still a leftist saint, Assange is a villain. Got news for you fellas; you aren't fooling anybody.
53
vain and childlike... sees the world in terms of how he is treated. Guess we know who he'll be supporting in the coming election.
10
Guessing again eh? I doubt that counts as facts, much like this entire article, which is based on guesses and circmstantial "evidence". This is simply an opinion piece, or more accurately, a link baiting piece of writing meant to provoke reaction, and raise subscriptions. There is no solid piece of evidence to prove any of it, simply speculation, much like your attempt.
6
This is the third time I have tried to post a comment encouraging readers to look at the Wikileaks reply to this article. The two other comments have been censored by the NYT staff.
40
I posted a comment yesterday on the dearth of articles about Hillary Clinton and also the lack of straight-news media - it was censored by The Times as well.
25
"if you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to hide, thus no revelation of any secret can harm you", or so it was said in defense of mass surveillance of any and everyone. How things change when the shoe is on the other foot!
20
The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming! Block your ears and close your eyes they are trying to corrupt our youth into believing Hillary is one of the biggest grifters ever. Don’t they know it is Trump we don’t want?
18
The American people do not know what their own government is doing unless there is a leak. And our government cries foul because more often than not the revealed information is an embarrassment politically rather than an actual harm to U.S. citizens. If Mr. Putin is a source of providing transparency to what our democratic government is hiding from Congress and the public then I say, thank you Mr. Putin.
38
Hey Cohen. I suggest you move to Moscow since you like Putin so much. I absolutely sure you will face no discrimination in Russia's democracy. None whatsoever.
13
@kschur
Really? "Love it or leave it". Is your reply? Weak.
Really? "Love it or leave it". Is your reply? Weak.
25
All media, too late to see hubris of Assange, including Times. Assange, narcissist like Donald, craves attention yet won't face own legal issues. A one-sided hacker--NOT able to hack Chinese, Russian diplomatic, gov't, secret files, so to keep limelight says will release something 'BIG' vs providing anything of note. Panama Papers' handling puts Wikileaks to shame in terms of good journalism, sharing credit, professionalism. Snowden found a way to make a name & money from stealing classified info. Gone back & forth on Snowden, but he should have found a different way to handle the issues even after he took the files. Bottom line, ignore Assange. 'What if everybody did that?" old children's book, The media should give Assange NO MORE time. We don't want to hear about what he's going to release. Why, like Snowden, Donald the demagogue does press give them so much unnecessary attention? The media fiddles while our world is literally burning up with fever. Assange, Snowden, donald, the red herring, don't matter. Pressure on Congress, on the UN on the leadership of all countries to get business out of government, political, and lobbying finance does as does committing to creating middle classes worldwide via taxation, and supporting the health, fitness, and healthcare of so many needy and #1 radical action on climate change.
Assange is totally misdirected as is the media. Become a good in the world. Put up or shut up Wikileaks. Release everything you have and go away.
Assange is totally misdirected as is the media. Become a good in the world. Put up or shut up Wikileaks. Release everything you have and go away.
6
The narrative the NYT has pushed is that people should not read the DNC hacks or anything else that would make Clinton or Democrats look bad because that would be giving Russian backed hackers what they want.
I have read about 50 articles about how evil Russians are trying to destroy America by releasing the truth to its citizens.
Look, I'm not going on bury my head in the sand just because Russian hackers are the source. I want to KNOW about what was actually in those hacked emails, but NYT has only published like 5 little articles about that.
It feels like the NYT is trying to change the real subject so that the DNC hacks somehow make Trump look bad. Trump is horrible, and will lose this fall. The more articles like this, the more I'm committed to voting Third Party. I don't care if Russia gets some sort of miniscule boost from releasing troves of data the citizens of America would never have seen. I'm actually grateful that they did so, and exposed the underbelly of our body politic. I hope they release more!
I have read about 50 articles about how evil Russians are trying to destroy America by releasing the truth to its citizens.
Look, I'm not going on bury my head in the sand just because Russian hackers are the source. I want to KNOW about what was actually in those hacked emails, but NYT has only published like 5 little articles about that.
It feels like the NYT is trying to change the real subject so that the DNC hacks somehow make Trump look bad. Trump is horrible, and will lose this fall. The more articles like this, the more I'm committed to voting Third Party. I don't care if Russia gets some sort of miniscule boost from releasing troves of data the citizens of America would never have seen. I'm actually grateful that they did so, and exposed the underbelly of our body politic. I hope they release more!
40
Wow, a new low. Guess when Wikileaks goes after HRC, that's when the gloves come off. Thanks for adding to the new Cold war hysteria. It's what I expect from the Times.
52
Assange is like any dictator over a fiefdom no matter how small. He started with admirable motives but than the need for more and more influence and power took hold until he released the names of gay people living in countries where being gay can be punishable by death. That is inforgivable. That makes him the demon. That makes him no longer about transparancy with purpose. That makes him a sleazy tabloid.
And itmis jot a wild theory to,say that if Russia hacks to get certain information that theynwpuld use Wikkileaks to disperse it. It is a conspiracy of convenience, of shared benefit.
Assange is the demon unconcerned about possible putting people to death. Shame on him!
And itmis jot a wild theory to,say that if Russia hacks to get certain information that theynwpuld use Wikkileaks to disperse it. It is a conspiracy of convenience, of shared benefit.
Assange is the demon unconcerned about possible putting people to death. Shame on him!
14
Assange's motives ought to be obvious, namely, how to inflict maximum damage on the United States. Little could accomplish that better than a Trump Presidency, hence the bias against Hillary in choosing which documents he leaks.
15
What an interesting theory: "Assange is a Russian "sympa" - if not a spy."
Look: there are two much more likely possible explanations for your, certainly, correct observation that "when Wikileaks finds something, it is mostly our muck - and hardly ever any of the Kremlin":
Possibility No.1: The Russian computers are better protected. I mean, in our latidudes, nothing is safe from whomsoever, but mostly NSA.
Possibility No.2: What concerns Kremlin muck, there is such a daily barrage of "information" (others call it Hate-Propaganda) in all our papers (incl. NYT) and media that it would seem hard (impossible) to find any more.
Possibility No. 3: Wikileaks are concentrating on real events and matters, not things that are invented to fool a credulous populace into believing anything. Now, whenever Wikileaks find anything over on Mr. Putin's side, the find, at the same time, the same thing (blown up x10) on ours - plus 15 things that we did (or were nearby, like Maidan/or President Sakashvili's Georgian artillery bombardment of his own minority in Avkhasia and S. Ossetia) and push, in our "news" into Putin's shoes.
- Logically, Wikileaks will find less over there.
Look: there are two much more likely possible explanations for your, certainly, correct observation that "when Wikileaks finds something, it is mostly our muck - and hardly ever any of the Kremlin":
Possibility No.1: The Russian computers are better protected. I mean, in our latidudes, nothing is safe from whomsoever, but mostly NSA.
Possibility No.2: What concerns Kremlin muck, there is such a daily barrage of "information" (others call it Hate-Propaganda) in all our papers (incl. NYT) and media that it would seem hard (impossible) to find any more.
Possibility No. 3: Wikileaks are concentrating on real events and matters, not things that are invented to fool a credulous populace into believing anything. Now, whenever Wikileaks find anything over on Mr. Putin's side, the find, at the same time, the same thing (blown up x10) on ours - plus 15 things that we did (or were nearby, like Maidan/or President Sakashvili's Georgian artillery bombardment of his own minority in Avkhasia and S. Ossetia) and push, in our "news" into Putin's shoes.
- Logically, Wikileaks will find less over there.
6
Assange is a coward, a criminal and a hypocrite who refuses to face the music for his own actions while preaching transparency in the affairs of others.
18
Was it only a few years ago that the NYT was bragging about its collaboration with Wikileaks? Why yes it was:
"Dealing with Assange and the Wikileaks Secrets", Jan 26, 2011
But that was then and this is now. Then the secrets were diplomatic cables and emails about the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. The source of the documents as well as who was hurt and helped by their release was not an issue. Now the secrets are emails that expose the Democratic party and their presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. And suddenly the source and beneficiary of these leaks is the story, not the details of the leaked documents.
I guess some secrets are better left alone, right?
"Dealing with Assange and the Wikileaks Secrets", Jan 26, 2011
But that was then and this is now. Then the secrets were diplomatic cables and emails about the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. The source of the documents as well as who was hurt and helped by their release was not an issue. Now the secrets are emails that expose the Democratic party and their presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. And suddenly the source and beneficiary of these leaks is the story, not the details of the leaked documents.
I guess some secrets are better left alone, right?
38
While the assertion of Assange's lack of criticism of Russia's cracking down on dissidents is valid it should be noted that Russia's fist is domestic while ours is global. Our economic power is still able to influence countries to our way of thinking with the threat of sanctions. The fact that Mr. Assange fears leaving the Embassy to face trial in Sweden proves the point. His fear that Sweden will expedite him to this country is not groundless.
19
Mr Assange is neither a Russian nor living in Russia. Many living in the USA are fed up with the chicanery, treachery with which America treats its own citizens as well as other nations. America undermines ITS OWN STATED values in its dealing with nations. Either through direct invasions or through invasions by its puppets or through financial undermining, it destroyed one Muslim state after another: Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan. If truth be told America is a friend to NO nation. Since 1777 America create wolf-packs, and installs itself as the ALPHA animal, and hunts down to devour other nations.
16
Hold on, WVa.;
Military industrial complex is not quite the American people; international oligarchs are not "We the People," they are an entirely different subspecies of humans.
Military industrial complex is not quite the American people; international oligarchs are not "We the People," they are an entirely different subspecies of humans.
8
@JRS
Have you noticed all the anti-Assange posts from users in DC? I feel like the Pentagon is working overtime.
Have you noticed all the anti-Assange posts from users in DC? I feel like the Pentagon is working overtime.
8
@Elfton,
Nope; I guess am not as smart as you.
Nope; I guess am not as smart as you.
Let's keep it real. If the United States actually adhered to its democratic principles, then there would be nothing for Mr. Assange or Russian hackers to expose in the first place. The example of the DNC's attempts to undermine Sanders' campaign and manipulate the outcome of the Democratic primaries is a case in point. The real problem is that such corruption is so rampant in our country--not the fact that its exposure has led to benefits for our enemies.
33
@Chrysanthemum - "Let's keep it real", indeed. The minute you got to whining about Sanders' campaign is when you lose some credibility, as that's your real complaint.
6
He is an Australian meddling in the United States' presidential election. What right does he think he has to do that?
There was as time when I had a certain amount of sympathy for him. After reading the charges against him in Sweden, I thought he had been caught up in an entrapment scheme in Sweden.
At this point, he'll either spend the rest of his life in the embassy or he'll emerge and face extradition for crimes against the US.
Good riddance.
There was as time when I had a certain amount of sympathy for him. After reading the charges against him in Sweden, I thought he had been caught up in an entrapment scheme in Sweden.
At this point, he'll either spend the rest of his life in the embassy or he'll emerge and face extradition for crimes against the US.
Good riddance.
13
"Meddling in the United States' presidential election"?
Look, I am the furthest thing from a Trump supporter, but Mr. Assange has every right to do that.
Mr. Assange is a journalist. I don't know where you studied civics, but he has just as much right as the London Observer, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, or any other media site to comment on a US election, and/or to reveal information about the election -- provided it is accurate, which it obviously is, since it's based on the DNC's own emails. In fact, he would have every right if he was just an ordinary citizen.
I suspect that if Julian Assange had revealed dirty tricks by the Trump campaign, that would be praised, instead of denounced as interference.
Some commenters here have actually suggested that comments aimed at affecting the outcome of the election are "criminal" -- as if the Times has not been trying to throw the election to Clinton from the get-go, elbowing not just Trump from the path, but Sanders and everybody else. The Times has every right to do this, as does Mr. Assange.
How much more shredding of the Constitution of the United States do you plan between now and November in order to guarantee a Clinton victory?
Look, I am the furthest thing from a Trump supporter, but Mr. Assange has every right to do that.
Mr. Assange is a journalist. I don't know where you studied civics, but he has just as much right as the London Observer, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, or any other media site to comment on a US election, and/or to reveal information about the election -- provided it is accurate, which it obviously is, since it's based on the DNC's own emails. In fact, he would have every right if he was just an ordinary citizen.
I suspect that if Julian Assange had revealed dirty tricks by the Trump campaign, that would be praised, instead of denounced as interference.
Some commenters here have actually suggested that comments aimed at affecting the outcome of the election are "criminal" -- as if the Times has not been trying to throw the election to Clinton from the get-go, elbowing not just Trump from the path, but Sanders and everybody else. The Times has every right to do this, as does Mr. Assange.
How much more shredding of the Constitution of the United States do you plan between now and November in order to guarantee a Clinton victory?
7
I don't want to comment on Mr. Assange, as he's been well described in the article, and judging by the comments, his image among the normal readers, is pretty dirty.
But I do want to note that WikiLeaks, the organization, has caused a lot of problems for average people - from women in Turkey, whose SSN were exposed via tweets by WikiLeaks, to people, who live in countries, where just talking to U.S. diplomats may be considered a crime big enough, so that these people will end their lives in jail, if not worse.
Here are some of the problems WikiLeaks has caused to innocent people:
- Outs gay people in Saudi Arabia;
- Reveals names of Afghanistan interpreters, who help the coalition forces after 2001, thus exposing them and their relatives to the bullets of the Taliban. As Mr. Assange told Nick Davies of The Guardian, “If an Afghan civilian helps coalition forces, he deserves to die.”
- John Wonderlich, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation said, “It’s not striving for objectivity. It’s more careless. When they publish information it appears to be in service of some specific goal, of retribution, at the expense of the individual.”
The fact that the NYT article says Mr. Assange *is* WikiLeaks, if correct, can only explain why WikiLeaks turned into an evil organizations, exposing instead of governmental secrets, the personal data - emails, SSN, addresses of millions of people around the world.
But I do want to note that WikiLeaks, the organization, has caused a lot of problems for average people - from women in Turkey, whose SSN were exposed via tweets by WikiLeaks, to people, who live in countries, where just talking to U.S. diplomats may be considered a crime big enough, so that these people will end their lives in jail, if not worse.
Here are some of the problems WikiLeaks has caused to innocent people:
- Outs gay people in Saudi Arabia;
- Reveals names of Afghanistan interpreters, who help the coalition forces after 2001, thus exposing them and their relatives to the bullets of the Taliban. As Mr. Assange told Nick Davies of The Guardian, “If an Afghan civilian helps coalition forces, he deserves to die.”
- John Wonderlich, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation said, “It’s not striving for objectivity. It’s more careless. When they publish information it appears to be in service of some specific goal, of retribution, at the expense of the individual.”
The fact that the NYT article says Mr. Assange *is* WikiLeaks, if correct, can only explain why WikiLeaks turned into an evil organizations, exposing instead of governmental secrets, the personal data - emails, SSN, addresses of millions of people around the world.
18
As a host for Airbnb, I meet all kinds of people from all walks of life. One, I'll never forget, worked in military intelligence. He told me about how Snowden's "noble" mission had taken the lives of his colleagues and threatened their families. These are people who can't be named because of national security; Americans who died in silence because their identities were exposed to those who wish to harm us.
17
Just think, if the NSA wasn't spying on the citizens of the US then Snowden would have never have exposed anything.
7
@Elfton - Just think, if Snowden had gone about this a different way, he'd still be in the U.S. rather than Russia, where he mistakenly thinks he is "free". Assange is a narcissistic egomaniac. I'll say this for Snowden, he's right to criticize Assange for his complete lack of care for the consequences of his actions, causing much harm to innocent people.
7
No proof for that oft repeated canard.
"Rule no.1 in both the CIA and MI6 is that identities are never, ever written down - neither their names or a description that would allow them to be identified.”
"Rule no.1 in both the CIA and MI6 is that identities are never, ever written down - neither their names or a description that would allow them to be identified.”
2
Nothing to fear here. We're a few scant years away from the indelible Technological Singularity, and scenarios such as this will be but a pittance.
1
On a related note, what I find particularly troublesome in this critical election year is that Russia seems to be focusing a substantial amount of its hacking efforts on Hillary Clinton and the DNC, apparently with the ultimate design of benefiting Donald Trump's election chances.
Remember also earlier in the presidential campaign when Trump would offer unsolicited compliments of Putin, which many political observers found to be particularly curious. Now we hear of Russian hackers attempting to actually hack into our voting machines. This is outrageous!...
The only "rigging" of this election which Trump had referred to in the past seems to be emanating exclusively from his side of the aisle with the GOP's deplorably rigorous attempts to suppress the Democratic vote through various means along with a string of other efforts that have been revealed to have come from "Russia with love".
Remember also earlier in the presidential campaign when Trump would offer unsolicited compliments of Putin, which many political observers found to be particularly curious. Now we hear of Russian hackers attempting to actually hack into our voting machines. This is outrageous!...
The only "rigging" of this election which Trump had referred to in the past seems to be emanating exclusively from his side of the aisle with the GOP's deplorably rigorous attempts to suppress the Democratic vote through various means along with a string of other efforts that have been revealed to have come from "Russia with love".
12
From Information Superman to Putin's Goebbels in just a few short years.
9
I can't help notice the difference between the Wikileaks approach, which releases all the data with a minimum amount of editorializing, and the NY Times approach, which gives little actual access and asks you to trust their source and their own integrity.
One approach provides real information about public corruption; the other hires journalists like Judith Miller. If Wikileaks were around before the Iraq War, maybe we would have read the actual intelligence estimates showing zero link between Saddam and Al Qaeda and zero evidence of WMDs. Instead, we got the sanitized Times version complete with shadowy pro-war sources being pimped by careerist, amoral "journalists."
Perhaps the most embarrassing part of the email revelations is that it appears that anyone with a press credential could have reported that the DNC was favoring Clinton. Instead, we got "sources from inside the DNC" propaganda pieces republished without comment and fluff pieces from a clearly unqualified press pool reporter following the Bernie campaign.
Next time, do us a favor and make clear that the paper is endorsing a candidate in their news section. It would spare me the wasted time of reading your American political reporting.
One approach provides real information about public corruption; the other hires journalists like Judith Miller. If Wikileaks were around before the Iraq War, maybe we would have read the actual intelligence estimates showing zero link between Saddam and Al Qaeda and zero evidence of WMDs. Instead, we got the sanitized Times version complete with shadowy pro-war sources being pimped by careerist, amoral "journalists."
Perhaps the most embarrassing part of the email revelations is that it appears that anyone with a press credential could have reported that the DNC was favoring Clinton. Instead, we got "sources from inside the DNC" propaganda pieces republished without comment and fluff pieces from a clearly unqualified press pool reporter following the Bernie campaign.
Next time, do us a favor and make clear that the paper is endorsing a candidate in their news section. It would spare me the wasted time of reading your American political reporting.
27
It is hardly the Russian government and/or Mr Putin who benefit most often from WikiLeak's and Mr Assange's revealations of certain secrets that the governments of the US and its 'allies' wish to keep from their populations ; rather it is these populations, who otherwise would have little chance to know what their governments are doing in their name. An example in point, of course, is the infamous decision on the part of the New York Times editors to withhold information on illegal domestic espionage by the NSA until after the US presidential elections of 2004. Some of the news is obviously not fit to print ; fortunately, despite the enormous pressure that has been and is being placed on Mr Assange and his organisation, they continue to publish that news....
Henri
Henri
14
I'd like to have someone hack into Assange's email and financial records. It wouldn't surprise me if Putin is bankrolling him as well as Snowden.
But of course we'll never know since Assange won't leak his own private business- only everyone's else's.
But of course we'll never know since Assange won't leak his own private business- only everyone's else's.
19
The long time supporters of Assange need to wake up and look at the fact that Assange is a Russian stooge who will do everything he can to undermine the US government - including helping Putin admirer, Donald J. Trump get elected president by releasing negative information about Hillary Clinton.
16
Whether he cares to expose HC or DT it makes no difference in my eyes.eyes. I question the motives of this egotistical,foreign rather creepy twit and who is financing him..
14
Its is clear that Journalism and freedom of Journalism always comes with a caveat which is about responsibility and objectivity. Mr Assange and his wikileaks have no right to intervene on foreign countries elections. Why hack? Why cannot they do a proper open journalism. Hacking is crime and Mr. Assange should be ashamed of himself. How can you call hacking a journalism? Please dont give Assange more coverage by writing an article. He is getting more publicity and we are just feeding into it. He should be condemned in serious terms. Ecuador which is hosting him is doing the biggest disservice. Shame on them. Human rights cannot be used as an excuse and an open pass for Mr Assange to do what he calls Journalism. It is an international crime and should be tried in International Law of Court or extradited to USA for hacking crime and many other crimes.
11
But American Values also require truth when making accusations. The article, for example, did not say he is "hacking." Nobody has said that. Also, you should be aware that the government of the United States hacks all the time and even listens to the private phone conversations of world leaders. American leadership in the world has been seriously compromised because of this and other outrages. You can live in your private world, but it not the real one.
15
"American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably
have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services. "
_____
If this statement is correct, how is that Assange's organization was able to spirit Edward Snowden out of China and on to Moscow so expeditiously that the State Dept. was unable to head it off? Maybe for Putin it was a no-brainer to take delivery of Snowden and the data files he absconded with, and required no special preparation. But it's also possible that Snowden had been played for some time, and the escape hatch had also been set up in advance, just in case.
have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services. "
_____
If this statement is correct, how is that Assange's organization was able to spirit Edward Snowden out of China and on to Moscow so expeditiously that the State Dept. was unable to head it off? Maybe for Putin it was a no-brainer to take delivery of Snowden and the data files he absconded with, and required no special preparation. But it's also possible that Snowden had been played for some time, and the escape hatch had also been set up in advance, just in case.
11
America and it's big bad Russian bear, why does today's generation continue to embrace those Happy Days of the cold war 1950s? Who's getting rich pushing this stuff?
Our biggest failure 100 years from now will be seen to be our not having taken advantage of Gorbachev, Yeltsin and the Fall of the Berlin wall to bring more peace to the world.
Jeebers people, same old same old, Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him?
Our biggest failure 100 years from now will be seen to be our not having taken advantage of Gorbachev, Yeltsin and the Fall of the Berlin wall to bring more peace to the world.
Jeebers people, same old same old, Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him?
15
If you recall, he managed to get out of Hong Kong and was en route somewhere else when the US pulled his passport. That's how he got stuck in the Moscow airport for 5 weeks.
12
I once thought Assange had some valid points. Now I think he is just a power-hungry jerk who is endangering everyone. Scary.
18
More scary and a bigger jerk than Trump? Because he's an Aussie?
2
Wait a minute. I thought NYTimes believed that the US is evil; the cause of world problems right down to hunger and over-population, and it's impact on global warming or climate change. I thought the US was a racist, materialistic country that should emulate the EU. What's the scope here - are we now thinking perhaps Snowden wasn't the innocent boy just trying to share with the globe? He went to China and then Russia - because those two super powers are the one's he prefers to share information with.
Now, how about an honest article on Soros? The Global Initiative, and all the other 'entities' that would like to bring the US down?
Now, how about an honest article on Soros? The Global Initiative, and all the other 'entities' that would like to bring the US down?
6
I guess I classify myself as something of a moderate liberal - if such an animal exists. Therefore, it's given me great pause to see so many appeasers within my group of Assange. To me, it was apparent from the beginning that this is a nefarious individual, trying to use his ill-gotten information to selectively advance an agenda which has been murky at best, while avoiding deportation to face sexual abuse charges he has allegedly committed under a banner of protection from that bastion of human rights Chile. It's interesting - but maybe not that ironic - that he and Donald Trump find themselves on the same side in supporting the near dictatorship of Putin. Strange bedfellows indeed.
9
If Assange is de facto abetting the Russian government, perhaps Ecuador should suspend his political asylum.
7
Assange and Snowden are arsonists. “Let’s pour gasoline everywhere and light a match! Oh what a pretty glow to bath myself in!” And so is Manning, who is not a whistleblower. If serious about the public interest (true whistleblowers), they would have brought specific concerns to the attention of any of a host of responsible entities, governmental and non-governmental – even the New York Times. But that would have required thoughtfulness and mature judgment. Instead, for their own amusement and petty aggrandizement, they callously threw everyone and everything (the bathwater and the baby) under the bus together. Maybe the three of them live in a fantasy world with no dangers that require quiet collaboration among civilized nations or people of good will risking their lives in intelligence gathering. A world where politicians are not murdered on Moscow streets, the president of Ecuador doesn’t intimidate journalists and subject them to “public denunciation and retaliatory litigation” (cite Human Rights Watch), Kim Jong-un does not want nuclear weapons, and terrorists do not kill innocents. But we do not live in that world, and Assange and Snowden in particular – in their ignorant arrogance – probably are unable to reflect on the extent to which they have blood and human suffering, past and future, on their hands. Instead, they cowardly hide themselves in the hands of some of the worst oppressors of human rights. As the New York Times observed, the irony is lost on them!
10
Julian Assange and Edward Snowden: Two men without a country.
5
Why is it always Russia, we now understand that the DNC tried to bury Bernie, your paper buried Bernie, all of the major media outlets did. It may help them, but does it not help us to see how the process is screwed up? Benefit us more? Why do you continue to push the agenda of HRC? Just do the news that is fit to print which includes bad stories about Hillary? Get Jill Stein into the debates. NYT we have 60% disapproval of both Hillary and The Donald.
24
You are correct, not one peep in this paper nor other main news venues regarding the also ran candidacy of Dr. Jill Stein who deserves a voice during this disastrous election of Clinton and Trump.
13
"I am wikiLeaks" says Julian Assange.
And what protocols does he follow? What standards? What ethics? Whatever is in his head at the moment and those are ultimately unknowable and subject to change.
And what reasons do we have to trust his judgment and character and abilities? None.
And what protocols does he follow? What standards? What ethics? Whatever is in his head at the moment and those are ultimately unknowable and subject to change.
And what reasons do we have to trust his judgment and character and abilities? None.
13
Sounds as though you are talking about the US govt. In that case, I couldnt agree more
11
Ah, the chickens are coming home to roost. We have meddled in the politics of other nations for so many years and are now getting a taste of our own medicine.
12
It may or may not be correct to release emails hacked from the Democratic national committee, but it is absolutely wrong to time the release of any such emails to influence a public election.
That act, intentionally monkeying with a democratic process by which we elect our leaders, should be recognized unambiguously as a criminal action.
Do criminals have a right to privacy in order to conceal their crimes? I think that's why we require search warrants to secure evidence based on probable cause.
But when the government goes over the line, and assumes the right to engage in mass surveillance, or secretly authorize torture, how can a society address governmental excess without whistle blowers and leakers and a free press?
Wikileaks occupies a strange intermediate space in the public square, functioning as a self-appointed ethics sheriff in an often unethical world.
What is needed, are clear ground rules regarding privacy of citizens, and clear oversight of governments internationally.
We need ethics in government, not zealots destroying our freedoms by"protecting us" in their mad fantasies of invented enemies and bizarre inclinations to control.
That act, intentionally monkeying with a democratic process by which we elect our leaders, should be recognized unambiguously as a criminal action.
Do criminals have a right to privacy in order to conceal their crimes? I think that's why we require search warrants to secure evidence based on probable cause.
But when the government goes over the line, and assumes the right to engage in mass surveillance, or secretly authorize torture, how can a society address governmental excess without whistle blowers and leakers and a free press?
Wikileaks occupies a strange intermediate space in the public square, functioning as a self-appointed ethics sheriff in an often unethical world.
What is needed, are clear ground rules regarding privacy of citizens, and clear oversight of governments internationally.
We need ethics in government, not zealots destroying our freedoms by"protecting us" in their mad fantasies of invented enemies and bizarre inclinations to control.
30
"It may or may not be correct to release emails hacked from the Democratic national committee, but it is absolutely wrong to time the release of any such emails to influence a public election. That action ... should be recognized unambiguously as a criminal action."
Huh?
The media do time releases of information to influence public elections all the time.
How would you propose to prevent this? Censor the media? Make such a revelation "a criminal action"?
Mr. Assange is a journalist. One can argue about the motives of the media, but if the material is true, if (for example) a political group or party (like Nixon, or Hillary Clinton) engages in skulduggery to prevent a free and fair election (such as the anti-Sanders maneuvers by the DNC, revealed in its emails), should that not be revealed? If not during the election period, then when? After it's too late for the public to do anything about it?
Huh?
The media do time releases of information to influence public elections all the time.
How would you propose to prevent this? Censor the media? Make such a revelation "a criminal action"?
Mr. Assange is a journalist. One can argue about the motives of the media, but if the material is true, if (for example) a political group or party (like Nixon, or Hillary Clinton) engages in skulduggery to prevent a free and fair election (such as the anti-Sanders maneuvers by the DNC, revealed in its emails), should that not be revealed? If not during the election period, then when? After it's too late for the public to do anything about it?
2
It has blown my mind for years the lack of criticism towards Assange and Snowden in the NY Times. As far as I am concerned they both are espionage figures working for the Russians and Chinese. Their entire goal from the start has been to undermine the Obama administration under the ploy that its all about freedom of information. Its funny to me that it took the Russians hacking into the DNC for the NY Times to change their tune on Wikileaks.
8
Funny how Assange's detractors use insults, and his supporters, facts.
19
I guess I cannot understand why the people whose "secrets" have been put on public view by Assange did not realize that information put on line is particularly vulnerable in these early days of digital data and information. The CIA, DoD, and like organizations needs to be able to keep national secrets. An if they are doing what they have done in the past with encrypting information, they are spending a lot of money for good people to try to first build unbreakable security tools and secondly break these tools. The rest of us mortals should follow the advice we received in our youth not to put anything we have written where it might get passed around if we don't want what we said on a newspaper's front page.
2
One commentator suggests that Assange may have been trying to trap Snowden. I wonder if it is more a case of collusion, given that the two have been closely connected in the past and what they seem to have in common.
1) the belief that they, by their own lights, have the knowledge and judgment to choose what information to leak
2) reliance on information acquired illegally
3) invasion of the right to privacy or confidentiality on the part of an individual or
organization
4) release of documents at moments strategically timed to disrupt specific American negotiations with allies and other nations
5) release of information to drive a wedge between the United States
and the European Union and NATO
6) motivation to seek revenge on the Obama administration for its intention to
proceed legally against them and engaging the same prosecutor to do so
7) murky ties to Russia and dealings with Putin plus actual time spent in Russia
A troubling convergence of connections.
1) the belief that they, by their own lights, have the knowledge and judgment to choose what information to leak
2) reliance on information acquired illegally
3) invasion of the right to privacy or confidentiality on the part of an individual or
organization
4) release of documents at moments strategically timed to disrupt specific American negotiations with allies and other nations
5) release of information to drive a wedge between the United States
and the European Union and NATO
6) motivation to seek revenge on the Obama administration for its intention to
proceed legally against them and engaging the same prosecutor to do so
7) murky ties to Russia and dealings with Putin plus actual time spent in Russia
A troubling convergence of connections.
2
Does anybody actually Assange's stated motives any more?
1
Julian assange is a self interested sleezeball. That is it in a nutshell. Now it is clear he relies on Putin and is an arm this man's intelligence services. He is a partisan and anything he does is as evil as people he cohorts with. Was there a day when he seemed to be helping the public discover dangerous truths, I think so. But that day is long gone and Assange is a scourge. The man is a sell out and a dangerous figure. We all know what Putin would do if he was his enemy, don't we.
5
It's pretty rich that NOW Assange is a threat because he is pretty clearly attempting to undermine the Democrat party in a presidential election. He was pretty cool in these quarters when he was just going after America in general or our international relations.
14
The usual crowd anxious to shoot the messenger, no suprise there: why would we even want to discuss our part in regime changes in Egypt and Ukriane as only two recent examples. " An increasingly dangerous world" we dare not utter who created this increasingly dangerous world, the mirror might crack along with the facades of our "allies". Thank, whomever, for Assange and Snowden. "To prefer having a voice over a country" will forever remain one of the inspirational moments in print.
16
The Times never stops trying to resurrect the Cold War. Since this only benefits the military contractors/merchants of death and increases the already crushing national debt for the United States this is a dead end. The Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s and the U.S. government led by Bill Clinton and politicians in both parties refused to take advantage of this opportunity to drastically downsize the military budget. end horrendous deficit spending and close most military bases outside the Western hemisphere. Instead they sent the Wall Street boys to loot Russia's natural treasures and wreck her economy with their "blessing". Now the Times is fretting because Assange, Snowden, etc. are leaking so called secrets that expose U.S. government officials in wrongdoing of all kinds. Instead of praising them the Times insinuates they are "foreign agents" albeit in a "nuanced manner". The Times needs to stop worrying about Russia which only has "ambitions" in her "near abroad" and does not seek world wide hegemony like the One World /New World Order White Collar Mafia headquartered in New York and London or the Red Chinese dictatorship which is currently the "counter balance" to the transnational banks and corporations. These constant attacks against the Russian government have driven them into a bad alliance with their old enemy Red China. Alienating Russia is literally insane. They are Europe's first line of defense against invasion from the Moslem South and Oriental East.
10
Wikileals may benefit Russia but they benefit us a whole lot more.
19
Setting aside the spy vs. spy simplistic thinking, what we know is that Assange is not being objective, nor is Russia.
Material coming out of Russia is being used by Assange to attack Hillary. He doesn't need to be anything but a little too full of his self-importance to miss that his weaknesses are being exploited to interfere in a foreign election.
The article spells it out pretty well.
As to DNC and all the other accusations against Hillary, in every case those who wish to attack Hillary are ignoring context and twisting meaning to make exaggerated claims of villainy. We all use email; have you never said something immoderate to anyone? If so, congratulations, you're not normal.
The DNC is made up of people.
Hillary is a person. So far, and dear knows it's been tried, nobody has been able to turn up malice aforethought, only a busy woman getting on with doing her best.
The Clinton Foundation is a charitable foundation that helps millions of people. It's reputation is a matter of public record. Only in bizarro world is this something to condemn rather than appreciate.
Material coming out of Russia is being used by Assange to attack Hillary. He doesn't need to be anything but a little too full of his self-importance to miss that his weaknesses are being exploited to interfere in a foreign election.
The article spells it out pretty well.
As to DNC and all the other accusations against Hillary, in every case those who wish to attack Hillary are ignoring context and twisting meaning to make exaggerated claims of villainy. We all use email; have you never said something immoderate to anyone? If so, congratulations, you're not normal.
The DNC is made up of people.
Hillary is a person. So far, and dear knows it's been tried, nobody has been able to turn up malice aforethought, only a busy woman getting on with doing her best.
The Clinton Foundation is a charitable foundation that helps millions of people. It's reputation is a matter of public record. Only in bizarro world is this something to condemn rather than appreciate.
12
Let's start a new Cold War because we all know how that went last time. The world vilifies all of Russia because of Putin. And next the world will vilify the United States because of the next U.S. President. I agree with Assange on one vital point: we all need freedom of the press in order to free ourselves of dictators.
8
How would the US be starting a new Cold War when Russia is the nation who has threatened international law, European security, treats the West as an existential enemy and is busy using cyber warfare and asymmetric informational war on the US and West?
3
@Jeff
The US has broken international law. NATO threatens Russia right up to its borders, treats Russia as an existential enemy to feed the Military Industrial Complex.
And if you think the US doesn't conduct cyber operations against Russia, well then you're hopeless.
The US has broken international law. NATO threatens Russia right up to its borders, treats Russia as an existential enemy to feed the Military Industrial Complex.
And if you think the US doesn't conduct cyber operations against Russia, well then you're hopeless.
6
@Efton
Russian "whataboutisms" and propaganda are no replacement for facts and reality. This very article and conversation exists because of Russian aggression.
Russian "whataboutisms" and propaganda are no replacement for facts and reality. This very article and conversation exists because of Russian aggression.
2
Don't shoot the messenger. No one has every disputed the enormous trove of documents released by either Assange or Snowden. These documents have been 100% accurate compared to the 30% honesty rating that Trump and Hillary have. They have shed light on the killing of innocent civilians, off shore tax evasions, overtly rigging the system against Bernie Sanders and of course, mass surveillance of all US emails including civilian correspondences. They shed light on our democracy in a way that no journalist is willing or able to do.
Whether Assange used a condom while having sex in Sweden (interestingly both "victims" refused to file charges), or whether he is self righteous, egotistical is not the issue. Even if Assange is a self serving evil person, or Putin lackey, this does not change the fact that he is helping to provide information to keep our democracy transparent and relatively honest. As imperfect as he is, Assange, along with Snowden has paid a steep personal price to keep our society open.
Whether Assange used a condom while having sex in Sweden (interestingly both "victims" refused to file charges), or whether he is self righteous, egotistical is not the issue. Even if Assange is a self serving evil person, or Putin lackey, this does not change the fact that he is helping to provide information to keep our democracy transparent and relatively honest. As imperfect as he is, Assange, along with Snowden has paid a steep personal price to keep our society open.
24
Why do news outlets continue to call Manning a whistle-blower? He transferred hundreds of thousands of classified documents to unclassified systems for distribution. He didn't read and select them before releasing them to Wikileaks. He haphazardly released classified information without knowing what the overwhelming majority of it even said. That's not a whistle-blowing, that's espionage.
10
Wow, liberals who want to shut down information and keep themselves in the echo chamber. Who would have thought?
15
If you were under the impression it is conservative to applaud Russian cyber warfare attacks on the US electoral system, you are mistaken.
7
Assange & Snowden are not true whistle blowers and they hurt the cause they think they're fighting for. Their disclosures are more often than not unhelpful, ruin lives of decent people doing their jobs, and not overly earth-shattering. Worst of all, they've mingled with regressive regimes in order to hurt western establishments, which despite its flaws is the best platform for human rights and freedoms. They're cowards, seeking attention, and they realize that but they're too deep the hole with Putin.
9
It's clear that Assange and Putin are in bed together. However we really need to improve our democratic system as the Super PACs and special interests are the real villains here. Super PAC donations must be taxed 40%. Any Super PAC donation must be matched dollar for dollar by individual contribution. Wikileaks reporting makes our democracy stronger and doesn't benefit little Putin.
7
Clinton and Trump together are directing their own modern day version of the movie Rashomon and the American partisan Democratic and Republican voters are the actors.
Delusion and deceit wins; truth, justice and the nation lose.
Delusion and deceit wins; truth, justice and the nation lose.
10
How about some pressure on Ecuador? Allowing this guy to do Russia' bidding out of their London Embassy should not go unchallenged.
8
You mean like overthrowing Ecuador's democratically elected government? The way that the Pentagon and Hillary Clinton overthrew the democratically elected government of Honduras in 2009, and lied about it -- with the help of the Times?
Honduras now has a murder rate that is off the charts, including wholesale murder of journalists. More Honduran media outlets have just been closed down. People are desperately fleeing.
Overthrowing Ecuador's democratically elected government would certainly prove to the world that Wikileaks' claims about official US behavior are absolutely true. But then, the Times can't really dispute the truthfulness of the Wikileaks revelations, can it? So it resorts to this McCarthyite smear.
I'm afraid that we have not yet seen and heard the worst of what a Hillary Clinton presidency holds -- nor the worst of the Times acting as her campaign office.
At least, unlike the Lyndon Johnson election in 1964, we are going into this election already knowing what a liar the candidate is.
Honduras now has a murder rate that is off the charts, including wholesale murder of journalists. More Honduran media outlets have just been closed down. People are desperately fleeing.
Overthrowing Ecuador's democratically elected government would certainly prove to the world that Wikileaks' claims about official US behavior are absolutely true. But then, the Times can't really dispute the truthfulness of the Wikileaks revelations, can it? So it resorts to this McCarthyite smear.
I'm afraid that we have not yet seen and heard the worst of what a Hillary Clinton presidency holds -- nor the worst of the Times acting as her campaign office.
At least, unlike the Lyndon Johnson election in 1964, we are going into this election already knowing what a liar the candidate is.
9
What a horrific piece of dubious journalism, trying so hard to put together everything they can into a melting pot, hoping that the readers will swallow the soup. Anyone who knows just a little bit about international diplomacy can read through the lines here and dismiss the claimed 'connections.'
18
Maybe if we stopped doing things that are immoral and illegal, then there would be secrets to reveal and we wouldn't have to worry.
I applaud Assange and Snowden for finally making the public wake up. Even though it seems the majority just go back to sleep.
Simply put, you don't want to get caught and look bad... don't do things that are bad. Secrecy is NOT in the protection of the public, it's for the protection of the few.
I applaud Assange and Snowden for finally making the public wake up. Even though it seems the majority just go back to sleep.
Simply put, you don't want to get caught and look bad... don't do things that are bad. Secrecy is NOT in the protection of the public, it's for the protection of the few.
12
Mr. Assange is just an egomaniac who found a subject to profit on... an on, an on.
8
Conversely, Hillary often suffers when her secrets are aired.
10
Well... you (NYT) and other western media venues that share George Soros' views benefited from this psychopathic anarchist to the point of helping to feed him. Now it's backfiring.
6
Someone should create a 'Russian Assange' to leak documents written in Russian to the rest of the World.
4
Since we can't say for certain who is behind the leaks, perhaps we should bug Assange's abode, and hack his computers so we might know more. Our need to know more about this Russian involvement trumps his right to privacy, using the reasoning employed by Assange that all transactions should be transparent.
6
The real problem you NYT guys have when you run this kind of Russia-is-a-global-villain, Wikileaks-threatens-the-West's-secrets silliness is that unfortunately reality is against you.
Did the Russians invade Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people in an illegal act of violence that goes on today, just so that Dick Cheney's mates could make a fortune out of controlling its' oil? No, the USA did.
Are Russian drones slaughtering innocent people across the Middle East (and even the occasional jihadi) with absolute disregard for human rights and the rule of law? No, the USA is.
So Russia is intervening in Eastern Ukraine and took back the Crimea (which it anyway gave to the Ukraine in 1956)? Is that worse than the mess the US and NATO have made of Libya? What about the awful atrocities and mass murder in Yemen which the US, UK and all the usual suspects are helping the Saudis commit there?
And, speaking of the Saudis, how come the 'War on Terror' mysteriously fails to touch those royal sponsors of some of the worst terror across the region? Something to do with oil, is it?
And as for the NYT lecturing RT for 'pro-Kremlin propganda', are you serious? The employers of Judith Miller, who simply ran propaganda straight from Cheney's vice-presidential office of special operations as if it had anything remotely to do with the truth?
Hypocrisy, thy name is NYT...
Did the Russians invade Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people in an illegal act of violence that goes on today, just so that Dick Cheney's mates could make a fortune out of controlling its' oil? No, the USA did.
Are Russian drones slaughtering innocent people across the Middle East (and even the occasional jihadi) with absolute disregard for human rights and the rule of law? No, the USA is.
So Russia is intervening in Eastern Ukraine and took back the Crimea (which it anyway gave to the Ukraine in 1956)? Is that worse than the mess the US and NATO have made of Libya? What about the awful atrocities and mass murder in Yemen which the US, UK and all the usual suspects are helping the Saudis commit there?
And, speaking of the Saudis, how come the 'War on Terror' mysteriously fails to touch those royal sponsors of some of the worst terror across the region? Something to do with oil, is it?
And as for the NYT lecturing RT for 'pro-Kremlin propganda', are you serious? The employers of Judith Miller, who simply ran propaganda straight from Cheney's vice-presidential office of special operations as if it had anything remotely to do with the truth?
Hypocrisy, thy name is NYT...
26
"Are Russian drones slaughtering innocent people across the Middle East with absolute disregard for human rights and the rule of law?"
Yes.
Yes.
8
Actually, the leaked diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks put the U.S. in a pretty good light. There were some blunt assessments that the State Dept. would rather have not been made public, no doubt. but no foreign service can operate without honest assessments from the field.
Wikileaks needs different and more accountable leadership. Assange is afflicted by a deep and wide streak of anti-American paranoia, which to some extent drives him into the arms of Russia, and a tendency to megalomania and secrecy. I don't know the organizational structure of Wikileaks, but apparently there is no mechanism for replacing Assange. and that makes Wikileaks a secretive dictatorship.
To be taken more seriously is the widespread surveillance revealed by Snowden, whose behavior has been much more principled and ethical than Assange's. I personally think he did us all a service, and should be pardoned.
Wikileaks needs different and more accountable leadership. Assange is afflicted by a deep and wide streak of anti-American paranoia, which to some extent drives him into the arms of Russia, and a tendency to megalomania and secrecy. I don't know the organizational structure of Wikileaks, but apparently there is no mechanism for replacing Assange. and that makes Wikileaks a secretive dictatorship.
To be taken more seriously is the widespread surveillance revealed by Snowden, whose behavior has been much more principled and ethical than Assange's. I personally think he did us all a service, and should be pardoned.
9
What I like to know is how Assange is able to reside in the Ecuador embassy and release pilfered confidential US documents. At some point the Ecuadorian government may decide it's time to kick it's tenant out.
7
The New York Times seems to have undergone something of an intellectual coup d'etat.
Just when the Neoconservative sensibility finally, mercifully melts away like an ice cube in the sun, the Times hooks its wagon to these logically-challenged charlatans shilling for the Pentagon Money Pit.
Trillion dollar F-35 program, anyone?
There is still still time to turn around, but the half-life is getting shorter and shorter.
it is heartening that we, your readership, based upon the comments section (when you allow comments,) see through this hollow transformation.
Just when the Neoconservative sensibility finally, mercifully melts away like an ice cube in the sun, the Times hooks its wagon to these logically-challenged charlatans shilling for the Pentagon Money Pit.
Trillion dollar F-35 program, anyone?
There is still still time to turn around, but the half-life is getting shorter and shorter.
it is heartening that we, your readership, based upon the comments section (when you allow comments,) see through this hollow transformation.
14
Every one benefits from an exposure of big Lie. Truth will out.
That Wiki leaks is being indicted by NYT headline innuendo and that evil looking image of Assange peaking around the curtain, as an enabler of Russian malfeasance is possibly the silliest thing thing ever.
What is leaked has proven to be highly accurate revelations of hidden actions of malfeasance on the part of whoever did it.
That is good for everybody, especially for those nations who would love to pursue Democracy.. A hard thing to accomplish when a lot of retrogressive agents are inside pulling fascist type strings.
That there has been few if any leaks from Russia is probably because Russia is much better at hiding stuff that we are.
That Wiki leaks is being indicted by NYT headline innuendo and that evil looking image of Assange peaking around the curtain, as an enabler of Russian malfeasance is possibly the silliest thing thing ever.
What is leaked has proven to be highly accurate revelations of hidden actions of malfeasance on the part of whoever did it.
That is good for everybody, especially for those nations who would love to pursue Democracy.. A hard thing to accomplish when a lot of retrogressive agents are inside pulling fascist type strings.
That there has been few if any leaks from Russia is probably because Russia is much better at hiding stuff that we are.
7
Assange is a flawed person, but he is just doing what makes sense for him. I see no malice in what he does, just self-interest. If that were a crime then we would all need to turn ourselves in. He is not American, has made no vow to defend this country or its interests, and has no reason to not take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves even if those opportunities benefit a corrupt and brutal dictatorship.
It is Snowden that is the real slime-ball in this whole thing. His actions are in an entirely different league than Assange's. I am pleased that Obama has not pardoned him. I just wish we had the ability to make him face justice for his crimes, and, yes, they are crimes, both legally and morally.
It is Snowden that is the real slime-ball in this whole thing. His actions are in an entirely different league than Assange's. I am pleased that Obama has not pardoned him. I just wish we had the ability to make him face justice for his crimes, and, yes, they are crimes, both legally and morally.
1
I remember when leaks of government misfeasance were made by those with honorable motives, trying to right wrongs and shed light on the wrongdoers. Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers), Frank Serpico (NYPD), Frank Snepp (CIA), Karen Silkwood (Kerr-McGee), Mark Felt (FBI/Deep Throat), and others leaked based on moral, ethical, and/or legal concerns. Only Serpico personally profited, from the book he wrote. Many others were persecuted, prosecuted, stripped of royalties, fired, or simply lived anonymously for forty years, while the good they did lived after them.
None fled the country, broke bail, took asylum in a foreign embassy, or tried to turn their moral indignation into personal power or turned against the U.S. All were willing to face the consequences of what they had done.
That's the primary difference between Assange and Snowden and their predecessor whistleblowers.
The second difference is that, as much as we hate to admit it, we are, in fact, protected by the deep undercover work of some of our security agencies. Spies have been part of human culture since the Assyrian empire. Now it's not the assassination of an emperor but chemical or biological warfare that could wipe out an entire city that endangers us; plots to poison the water, blow up buildings, interfere with infrastructure, steal nuclear devices, etc. have been foiled by such outfits as the NSA, DEA, CIA. Public knowledge would only help future plotters.
Do I like that sad fact? No. Do I accept it. I must.
None fled the country, broke bail, took asylum in a foreign embassy, or tried to turn their moral indignation into personal power or turned against the U.S. All were willing to face the consequences of what they had done.
That's the primary difference between Assange and Snowden and their predecessor whistleblowers.
The second difference is that, as much as we hate to admit it, we are, in fact, protected by the deep undercover work of some of our security agencies. Spies have been part of human culture since the Assyrian empire. Now it's not the assassination of an emperor but chemical or biological warfare that could wipe out an entire city that endangers us; plots to poison the water, blow up buildings, interfere with infrastructure, steal nuclear devices, etc. have been foiled by such outfits as the NSA, DEA, CIA. Public knowledge would only help future plotters.
Do I like that sad fact? No. Do I accept it. I must.
78
The other difference is that Assange is not an American. So whether or not he "turned against the US" really doesn't have any relevance.
8
Excellent point about whistleblowing. I'm glad you pointed out what moral courage genuinely consists of--understanding what codes or laws you will be breaking and sticking around to face them, and to explicate your reasons for doing it.
1
did I say Americans are stupid? perhaps not uniquely so, yet coupled with its war machine... did I say stupid yet?
1
Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden are both captive of their own believe that they are doing something good but are not living in the shadows and won't face any sunshine. Their faces are now furtive and not stern and brave. They are afraid of the world that they are trying to save! Is that a true image of heroes! Hardly! Fugitives! Just like their enemies. No one wants to be a martyr but that is what is required if you truly BELIEVE! Fight for it openly!
1
One little discussed facet to this whole ugly business, is what kind of technical forensic work does Wikileaks actually do to ensure that they're not publishing files, emails, etc. that haven't been altered or otherwise tampered with?
One would strongly suspect that Russian intelligence (or any other nation's for that matter) would have both the motivation and the technology to be able to pull that off very convincingly.
One would strongly suspect that Russian intelligence (or any other nation's for that matter) would have both the motivation and the technology to be able to pull that off very convincingly.
5
If you want to look at who benefits from Wikileaks, look at China.
7
Read Sheldon Wolin's "Democracy, Inc." It is his thesis on "inverted totalitarianism," and it appears to be very similar to Assange's opinions. I note it to make a point that Wolin, being the late professor emeritus at Princeton, would probably agree with Assange, thereby asserting that Assange is not just some kind of crackpot. I believe Assange is doing what more people should be exposing--the corporate take-over of the U.S. through a combination of business practices by moneyed people who can bribe shameless politicians. Wolin goes into detail about it not being the classic type of situation (having a cult of personality with a single dictator) but a series of decisions/actions that nevertheless leads to a totalitarian state. These ideas should be given serious consideration if they have anything to do with the truth about our times.
8
Mr. Assange may well have a bias against America for reasons that are justified or not, but whatever his beliefs or actions it does not in any way abrogate the U.S in any way from its illegalities, behaviours and actions as revealed by Wikileaks through the actions of others who originally obtained the material.
And whilst one could argue that the perceived bias in releasing so much U.S material as well as how much it seems to benefit Russia, we must also acknowledge and point out that this information also benefits so many more than just an adversary of the U.S and in fact benefits most Americans as well as most people in the World if they care to take an interest and recognise the activities and things being done ,many of which should not be done, and the importance to all that even at the highest most secret levels, those that keep those secrets and put them into play can never be absolutely sure that word may be get out and people find out about what it is that's being done.
For that reason alone, the work that Mr. Assange and those who obtain all the material does, is invaluable and very worthwhile as because of it , those in power and those who work secretly behind all scenes, will all the more think twice or even thrice about the things that they do...
...as well they should.
And whilst one could argue that the perceived bias in releasing so much U.S material as well as how much it seems to benefit Russia, we must also acknowledge and point out that this information also benefits so many more than just an adversary of the U.S and in fact benefits most Americans as well as most people in the World if they care to take an interest and recognise the activities and things being done ,many of which should not be done, and the importance to all that even at the highest most secret levels, those that keep those secrets and put them into play can never be absolutely sure that word may be get out and people find out about what it is that's being done.
For that reason alone, the work that Mr. Assange and those who obtain all the material does, is invaluable and very worthwhile as because of it , those in power and those who work secretly behind all scenes, will all the more think twice or even thrice about the things that they do...
...as well they should.
8
The best possible spin that can be put on the farce of Assange's sequestration in the Ecuadorian embassy - for the US - is that a couple of Swedish prostitutes attempted to extort money from a celebrity after consensual sex. Any other plausible explanation goes downhill from there, with egg on the faces of official hypocrites for the US, the UK and Sweden, not to mention their apologists , well represented in these comments.
Patriotic bruising aside, none of the above can be attributed to nefarious anti American/ anti Western occult forces anywhere, quite the contrary, despite the (again) farcical attempts of fact challenged opinion writers.
Patriotic bruising aside, none of the above can be attributed to nefarious anti American/ anti Western occult forces anywhere, quite the contrary, despite the (again) farcical attempts of fact challenged opinion writers.
3
Assange released information that shed light on dishonest and disturbing US government practices. This article proposes this should stop because Russia likes it too. Retro Cild War thinking.
5
You say:
Among United States officials, the emerging consensus is that Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services.
Didn't you bury the lead?
Among United States officials, the emerging consensus is that Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services.
Didn't you bury the lead?
11
What is the first thing a guilty, murderous husband says to police?
You have the wrong guy ... why aren't you out there looking for the real killer.
Sounds a lot like comments here: yeah, we've killed many innocent people, but what about Russia?
You have the wrong guy ... why aren't you out there looking for the real killer.
Sounds a lot like comments here: yeah, we've killed many innocent people, but what about Russia?
7
One reason Assange will never go after Putin is his he values his life. Not that I blame him for wanting to stay alive, but he should then just get out of the business instead of being a hypocrite and Putin's pawn.
7
Assange has said that the wants to bring Hillary Clinton down and that's what he's about - timing and all.
9
As Woodward and Bernstein brought down Nixon - by publicising the truth. If the truth about your activities costs you the trust of the voters, so be it.
10
But what right does he have to do that? He's an Aussie fergawdsake!
If he wants to take politicians down, he needs to go back to Australia to do that.
If he wants to take politicians down, he needs to go back to Australia to do that.
3
Woodward and Bernstein are American citizens...this clown is nothing more than a narcissist...and he's not from the USA.
3
Guess what? WikiLeaks and other such organizations and people hold the US to higher standards than the once and future Soviet Union. Is anyone out there actually dumb enough to not understand why?
If you think the US is great (and I do in a tremendous number of respects), then you should be fully supportive to those organizations that help watchdog that very greatness.
If you think the US is great (and I do in a tremendous number of respects), then you should be fully supportive to those organizations that help watchdog that very greatness.
8
Holding the US to higher standards? What an excellent rationalization for a "Hate America First" mentality!
2
does anyone else claim to be the free world 's leader, or bully everyone else into being one? nope. so wear the mantel, it fits.
1
Don't forget that some commenters here are supported and in some cases paid by Russia and China. You will observe a blip in comments when their interests are published.
7
There is nothing "boring" about a country or an individual being a victim of state bullying, and Russia's whole power structure does not allow or encourage dissent. Gorbachev seems to have been a good man, but Yeltsin was much more easily overcome and manipulated by the forces Putin represents.
I think Snowden did a public service, and some of Wikileaks, but Putin has used both to put his thumb in the eye of the west and its freedoms. There's nothing clean or democratic about the way he cultivates oligarchs and punishes opponents.
There's nothing OK about his support of Assad's murderous slaughter of his people.
The world is complicated, nobody's perfect, but condemning our free country (you are exercising your freedom here, as am I) and giving Putin, Manafort, and Trump a free pass is dangerous.
Hillary Clinton has walked the razor's edge of policy vs. perfection for a lifetime, and Republicans have exploited this for a quarter century. That people from my left condemn her instead of the real enemies of freedom - among others, our obstructive bought and paid for Congressional Republicans and Statehouses - is sad and limited. What we really need is to replace them all, and then pressure her by giving her support for a more idealistic program that serves all of us, not just the rich.
Here's climate, for example; where R Congress is well funded by big fossil:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/08/a-climate-of-cash-in-votes-on-gl...
I think Snowden did a public service, and some of Wikileaks, but Putin has used both to put his thumb in the eye of the west and its freedoms. There's nothing clean or democratic about the way he cultivates oligarchs and punishes opponents.
There's nothing OK about his support of Assad's murderous slaughter of his people.
The world is complicated, nobody's perfect, but condemning our free country (you are exercising your freedom here, as am I) and giving Putin, Manafort, and Trump a free pass is dangerous.
Hillary Clinton has walked the razor's edge of policy vs. perfection for a lifetime, and Republicans have exploited this for a quarter century. That people from my left condemn her instead of the real enemies of freedom - among others, our obstructive bought and paid for Congressional Republicans and Statehouses - is sad and limited. What we really need is to replace them all, and then pressure her by giving her support for a more idealistic program that serves all of us, not just the rich.
Here's climate, for example; where R Congress is well funded by big fossil:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/08/a-climate-of-cash-in-votes-on-gl...
7
No doubt the NYTs lives in a bizzaro world. Snowdon pro Putin. Assange pro Putin. Of course Wkileaks finds much more on the US because the US is involved in much more ridicules spying and foreign intrigue. If it weren't Wikileaks the American people wouldn't know the embarrassing stuff the US thinks it can get away with. Heck Assange doesn't believe the coup in Ukraine in 2014 was a spontaneous uprising of the people against that nasty Russian puppet regime. The reality is that the coup was aided and encouraged by the US to overthrow the inept Yanokovich regime and replace it with a pro NATO anti Russian regime. Victoria Nuland's coup turned out to be a colossal belly flop that should have got her fired. Now Crimea is out of reach of NATO. The DNC hack did the public good to let the world see how the DNC was working to undermine Bernie Sanders' candidacy in the primaries. Of course the NYTs is involved in an astounding effort to demonize Putin. Its funny that they should spend so much time trying to debunk what is obvious and disturbing.
8
Did you really post this from Rock Hill, South Carolina? Given your command of the English language, I'm inclined to believe you posted it from Moscow.
Go ahead, spout all the pathetic criticisms you want about the United States. How long do you think you could survive if you did the same thing to Putin's Russia? There are plenty of dead Russian journalists and dissidents to give you a clue.
Go ahead, spout all the pathetic criticisms you want about the United States. How long do you think you could survive if you did the same thing to Putin's Russia? There are plenty of dead Russian journalists and dissidents to give you a clue.
9
"The DNC hack did the public good to let the world see how the DNC was working to undermine Bernie Sanders' candidacy in the primaries"
Except it didn't accomplish that. What is showed were the inner workings of a political party, not a governmental agency, that are private to its membership. And those emails didn't unmask a great conspiracy to put Bernie down. All they showed were the personal preferences and prejudices of some of the staff, not even the leadership. And these people were having a very frank internal discussion of questions that were perfectly legitimate even if they seemed hard-hearted and prejudiced to the public. But there was no evidence of any actual steps taken to "tip the scales", as you people like to put it. Indictments would already have been issued if there had been.
Your conflating of the issues shows a lack of clarity and precision in your argument, one that shouldn't be allowed in an ethical or even a legal discussion which this is. Assange didn't do this to expose malfeasance, because there wasn't any to find and he already knew that. No, he did it to influence a national election because he wants to avoid extradition. No other reason.
His hands are not clean here, and it is amazing that you are so easily duped by it all.
Except it didn't accomplish that. What is showed were the inner workings of a political party, not a governmental agency, that are private to its membership. And those emails didn't unmask a great conspiracy to put Bernie down. All they showed were the personal preferences and prejudices of some of the staff, not even the leadership. And these people were having a very frank internal discussion of questions that were perfectly legitimate even if they seemed hard-hearted and prejudiced to the public. But there was no evidence of any actual steps taken to "tip the scales", as you people like to put it. Indictments would already have been issued if there had been.
Your conflating of the issues shows a lack of clarity and precision in your argument, one that shouldn't be allowed in an ethical or even a legal discussion which this is. Assange didn't do this to expose malfeasance, because there wasn't any to find and he already knew that. No, he did it to influence a national election because he wants to avoid extradition. No other reason.
His hands are not clean here, and it is amazing that you are so easily duped by it all.
82
I maintain that more is found on the U.S. (and Democrats) because we're just not as good at state-supported lying and cheating as other countries (and the Republicans) are.
4
A poor analyses by the New York Times in regard to Wikileaks, with a 'wink, wink, nudge, nudge' about that organization serving Russian interest, saying the they probably don't have no direct ties but....
As far as we know candidate Clinton or president Obama probably don't have direct ties with the Kremlin either and so do most of us. It is a symptom of bad reporting to discuss what is probably not...
It brings to mind the 2008 presidential campaign when Mrs Clinton said that she doesn't think Mr. Obama was a Muslim, cunningly keeping the door slightly open for speculation.
Embarrassing information about abuse of power by the US authorities and the Democratic party might serve Russia - the new boogieman - on the propaganda level, but it mostly serves the American people who can at last learn what is done on our behalf and with our tax money, and how many times we have been lied to. It serves democracy first and foremost.
IT would seem as if the Times is trying preemptively to discredit Wikileaks in case more negative information about the Mrs. Clinton would be put forward (Perhaps foundation donors got fast track access to the madam secretary). Clinton is already the second most detested and unpopular candidate in recent history, second to Trump only.
Of course The New York Times probably have no direct ties to the Clinton campaign but its reporting mostly benefits Clinton.
As far as we know candidate Clinton or president Obama probably don't have direct ties with the Kremlin either and so do most of us. It is a symptom of bad reporting to discuss what is probably not...
It brings to mind the 2008 presidential campaign when Mrs Clinton said that she doesn't think Mr. Obama was a Muslim, cunningly keeping the door slightly open for speculation.
Embarrassing information about abuse of power by the US authorities and the Democratic party might serve Russia - the new boogieman - on the propaganda level, but it mostly serves the American people who can at last learn what is done on our behalf and with our tax money, and how many times we have been lied to. It serves democracy first and foremost.
IT would seem as if the Times is trying preemptively to discredit Wikileaks in case more negative information about the Mrs. Clinton would be put forward (Perhaps foundation donors got fast track access to the madam secretary). Clinton is already the second most detested and unpopular candidate in recent history, second to Trump only.
Of course The New York Times probably have no direct ties to the Clinton campaign but its reporting mostly benefits Clinton.
15
It would be more useful to denounce the liars running our government, and some others, than to repeatedly denounce the person revealing their lies. It's especially upsetting that a newspaper such as the Times, with some fine revelations of government lying in the past, would take this path.
One does indeed wonder if Democrats' lies are considered better than Republicans' lies by Times editors. Unfortunately, there are plenty of both to expose.I think the American people can use all the help they can get in exposing them.
As for not criticizing Russia or Mr. Putin "enough," revealing one country's, or several countries', leaders' lies does not obligate one to reveal every single country's lies.
I can see why it might be just a little bit difficult to reveal Mr. Putin's thuggery while living under it as a foreigner. Perhaps Russian-citizen whistleblowers, perhaps living in exile, can do a better job than Mr. Assange in carrying out this important task. And the Times can continue its good work in this regard, too.
But no, Times, I don't think that anything that makes U.S. leaders look dishonest must come at the behest of a foreign enemy. Sometimes, the leaders really are dishonest.
One does indeed wonder if Democrats' lies are considered better than Republicans' lies by Times editors. Unfortunately, there are plenty of both to expose.I think the American people can use all the help they can get in exposing them.
As for not criticizing Russia or Mr. Putin "enough," revealing one country's, or several countries', leaders' lies does not obligate one to reveal every single country's lies.
I can see why it might be just a little bit difficult to reveal Mr. Putin's thuggery while living under it as a foreigner. Perhaps Russian-citizen whistleblowers, perhaps living in exile, can do a better job than Mr. Assange in carrying out this important task. And the Times can continue its good work in this regard, too.
But no, Times, I don't think that anything that makes U.S. leaders look dishonest must come at the behest of a foreign enemy. Sometimes, the leaders really are dishonest.
25
Thank you very much. You've summarized the moral base of this whole matter. I certainly hope Lincoln will still be correct with "You cannot fool all of the people all of the time." My plea: Where oh where is our Lincoln for this age?
6
It's not a question of lies but who it is that's putting the information out there and their motivation. It's pretty obvious that the FSB is supplying Assange with all this information in a trade off to not expose Putin's criminality. For all the rumors and internet articles about HC murdering countless people, somehow, there is one world leader who is actually doing those things against his political opponents and destabilizing democracies around the world. Assange's silence in that regard speaks volumes.
1
We ALL benefit!
“The sin which is unpardonable is knowingly and willfully to reject truth, to fear knowledge lest that knowledge pander not to thy prejudices.”
~ ALEISTER CROWLEY
(1875 – 1947)
English occultist, ceremonial magician, poet, painter, novelist.
“The sin which is unpardonable is knowingly and willfully to reject truth, to fear knowledge lest that knowledge pander not to thy prejudices.”
~ ALEISTER CROWLEY
(1875 – 1947)
English occultist, ceremonial magician, poet, painter, novelist.
14
Assange is nothing more than a criminal....and no wonder he's best friends with Putin and Trump.
12
*Citation Needed.
2
Please tell me how he's a criminal? As in what law did he break, much less be convicted for?
I fear facts don't matter to you, so I'm wasting my time asking...
I fear facts don't matter to you, so I'm wasting my time asking...
4
Friend or foe, Donald owes the Russian banks a lot of money.
4
How interesting that the Russian trolls on this site are attacking NATO. It is NATO that is a thorn in the side of a brutal thief and dictator, a man much admired by Trump and his cohorts.
15
Oversight in my earlier post. Mr. Assange, of course, is in London, and Mr. Snowden is in Russia. Both are limited by their situations in how much they can reveal about who. And I'd think any human being who's politically or socially active attempts to correct the things that annoy them the most, which very often are produced by the societies they were raised in. It doesn't necessarily mean they prefer a different society with different problems. As countless contributors to the Times pointed out at the time, thinking the Vietnam War was a bad idea did not mean its opponents wanted to move en masse to North Vietnam, the USSR, or China.
10
Julian assange (wikileaks) has lost moral authority in his profession as a journalist independent, becouse is biased with the Republican Party and Donald Trump
10
and their handlers in the Kremlin.
2
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. "I am Wikileaks". Case closed.
12
"There is “no concrete evidence” that what WikiLeaks publishes comes from intelligence agencies, he said, even as he indicated that he would happily accept such material."
Nor is there evidence it doesn't.
Nor is there evidence it doesn't.
4
It is strange how Mr. Greensand uses the exact same talking points as Wikileak's Assange, especially when it comes to Russia. I don't trust either of them anymore, especially their attacks on critics. Recently they retweeted a criticism of Michael Weiss that blames a lot of problems on him and the 'Jews'.
The Intercept is apparently working with Wikipedia on Hillary Clinton. They have been publishing articles that occasionally defend him. Their Senior Editor said that are going to concentrate a lot more on Clinton because she is the next president and he is a troll.
These people are not journalists and neither is Wikileak's. They both share, often line for line, criticism of the U.S. While completely ignoring Russia's abuse. You cannot find a single article on their site's about Russia starving/bombing/chemical weapons usage on the people of Aleppo.
The Intercept is apparently working with Wikipedia on Hillary Clinton. They have been publishing articles that occasionally defend him. Their Senior Editor said that are going to concentrate a lot more on Clinton because she is the next president and he is a troll.
These people are not journalists and neither is Wikileak's. They both share, often line for line, criticism of the U.S. While completely ignoring Russia's abuse. You cannot find a single article on their site's about Russia starving/bombing/chemical weapons usage on the people of Aleppo.
7
Is the NYT to be trusted on subjects like WikiLeaks, Assange, Putin, Ukraine, and Russia? It's increasingly hard to tell. I'm old enough to remember newspaper and TV coverage of East-West relations in the late 1950s. Back then, almost every U.S. news source had an anti-Russian axe to grind, and Pravda was even worse. At least with the internet we have more access to alternate versions of reality that may be less distorted by propaganda.
17
If it was not for Julian Assange and Wikileaks the American people would be in the dark about the corruption and deception carried on by our government. Detractors can call him what they will, but he is doing the job that responsible investigative journalists should be doing.
21
Absolutely true. I'm glad we found out about the DNC favoring Clinton, no matter how we got that information. Our press should have been looking into it more vigorously, after all, since Bernie and his supporters identified the bias early on. But from the MSM and the NYT? Crickets.
8
With the greatest respect I ask, why would the Democratic party favor a candidate who was not a Democrat and had never done anything for the Democratic Party?
Bernie Sanders and his enthusiastic followers never understood that if you want the change a political party or any institution, you have to toil inside that system for a long time. That's how it works!
~
Bernie Sanders and his enthusiastic followers never understood that if you want the change a political party or any institution, you have to toil inside that system for a long time. That's how it works!
~
2
It is due to Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden that we know. Assange did nothing but just throw it up on the web...
1
I seems that Secretary Clinton's unpopularity is such that she may be defeated even by someone as unlikely as Mr. Trump. She has therefore decided to run, not against Mr. Trump, but against Mr. Putin and this diversionary maneuver is actively forwarded by the NYT and others in the press.
10
If revealing actions of the American government helps the Russians, maybe the U.S. should review its actions. Just because Julian Assange is nuts doesn't mean that the U.S. is always doing the right thing.
14
This Clown is NO friend of the United States and for us not to think he is in Russia's pocket is absurd. He does not have to vet any of the information he publishes and can lie about our Country at will bringing severe hardship and perhaps a death sentence for some. He should be jailed in a very dark place where he can do no more harm.
9
NYT,
When some one pointed out there is Gator in your home. Show some effort to Get rid of it and thank to the person who said it to you.
But you went on to say, There is a Gator in XYZ's home why not he pointed out that.
This kind of reporting is Purely PROPAGANDA , nothing else.
Try to Help the person who imprisoned but still did not left his cause unlike Our Media Pimps who sold their soul for Money.
Let me ask you, did you ever asked OBAMA
"Did you know what Snowden shared with the world ?"
Why not you Publish article on the EMAIL CONTENTS.
I see there is a desperate attempt Form NYT and other Political Crooks to divert the People by creating a BIG DEMON RUSSIA .
When some one pointed out there is Gator in your home. Show some effort to Get rid of it and thank to the person who said it to you.
But you went on to say, There is a Gator in XYZ's home why not he pointed out that.
This kind of reporting is Purely PROPAGANDA , nothing else.
Try to Help the person who imprisoned but still did not left his cause unlike Our Media Pimps who sold their soul for Money.
Let me ask you, did you ever asked OBAMA
"Did you know what Snowden shared with the world ?"
Why not you Publish article on the EMAIL CONTENTS.
I see there is a desperate attempt Form NYT and other Political Crooks to divert the People by creating a BIG DEMON RUSSIA .
8
I held my nose and read some of this disgraceful McCarthyist article because I wanted to be clear about what led The Times to stoop so low. Since The Times has sold its soul to the Clinton Campaign it is plain that the motive for the article was to neutralize the material hacked from the DNC. I am not surprised that The Times would stoop so low because it is only a further extension of its past behavior. What surprises and disturbs me is that a large majority of the readers appear to approve of it. Basically they are saying that they don't want to hear disturbing facts, and people who tell them what they don't want to know should be punished.
Some people like to make much of the threat to Democracy posed by Trump, but in fact it is clear that the neoliberal alliance behind Clinton and the Clinton Campaign is a much greater threat. Already a large majority of the people who read The Times want Orwell's 1984, and to a large extent they have got it.
Some people like to make much of the threat to Democracy posed by Trump, but in fact it is clear that the neoliberal alliance behind Clinton and the Clinton Campaign is a much greater threat. Already a large majority of the people who read The Times want Orwell's 1984, and to a large extent they have got it.
25
I sadly agree, except that the Clinton threat may not exactly be worse than Trump. It is cold comfort but nice to know that there are some who comment here in agreement with your point. I'm just hoping that Lincoln will still be correct with "You cannot fool all of the people all of the time." Where is our Lincoln for this age??
4
Boy, you couldn't be more wrong, and on every count.
But by all means continue. The entertainment factor is well worth it!
But by all means continue. The entertainment factor is well worth it!
1
This slime is full of himself which makes him a perfect match for the likes of trump. In a televised appearance on Bill Maher's he attempted to intimidate Maher with what he thought was an undisclosed large donation to the Obama campaign. This of course flopped because, as Maher informed him, this donation was made quite public.
Assange is a snake in the grass willing to trash anyone he deems an enemy, and accept support from the most despicable sources, particularly Putin.
Assange is a snake in the grass willing to trash anyone he deems an enemy, and accept support from the most despicable sources, particularly Putin.
9
A lot of use seem to be forgetting that the man is wanted on criminal charges. He committed a sexual assault. How many people here would want a rapist set free in their neighborhood?
5
Patently a lie, yet you have no qualms about writing it. what does that make you?
7
If you read the criminal complaint, it does sound like he was lured to Sweden under false pretenses and entrapped.
Once he'd had a few drinks that his hosts bought for him, and was invited into this woman's bed, she changed her mind.
Nonetheless, he's not helping his chances of escaping extradition by meddling in the US elections. Also, greater men than he have tried to take down Hillary Clinton and failed.
~
Once he'd had a few drinks that his hosts bought for him, and was invited into this woman's bed, she changed her mind.
Nonetheless, he's not helping his chances of escaping extradition by meddling in the US elections. Also, greater men than he have tried to take down Hillary Clinton and failed.
~
1
Clinton Camp fear level rising to full tide: they know the emails that show the true Hillary are coming any day now, and they're going to be devastating. They are feverishly trying to divert our thinking in advance, setting us up to think Russia, Russia, Russia, when Russia has nothing to do with this. Propaganda like this article is a smokescreen, stoking paranoia, McCarthy-style, to get your attention away from the real fact of the matter: Clinton crookery.
NYT has abandoned all pretense of reporting the news and the facts, now it's pure propaganda every day to push Hillary Clinton down the voters' throats so the Globalists can continue their pillaging.
It's become almost laughable seeing the daily antics on the part of NYT and MSM. Every charge has been leveled against those who would oppose that crooked woman: fascism, nationalism (!), sexism, racism, xenophobia. When we revert to 1950s McCarthyism we've scraped the bottom of the barrel. I look forward to whatever Mr. Assange can unearth on this truly awful woman. He's doing a public service, and one for which we should be grateful.
NYT has abandoned all pretense of reporting the news and the facts, now it's pure propaganda every day to push Hillary Clinton down the voters' throats so the Globalists can continue their pillaging.
It's become almost laughable seeing the daily antics on the part of NYT and MSM. Every charge has been leveled against those who would oppose that crooked woman: fascism, nationalism (!), sexism, racism, xenophobia. When we revert to 1950s McCarthyism we've scraped the bottom of the barrel. I look forward to whatever Mr. Assange can unearth on this truly awful woman. He's doing a public service, and one for which we should be grateful.
22
You are an ignorant fool who has bought in to the decades of anti-Clinton propaganda by the right wing. You cite no evidence that Hillary Clinton is the "awful woman" that you say she is. You condemn the mainstream media, yet you blithely repeat the unfounded assertions of "Clinton crookery" that are circulating around the social media echo chamber. Donald Trump is the real crook who is running for President. Julian Assange doesn't publish anything negative about Donald Trump because he has not been given that material by his Russian handlers.
I have to agree, admittedly sadly. Distraction techniques are the essence of the con game. And the P. T. Barnum advertising agency, as used through campaign financing, continues its dedicated work to that effect.
5
"awful woman" is a matter of opinion. One needs no evidence to express an opinion.
1
Assange & Snowden are classic Soviet dupes.
They were inspired by a misunderstanding of the world to weaken western institutions which unwittingly aided regimes hostile to the West.
And after they both realized they were totally duped into doing this, they aggressively deny their dupiness in order to save face as an international adventurer & cause célèbre.
They were inspired by a misunderstanding of the world to weaken western institutions which unwittingly aided regimes hostile to the West.
And after they both realized they were totally duped into doing this, they aggressively deny their dupiness in order to save face as an international adventurer & cause célèbre.
10
I don't know of a single government policy change anywhere that can be ascribed to the work of Wikileaks. That means, A) they are not the evil threat many describe them as, and B) they are probably right in arguing that there is too much government secrecy.
7
What a completely bogus article larded with maybe, might have, could have, and many more weasel words. Why not go with verifiable fact?
And what is up with the commenters who feel it relevant to state; I don't like him. Oh, sorry it has taken a second for me to grasp that is the trust of this so-called news report. Never mind real information, these days the NYTs is about drama, lots of adjectives, and supposition.
Assange is not the perfect messenger, but that dose't square with killing him. His mission is to publish what is sent to him because he and many others are tired of our governments lying to us, which they do 24/7. As for his legal problems, they are quite dubious. If he capitulates, I'l give one guess as to what will happen to him. Would you step into the noose? It is more than a little bit irritating that Times readers demographically described as educated and informed consistently are moving in the direction of a rightwards lynch mob. Those not willing, or able to comment from the perspective of a curious inquisitive close reading informed perspective bring the conversation down to grammar school level.
And what is up with the commenters who feel it relevant to state; I don't like him. Oh, sorry it has taken a second for me to grasp that is the trust of this so-called news report. Never mind real information, these days the NYTs is about drama, lots of adjectives, and supposition.
Assange is not the perfect messenger, but that dose't square with killing him. His mission is to publish what is sent to him because he and many others are tired of our governments lying to us, which they do 24/7. As for his legal problems, they are quite dubious. If he capitulates, I'l give one guess as to what will happen to him. Would you step into the noose? It is more than a little bit irritating that Times readers demographically described as educated and informed consistently are moving in the direction of a rightwards lynch mob. Those not willing, or able to comment from the perspective of a curious inquisitive close reading informed perspective bring the conversation down to grammar school level.
13
Leaking information about the underbelly of U.S. politics and foreign policy fiascos benefits U.S. citizens much more than Russia.
20
ha, ha, ha. it seems assange has fallen out of favor with the left wingers. when he was dishing iraq combat video the media loved him. now that he is dishing on DNC emails; not so much. and people laugh at fox news' lack of objectivity, ha, ha, ha. thats ok the left wingers still have snowden to worship...snowden putin's lap dog...
6
I just donated to wikileaks.
29
Awesome.
Now even more innocents will have their personal information revealed.
Identity thieves everywhere are very grateful.
Now even more innocents will have their personal information revealed.
Identity thieves everywhere are very grateful.
10
Wow Jill, way to support Putin! Glad you're moving the Russian soon, congratulations, I'd imagine you'll wait and vote for Trump first.
8
Wrong. You just donated to the Trump campaign.
10
Those who see a nefarious liberal plot to silence Mr. Assange for political advantage would be howling for his head on a pike were a Republican in the White House. Perhaps Mr. Assange really did start out as a voice for governmental transparency and anti-authoritarianism, but it sure seems to me that there is also present in him a drive or thirst for personal recognition and power. Like many talented egomaniacs before him and many more to come, intoxication with his own celebrity occludes and perhaps even nullifies whatever virtues might have been attached to his "work." His extreme animosity towards Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton reminds of nothing more than the reaction of a jilted lover. He is now little more than a very talented blackmailer.
28
The NYT has announced that it will no longer report on local (NYC) crimes. This would mean it is no longer a local (NYC) newspaper. It's readership is no longer the intelligentsia, and with good measure. More than a decade ago, I sensed the general dumbing down and thought it was to increase sales. I was wrong. IMHO the real reason was to attract a readership who would willing follow their cant and never question anything they printed. I do believe I smell the government at work in the once venerable office of the NYT; it is now the National Times (caveat emptor). Assange et al have a forum because there are still some of us who ask intelligent questions. It's your job to do so, but you appear to have no desire to.
20
Do you also smell Putin at work in the Assange camp, or are you another Russian troll working this site?
5
Assange's anti-American agenda was obvious from day one of the first "leaks". He should have been captured and jailed then.
14
@Ray. Being anti-American is cause for jail? I thought that was where the USA was headed, but I wasn't actually sure.
14
So, we should have arrested a foreign national living in another country because they were "anti-American"?
6
Matters little who benefits, or who loses when the Truth is spoken, because the Truth drives us forward. What matters is the Truth. The truths we know sre "facts". The other things are "lies". We should concern ourself, as Bertrand Russell advised late in life, only with the facts.
"I am for Truth, no matter who tells it."
Malcom X
"I am for Truth, no matter who tells it."
Malcom X
14
It is a distortion to view Wikileaks releases through the US-Russia lens. The revelations should be seen on their own merit, regardless of whom they benefit. If we or our allies wouldn't be engaged in activities that our democratic and authoritarian governments rather not disclose to their subjects, then Wikileaks wouldn't have a case. But just as nothing is more enjoyable than seeing a finger-wagging moralist exposed as having an affair, so the US who feels entitled to lecturing everyone on the globe is exposed as an emperor without clothes. Never mind our authoritarian friends such as Saudi Arabia. And Mr. Assange is surely right when he says that everybody and his brother is criticizing Russia, time to put the spotlight on those who pretend to be knights in shining armor, but are anything but and expose their own sordid activities.
13
NYT has published journalism which undermines and vilifies one of the rare sources(Assange-Wiki Leaks)which has exposed Orwellian government doublespeak and corruption, military murder in Iraq(an illegal war based on lies) and lately,duplicity and deceit in the "democratic" US political system..........to the extent of using as reliable evidence, a quote from an "heiress"Wiki Leaks donor now accusing Assange of obfuscation and misinformation..............Assange is portrayed as a Russian puppet,narcissistic,neurotic,ineffective and lacking vitamin D.............an accused rapist(one of the charges-refusing to use a condom ,before sex)........ confined illegally in an embassy for years.....................this NYT article not just killing but"drawing and quartering"the messenger means some powerful people are fearful of the revelations to come !
13
the messenger means some powerful people are fearful of the revelations to come !
*****
This guy doesn't know anything you already know.
*****
This guy doesn't know anything you already know.
5
"It's the Russians, Stupid!"
Honestly, the Clintons are so corrupt. "How ever will we distract people from our corruption and ineptitude?" I know, let's resurrect the ghost of Joe McCarthy in 2016! Everyone against us is a Russian agent!
Hillary is so wonderful. Just like Bill gave American children an education in sex ed, Hillary is turning out to be an education for them in civics!
This hit piece is such sloppy, inaccurate journalism. I wonder if it was directly submitted to the Clintons for approval, as Wikileaks showed was done with articles running in Politico. Or if the Clinton people had meetings with the NYT bosses to tell them what it expected of them, as Wikileaks showed was done with NBC, MSNBC, CNN.
Still, this article may not actually be as bad as the piece the Times ran on July 20th, by Andrew Rosenthal, which actually seems to be suggesting that Donald Trump might be a Manchurian Candidate: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/opinion/campaign-stops/is-trump-obsess.... That was breathtaking journalism.
Do yourself a favor and watch the interview between the author of this article Jo Becker and Julian Assange, posted on Facebook, where the NYT agenda is laid bare and thoroughly refuted. Or read the accurate, thorough and responsible rebuttal of this piece published by Wikileaks on its site.
Honestly, the Clintons are so corrupt. "How ever will we distract people from our corruption and ineptitude?" I know, let's resurrect the ghost of Joe McCarthy in 2016! Everyone against us is a Russian agent!
Hillary is so wonderful. Just like Bill gave American children an education in sex ed, Hillary is turning out to be an education for them in civics!
This hit piece is such sloppy, inaccurate journalism. I wonder if it was directly submitted to the Clintons for approval, as Wikileaks showed was done with articles running in Politico. Or if the Clinton people had meetings with the NYT bosses to tell them what it expected of them, as Wikileaks showed was done with NBC, MSNBC, CNN.
Still, this article may not actually be as bad as the piece the Times ran on July 20th, by Andrew Rosenthal, which actually seems to be suggesting that Donald Trump might be a Manchurian Candidate: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/opinion/campaign-stops/is-trump-obsess.... That was breathtaking journalism.
Do yourself a favor and watch the interview between the author of this article Jo Becker and Julian Assange, posted on Facebook, where the NYT agenda is laid bare and thoroughly refuted. Or read the accurate, thorough and responsible rebuttal of this piece published by Wikileaks on its site.
13
Yes, clearly the only unbiased reporting on this is from Wikileaks themselves, or possibly from Breitbart or Infowars? Makes perfect sense.
6
You raise a good point, which is, how is someone who reads these news articles supposed to know what is accurate.
The only answer I have found is to follow a story from the beginning, read as many accounts of it as you can find, from across the political spectrum, compare them, keeping in mind what is a first-hand source and what is not, which facts have been verified and which have not, which facts are emphasized and which are omitted and why, and learn what agendas to be aware of, including what official version the government is trying to create. This is what I do when a good news story comes along, and it is what I have done with Wikileaks and this election cycle. It's not easy. You have to be kind of a news junkie with some academic training. So I am not surprised you don't have the confidence to say who might be in the right here if you haven't bothered to inform yourself adequately. But I've done the work. So I do know when something I read on this subject is supported by facts and when it is not.
The only answer I have found is to follow a story from the beginning, read as many accounts of it as you can find, from across the political spectrum, compare them, keeping in mind what is a first-hand source and what is not, which facts have been verified and which have not, which facts are emphasized and which are omitted and why, and learn what agendas to be aware of, including what official version the government is trying to create. This is what I do when a good news story comes along, and it is what I have done with Wikileaks and this election cycle. It's not easy. You have to be kind of a news junkie with some academic training. So I am not surprised you don't have the confidence to say who might be in the right here if you haven't bothered to inform yourself adequately. But I've done the work. So I do know when something I read on this subject is supported by facts and when it is not.
2
One term I learned from WikiLeaks -"double tap"- is all I need to know about who's morally bankrupt and who's criminally corrupt.
Hint : it's hardly Julian Assange; rather, look at who's pointing fingers
Hint : it's hardly Julian Assange; rather, look at who's pointing fingers
14
The Times publishes an article on Julian Assange with one of the subtexts being that some governments and other organizations and people are out to smear his reputation and paint him as a stooge of Russia. I submit that this article strongly suggests that the Times has joined the “Assange is a stooge of Russia” crowd. The article is somewhat slanted.
What I find astonishing is that my extremely liberal Times readers have put their liberalism in timeout and joined the smear Assange hallelujah chorus. The calls for his prosecution/persecution by Times “liberals” is astounding. There can be only one reason for this about face and that is the fear that Assange and Wikileaks are holding and may expose corruption in the world-wide effort to enrich financially and politically the Clintons and their progeny for eternity. That Will Not Do!
The women that Assange had a consensual sexual relationship with in Sweden made an offer to settle their concerns without involving the legal system but a Swedish prosecutor decided there would be none of that. So the fix is in. Assange’s fear that he will be extradited to the US and disappear into a mad max prison system for the rest of his life are justified. All the corruption that Wikileaks has exposed no longer matters, Hillary Clinton must not be exposed. What do they call such behavior, situational ethics?
What I find astonishing is that my extremely liberal Times readers have put their liberalism in timeout and joined the smear Assange hallelujah chorus. The calls for his prosecution/persecution by Times “liberals” is astounding. There can be only one reason for this about face and that is the fear that Assange and Wikileaks are holding and may expose corruption in the world-wide effort to enrich financially and politically the Clintons and their progeny for eternity. That Will Not Do!
The women that Assange had a consensual sexual relationship with in Sweden made an offer to settle their concerns without involving the legal system but a Swedish prosecutor decided there would be none of that. So the fix is in. Assange’s fear that he will be extradited to the US and disappear into a mad max prison system for the rest of his life are justified. All the corruption that Wikileaks has exposed no longer matters, Hillary Clinton must not be exposed. What do they call such behavior, situational ethics?
11
It's a shame that the misdeeds of the West put Russia in a better light.
9
Assange is a prisoner. Stuck in a little embassy in London, no fresh air, and being subject to the actions and decisions of an Equadorian dictator. On top of that finally understanding that he has no friends, nobody respecting him, and always that possibility to end up in Sweden and then America. No picnic - even for a fool.
5
He is NOT a prisoner, he chose to be there because he is a coward
9
Shows that Putin is afraid of Hillary Clinton...
10
Very doubtful. Putin plays his own game.
Putin wants Trump to win so bad he can taste it...because he knows Trump is dumber than a box of rocks. What color is the sky in your world?
2
When it comes to full disclosure, the person doing it needs to have high moral fiber... otherwise, they push their own subversive agenda. Assange has made it clear throughout the years of his life that he is anti-establishment, anti-government minded. Rather than seeking to CORRECT problems, he'd just assume burn everything to the ground.
He is no hero. WikiLeaks has done only 2 good things -- exposed a tragic mistake in an Iraq mission that killed civilians and then was covered up, and as a conduit for Edward Snowden. Nothing else of notable value has come out of them. There's a good reason why....
He is no hero. WikiLeaks has done only 2 good things -- exposed a tragic mistake in an Iraq mission that killed civilians and then was covered up, and as a conduit for Edward Snowden. Nothing else of notable value has come out of them. There's a good reason why....
7
You say:
In July, the organization released nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails suggesting that the party had conspired with Hillary Clinton’s campaign to undermine her primary opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders.
Your use of the word "suggesting" reveals your bias.
Luis Miranda instructed staff to spread a false story about violence at the Nevada Convention without attribution. That is blatant.
In July, the organization released nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails suggesting that the party had conspired with Hillary Clinton’s campaign to undermine her primary opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders.
Your use of the word "suggesting" reveals your bias.
Luis Miranda instructed staff to spread a false story about violence at the Nevada Convention without attribution. That is blatant.
18
This "journalism" is a plant - just as a lot of WMDs and rush to Iraq war was.
Don't blame the messenger. The fact is that no one has questioned the veracity of the information being provided by Wikileaks, just the method. In the day of corrupt and self-serving politicians, I'd rather have the information and consider what Wikileaks is doing to be a service, and Edward Snowden to be a hero of this nation. Without him, we would be lot more in dark.
Don't blame the messenger. The fact is that no one has questioned the veracity of the information being provided by Wikileaks, just the method. In the day of corrupt and self-serving politicians, I'd rather have the information and consider what Wikileaks is doing to be a service, and Edward Snowden to be a hero of this nation. Without him, we would be lot more in dark.
19
The article questions the timing of the releases, and the intent behind them, not the veracity or "the method" whatever that means. It is the stated intent of Assange and WikiLeaks to interfere with the election for president of the US. He has stated that he wants to take down Mrs. Clinton because he has a personal vendetta against her. Assange and WikiLeaks are foreign entities. I find that troubling regardless whether the data dumps contain true information or not. Not one commenter lauding Mr. Assange and bashing the NYTimes has responded to that allegation.
29
Mr Assange made no such statement. Now, if you take a look at statements from our elected officials, you will see not only desire for takedown of Mr Assange, but also the death penalty. Are you really more concerned about the timing of the DNC releases than with the substance? It outrages me to think that what really amounts to treasonous behavior against our electoral system is somehow less disturbing than timing of the release. Mr Assange appears to care more about this country than you do.
2
The Bible says: "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Since the Wiki leaks are all true, even the most ardent Clinton partisan has no real grounds to "beef". Another thing is this: What if the Russian KGB/FSB has most of those 30, 000 missing Clinton e mails and not Assange and Snowden and they simply wait out the election, Hillary Clinton wins, and those e mails contain so much wrongdoing, morally and legally, that they can be used as blackmail/leverage by Comrade Putin to bend Clinton to his will. Regardless of whether one is pro or anti Russian or neutral this distinct possibility should give any real American pause. Given the overwhelming likelihood of this, as well as Trump's admiration / respect for Vladimir Putin, it appears to me that the Kremlin will have a "friend" in Washington in the White House and be pleased and happy however this election turns out. The greater threat would be from a President Hillary Clinton if they have really serious e mails showing corruption and wrong doing on her part. With Trump we only risk naivete and a patsy for the Russian government not a full blown "Manchurian candidate". The best thing for the United States would be the DNC and RNC forcing both presidential candidates to step down and running completely "clean" party hacks, non entity from each party. At least then however the election for POTUS went, we would not need to be concerned over America's national security and defense. With these two, who knows?
4
It has not escaped notice that many of us trust the revelations of Wikileaks more than those of the NYTimes.
26
Mr.Assange and WikiLeaks have a proven 100% accuracy track record.
What else is there to know?
What else is there to know?
20
Well put!
2
Assange's narcissism blinds him to reality and his own motives.
10
Mr.Assange only reveals information that does Damage to the Democrats. Is he being paid by some Wealthy Republicans to do this?
7
So the Russians give us better information than we can get from the goverment and news media here.
21
Seriously, NY Times? Let first cast a stone... those are self-condemned judge others and yet do the same thing.
6
The reason for the WikiLeaks bias is that Mr. Assange is a rather typical anti-Western leftist who see the United States as the source of all the political, military and economic evil in the world. People with this worldview still have a creeping admiration for Russia even decades after it stopped being a bulwark of socialism, and as a result it's painful for them to criticize her. This doesn't discredit Mr. Assange or WikiLeaks of course, but when analyzing its information, or the information from anywhere, one should always consider the source too.
6
I agree with Assange. Russia is no longer a super power. Nato, (stupidly) has now expanded right up to the Russian border. I am no fan of Putin, but there are much bigger fish to fry.
Our country is supposed to be a democracy, but it classifies almost everything. Our foreign policy is designed mostly in secret. The CIA is forever messing with other countries, often using USAID as its tool. We have let homeland security create a massive surveillance state, sucking up terabytes of data, which it doesn't consider "collected" until someone actually listens to it. Bush and Obama have both expanded civilian surveillance, and if Clinton doesn't get a chance to expand it more (to target "lone wolf terrorists") that means Trump will have the keys and a core cadre of loyal military and law enforcement people to protect his image.
We need people like Assange, Snowden, Manning, etc., shining the light of truth and transparency on what our government is doing in our name. If this information helps the Russians in some way, it is the fault of the people that made the decision to go ahead with embarrassing actions.
Even the DNC email leaks which have been blamed on Russia only benefit Russia to the extent that they show that the DNC primary was fixed. That was not Russia's idea. That was Clinton and her buddy Schultz that did that.
The TPP, as the leaks show, is designed to shift power from our representatives to global corporations and the billionaires that own them.
We need to know!
Our country is supposed to be a democracy, but it classifies almost everything. Our foreign policy is designed mostly in secret. The CIA is forever messing with other countries, often using USAID as its tool. We have let homeland security create a massive surveillance state, sucking up terabytes of data, which it doesn't consider "collected" until someone actually listens to it. Bush and Obama have both expanded civilian surveillance, and if Clinton doesn't get a chance to expand it more (to target "lone wolf terrorists") that means Trump will have the keys and a core cadre of loyal military and law enforcement people to protect his image.
We need people like Assange, Snowden, Manning, etc., shining the light of truth and transparency on what our government is doing in our name. If this information helps the Russians in some way, it is the fault of the people that made the decision to go ahead with embarrassing actions.
Even the DNC email leaks which have been blamed on Russia only benefit Russia to the extent that they show that the DNC primary was fixed. That was not Russia's idea. That was Clinton and her buddy Schultz that did that.
The TPP, as the leaks show, is designed to shift power from our representatives to global corporations and the billionaires that own them.
We need to know!
91
Deliberately confusing Assange with the earlier heroic actions of hackers is disingenuous. How odd that Assange never reveals emails by Trump or Putin.
Assange's one-sided attacks on the Democrats reveal him to be another Russian troll spreading disinformation, just as Putin's attacks on NATO in the Swedish media frightened the Swedish public.
Assange's one-sided attacks on the Democrats reveal him to be another Russian troll spreading disinformation, just as Putin's attacks on NATO in the Swedish media frightened the Swedish public.
5
You stole my thunder and you did it well. Thank you.
1
I don't know how any of our lives have been improved even one iota by any of this. Transparency (especially just for transparency's sake) is just a modern, meaningless meme and so far it seems to mostly distract us from the real dangers...the Koch brothers and their ilk, so-called religious extremism, nuclear war.
Everybody benefits except the criminal US government and their corporate handlers.
9
Many of the commentators here seem to believe that Snowden and Assange are practically the same person. One is an American, the other is not. One served in the US military, the other did not. One is a whistle blower, the other is a journalist. They are accused of different crimes, had different motivations, and are in different situations. Personally, I think both are heroes. However, if you are going to attack them both, please at least have the intelligence to recognize that these are totally separate cases.
9
Of course it does. When Snowden's actions had barely made a news blip it was all that was featured on an episode of the disturbed and disturbing RT News. That's a news program straight from Putin's fevered brain. And I thought why you naive nitwit you have played right into this man's hands. Associating yourself with someone as destructive as Putin and his regime shows only a complete ignorance not only of Russian and world politics but a complete naivete about human nature. And also it takes amazing arrogance to think you know best for the world. Assange just shows his arrogance and contempt for everyone else in every action he takes.
4
NYT: We hate Russia! We hate Putin too!
So we need to hate Assange by association!
FBI: Err ... looks like there is no association!
NYT: We hate Russia! We hate Snowden!
So we hate Assange by association!
Way to go, NYT!
So we need to hate Assange by association!
FBI: Err ... looks like there is no association!
NYT: We hate Russia! We hate Snowden!
So we hate Assange by association!
Way to go, NYT!
15
Mr. Assange: “Our primary targets are those highly oppressive regimes in China, Russia and Central Eurasia.”
But, instead, we get news about a political party's officials secretly favoring one of its potential candidates.
Three possibilities:
1. He is incompetent in his stated purpose since he can't get any secret information on China or Russia or North Korea, given that they are much more secretive countries than the US;
2. He is a coward who can indeed get such information, but doesn't want to face what Russia or North Korea does to their enemies--even outside of their national borders;
3. He actually believes that the actions of the US government are more terrible than any other major country on earth.
Or, I suppose, he could just have been lying and doesn't care where the information is from, as long as he can feel self-important. And those who want to see a single villain in the world are okay with that, since they certainly are not asking about what has happened to the promised revelations about other countries, including those who have killed or imprisoned thousands of their citizens. As Assange suggests, that stuff is so boring.
But, instead, we get news about a political party's officials secretly favoring one of its potential candidates.
Three possibilities:
1. He is incompetent in his stated purpose since he can't get any secret information on China or Russia or North Korea, given that they are much more secretive countries than the US;
2. He is a coward who can indeed get such information, but doesn't want to face what Russia or North Korea does to their enemies--even outside of their national borders;
3. He actually believes that the actions of the US government are more terrible than any other major country on earth.
Or, I suppose, he could just have been lying and doesn't care where the information is from, as long as he can feel self-important. And those who want to see a single villain in the world are okay with that, since they certainly are not asking about what has happened to the promised revelations about other countries, including those who have killed or imprisoned thousands of their citizens. As Assange suggests, that stuff is so boring.
7
" If Mr. Assange appreciated the irony of the moment — denouncing censorship in an interview on Russia Today, the Kremlin-controlled English-language propaganda channel”
When I was enrolled in college a world history class in 1964, the instructor kept referring to “Soviet propaganda” vs “American Education.” It appears this article is engaging in similar tactics.
At the height of the Cold War a story was circulating about a conversation between a Soviet citizen and an American. The Soviet citizen said to the American, “The difference between you Americans and us is that we know our news is propaganda. You Americans think your news is the truth.”
If we want our adversaries to not benefit from information leaks by whistle blowers, whether Corporate or governmental, then our Corporate and governmental leaders should alter their behavior instead of trying to discredit the whistleblowers, whoever they may be.
When I was enrolled in college a world history class in 1964, the instructor kept referring to “Soviet propaganda” vs “American Education.” It appears this article is engaging in similar tactics.
At the height of the Cold War a story was circulating about a conversation between a Soviet citizen and an American. The Soviet citizen said to the American, “The difference between you Americans and us is that we know our news is propaganda. You Americans think your news is the truth.”
If we want our adversaries to not benefit from information leaks by whistle blowers, whether Corporate or governmental, then our Corporate and governmental leaders should alter their behavior instead of trying to discredit the whistleblowers, whoever they may be.
8
To rebel is justified.
5
Arrest him and bring him to trial in the US.
3
Have you considered that maybe the Wikileaks documents are seen as embarrassing to the US and our activities because our government conducts itself in an untrustworthy way? The list of illegal activities our government has been engaged in both historically and today is quite long.
May I suggest John Perkins' Confessions of an Economic Hitman and the Trilogy from the late Chalmers Johnson- a retired Professor, former Naval Intelligence Officer and CIA Analyst.
Johnson's Trilogy includes these books-
Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire
The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic
Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
Johnson's books are all still in print and also are available in various e-book formats. I highly recommend them.
As to why so many benefit Russia and few point at them, maybe the Russians are better at keeping their secrets as they do not contract out intelligence activities to for-profit companies and do not put former First Ladies that use private email servers in charge of Foreign Policy. Stupid is as stupid does, Ms Clinton.
May I suggest John Perkins' Confessions of an Economic Hitman and the Trilogy from the late Chalmers Johnson- a retired Professor, former Naval Intelligence Officer and CIA Analyst.
Johnson's Trilogy includes these books-
Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire
The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic
Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
Johnson's books are all still in print and also are available in various e-book formats. I highly recommend them.
As to why so many benefit Russia and few point at them, maybe the Russians are better at keeping their secrets as they do not contract out intelligence activities to for-profit companies and do not put former First Ladies that use private email servers in charge of Foreign Policy. Stupid is as stupid does, Ms Clinton.
14
Assange is a traitor and is working hard to get Trump elected so he and his Russians pals can benefit.
11
A traitor? To who? He isn't American. Also, if he was so buddy-buddy with the Russians why aren't they giving him sanctuary?
3
traitor? thanks for the laugh
you know hes not a US citizen right?
so therefore who is he a traitor to?
Sweden?
i doubt sweden considers him one
you know hes not a US citizen right?
so therefore who is he a traitor to?
Sweden?
i doubt sweden considers him one
5
Funny thing about Hillary helping to secure all those rights to American uranium supplies for Russian companies . . . .
6
The article is a little bias, no? Besides, its title implies that democracy only works for the good guys. I'm sorry, if Russia benefits or not, leaks is the only way, we, the ignoramus of the inside workings of politics have a hint of what is going on. So, please, choose a better title because, we, the ignoramus also benefit from knowing what is going on behind our back.
21
I really would prefer you not to speak on my behalf by using the word "we".
5
These days, I am really questioning if we are still the "good guys".
6
I am so-o-o tired of the propaganda in the New York Times. Everyone who is not for Hillary Clinton in this election is suspect for reasons concocted by the paranoid self-interest of this newspaper. Mr. Assange may well be bored given his circumstances. End of story.
33
It has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton for me. Assange is a loathsome figure under any circumstance. Would you want this creep living next to you? He's the type that would train a telescope on your bedroom window or sneak up to your window with a GoPro after dark and then sell what he found out about you to the highest bidder. He's just the National Observer on steroids and he traffics in state secrets, which every country has to have. Sometimes those are dirty little secrets too, but it is not his place to traffic in them, especially given his own alleged criminal history.
Anyone who has to live on the run like Assange is not a credible source, Hillary Clinton and State Department or not. I see this guy and my skin just crawls.
He'll write books, he'll entertain and regale the media, and no doubt be irresistible to Hollywood... he's the biggest huckster and con artist this side of Donald Trump.
Anyone who has to live on the run like Assange is not a credible source, Hillary Clinton and State Department or not. I see this guy and my skin just crawls.
He'll write books, he'll entertain and regale the media, and no doubt be irresistible to Hollywood... he's the biggest huckster and con artist this side of Donald Trump.
8
He doesn't sell anything, nor is the purported subject interesting to anyone but you. That assertive supposition places you on the side of lying lies and the lying liars who tell them. Hope you still feel clean ?
4
Ah, here is the NY Times preparing its readers for the expected damaging new Wikileaks info on its candidate Hillary Clinton lol. This transparent tactic insults our intelligence.
23
I have to wonder why comments supportive of the article's thesis appeared right away and why my critical comment appeared 12 hour later.
Studies have shown that comments can affect readers perception of the original story -- is the NYT using moderation to guarantee that supportive comments are prioritized over critical ones?
Studies have shown that comments can affect readers perception of the original story -- is the NYT using moderation to guarantee that supportive comments are prioritized over critical ones?
17
Yes. This deceptive and unacknowledged manipulation has been going on for some time
8
Look at the NYT picks. There are at least 50 comments pointing out that the NYT is accusing the messenger only because the message is detrimental to Hillary Clinton. Not one has put chosen as a Pick (at this point in time).
5
Is the Pope Catholic?
3
Quick, change the narrative now that it's Hilary's corruption being exposed.
24
How kind (timid?) of the NY Times to say that Julian Assange has sought asylum due to "a legal imbroglio," when in fact the man is accused in Sweden of rape. If his name was Clinton, the word "rape" would have been featured at least twice before the jump, and Maureen Dowd would be working on at least her 10th column about the matter.
14
Thank you Dan from Baltimore!
3
OMG! Russia benefited when Jonas Salk discovered the polio vaccine! OMG we should have stopped Salk!
Good grief NYT.
Good grief NYT.
24
I believe the NYT is now managed by the US govt. What a garbage headline and article.
If the US govt is caught lying, breaking laws, torturing, surveilling, and coordinating the killing of innocent people in illegal, undeclared wars, the beneficiary is the world in knowing the truth.
What garbage can you conjure next. The truth reveals the US deception and lies- the benefits are to the US voters and the world to see the hypocrisy of the corrupt war mongering US industrial military complex.
This is an embarrassing reflection on the paper.
If the US govt is caught lying, breaking laws, torturing, surveilling, and coordinating the killing of innocent people in illegal, undeclared wars, the beneficiary is the world in knowing the truth.
What garbage can you conjure next. The truth reveals the US deception and lies- the benefits are to the US voters and the world to see the hypocrisy of the corrupt war mongering US industrial military complex.
This is an embarrassing reflection on the paper.
25
You may just have hit the proverbial nail on the head with your first sentence. The NYT used to be a venerable publication that spoke truth to the people. That hasn't been the case in at least a decade or more. I've so disappointed with them that I stopped paying to read the paper. I just subscribe to the crossword and really feel it's not worth it since they've dumbed it down so much. I'm predicting that I won't be renewing my crossword subscription. R.I.P. to the old "Grey Lady." She was lovely, but she is no more.
6
If you don't like what you read in the NYT, get your news from elsewhere. Go to wikileaks. Apparently this organisation is the font of "truth," no matter how they conduct themselves and how many people they screw getting to their perception of the "truth." Assange runs the same type of operation as those he wants to expose.
1
Julian Assange believes America is the world's worst large democracy. Except, of course, for all of the others. And Russia doesn't even count as a Democracy.
7
America isn't a democracy though...
5
This reminds me to write another check to the Hillary Victory Fund.
10
Did this article come from Frank Underwood's office? In this flimsy attempt to tie Wikileaks to Russia, the Times does some serious service to the Pentagon by attacking both Russia and whistleblowing at the same time. The article implies that everything Assange says critical of the US is essentially supporting Russia (e.g.. if you don't by the Ukrainian narrative put out by US government, then you must support Russia). It also talks to how Wikileaks is undermining democratic processes in the US, while completely ignoring the Snowden revelations that the US is hacking and spying and undermining democratic processes on a global level. This is unfortunately another weak article that comes across as propaganda. And the presence of so many similar articles in recent days is why many cite a resurgence in McCarthyism, or Underwoodism.
28
Of course Assange is a Russian tool, as is any paper that would publish a Putin Op-Ed on Sept 11.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from...
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from...
8
Interesting effort by the Times. Curious how it only impugns efforts that hold this admin up to ridicule. Also curious is the fact that while the info is accurate the intentions of the publisher becomes the story. As Churchill put it the "Bodyguard of Lies" works both ways given the facility to drop off info without tracking. The recent stories on hacks are an indirect result of the US forcing access by NSA to myriad communications. An exploit by design can be exploited by anyone . If the White House does it its good and if the Kremlin does its bad?
18
The most telling comment was his assertion that he is WikiLeaks. Like many people in power or able to influence power, he has completely lost his way. It seems apparent he has become little more than a stooge for anyone wanting to do harm to others. Russia is just more adept at manipulating him, because he is so transparent and small minded.
11
Your comment only emphasizes how much the truth and candor bother some people.
He is wikileaks. Obviously. Much in the same way -- but more -- than Pink Floyd, Radiohead, Coldplay... bands, yes, but they were Roger Waters, Thom Yorke, and Chris Martin. Without those three, the bands wouldn't have been. Without Assange, no wikileaks.
He is wikileaks. Obviously. Much in the same way -- but more -- than Pink Floyd, Radiohead, Coldplay... bands, yes, but they were Roger Waters, Thom Yorke, and Chris Martin. Without those three, the bands wouldn't have been. Without Assange, no wikileaks.
2
The press is building up a head of steam on then pending State Department document release and the threatened Assange wikileaks on Hillary - the new polls are fully as negative about her as Trump. The NY Times spent a week running an article on how Hillary was practising how to get Trump's goat during the debate. I would think it was the other way round - how to counter Trumps comments of favors to the foundation donors without melting down or appearing like a sleaze. I would like to be a fly on the wall watching Hillary practice open and sincere in front of a mirror - something that doesn't come naturally to her.
11
For everyone who supports Assange I'd like him to hack your personal and work emails and then give it to the world. He's a self-serving phony.
18
No need for Assange to hack us - our government is already doing that to us.
5
Only a problem if you're doing pay-for-play while United States Secretary of State...
3
I've neither written nor done anything to be ashamed of. Is that what the world has come to? Has corruption become so casual to you that you believe everyone has skeletons?? How pitiful.
Assange and Trump are two peas in a pod. Power obsessed ego maniacs. Anything, ANYTHING, for attention. Completely untrustworthy slugs.
15
Had it wanted to run an even slightly even-handed piece, the Times could have mentioned that during Snowden's initial NSA leak the United States, believing Snowden to be on board, pressured Spain, Italy, and France to deny airspace to the Bolivian president's plane. It was rerouted to Austria. (Psss: Snowden wasn't on board.)
Days later, the Times had a story with this headline: "Defiant Russia Offers Snowden Temporary Asylum." But by forcing the Bolivian's president down -- the type of action that in yesteryear caused wars -- Russia wasn't being "defiant" at all -- it had more than the right to offer Snowden asylum, it had the obligation.
The New York Times has obviously made the decision high up -- do whatever it takes to put Clinton in the White House. We'll deal with the fallout later.
Days later, the Times had a story with this headline: "Defiant Russia Offers Snowden Temporary Asylum." But by forcing the Bolivian's president down -- the type of action that in yesteryear caused wars -- Russia wasn't being "defiant" at all -- it had more than the right to offer Snowden asylum, it had the obligation.
The New York Times has obviously made the decision high up -- do whatever it takes to put Clinton in the White House. We'll deal with the fallout later.
21
I afraid that the fallout might be literal.
3
@Elfton. You win the thread.
3
One thing is clear, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are all three bigger and better men that the collective ilk that is the US government.
23
Assange clearly is biased and is working hard to get Trump elected so he and his Russian pals can profit.
9
You got two out of three right.
The authors blame Russia for America's transgressions:
"But WikiLeaks’ disclosures often benefit Russia, our examination found — whether by conviction, convenience or coincidence."
In fact, the disclosures benefit Russia because they expose American misconduct. THAT is why the disclosures benefit Russia and shame every law-abiding, decent citizen in this country.
Amnesty, Medal of Honor to Assange!
"But WikiLeaks’ disclosures often benefit Russia, our examination found — whether by conviction, convenience or coincidence."
In fact, the disclosures benefit Russia because they expose American misconduct. THAT is why the disclosures benefit Russia and shame every law-abiding, decent citizen in this country.
Amnesty, Medal of Honor to Assange!
18
The problem with Wikileaks is that it appears Wikileaks is not interested or incapable of leaking anything big except from Washington. This exclusion of some of the most terrible countries on earth, e.g. Russia, North Korea, China, and most of the Middle East countries, makes Wikileaks anti-American and should be dealt with accordingly.
15
I couldn't agree more. While the USA is no utopia, Russia, China and North Korea's human rights abuses are legendary. Most of the material that Wikileaks exposes are about shadowy deals, not about State mandated killings -- like in the other countries mentioned.
5
China, Russia and Middle East never positioned themselves
as champion of human rights, democracy and freedom.
What bad things they do are not hypocritical. In case
of USA which always harp on human rights ,democracy
and america as a beacon to the world, the leaks are
revealing. Russia and china are the same in public
and private. USA is great in public and repressive
in private. There are two americas- we know the public, greatest country in the world but only find out the
hidden america through leaks. Now every body
acknowledges the massive surveillance after Snowden.
If he didn't ,we will never know. Obama has been tough
in pursuing and punishing the leakers. He doesn't
want any one to know the unsavory practices
of his government. His public rhetoric was keeping
public pacified. Thanks to Assange and Snowden we
know our president, Mr. transparency, a little better.
as champion of human rights, democracy and freedom.
What bad things they do are not hypocritical. In case
of USA which always harp on human rights ,democracy
and america as a beacon to the world, the leaks are
revealing. Russia and china are the same in public
and private. USA is great in public and repressive
in private. There are two americas- we know the public, greatest country in the world but only find out the
hidden america through leaks. Now every body
acknowledges the massive surveillance after Snowden.
If he didn't ,we will never know. Obama has been tough
in pursuing and punishing the leakers. He doesn't
want any one to know the unsavory practices
of his government. His public rhetoric was keeping
public pacified. Thanks to Assange and Snowden we
know our president, Mr. transparency, a little better.
2
Want to be the "leader of the free world?" Act like one, not a Capone era gangsta crew.
And "makes Wikileaks anti-American and should be dealt with accordingly?" Sounds like a chilling threat, yet in these odd times of bitter disillusionment, it turns out to be authentic US policy, however unhinged from the US constitution.
Russia, China, run by despots? Who'da thunk? Wait... But when the self styled "leader of the free world" - and this is no campy quote from a campy Bond film, but a traditional and authentic US Presidential saying - is shown to have no clothes? Well that's news.
Doesn't fit the narrative of your basic US "patriot"? Boohoo.
And "makes Wikileaks anti-American and should be dealt with accordingly?" Sounds like a chilling threat, yet in these odd times of bitter disillusionment, it turns out to be authentic US policy, however unhinged from the US constitution.
Russia, China, run by despots? Who'da thunk? Wait... But when the self styled "leader of the free world" - and this is no campy quote from a campy Bond film, but a traditional and authentic US Presidential saying - is shown to have no clothes? Well that's news.
Doesn't fit the narrative of your basic US "patriot"? Boohoo.
3
I have little doubt the Swedish justice system is doing its job, although I'm a little less convinced with respect to the UK. I'm dead certain however that the CIA has done a better job than either. The arrangement with a couple of Scandinavian prostitutes is just too conventional and convenient to be believed.
US leaders have made it clear they want Assange's head, so they will get it and he'll never make it to Sweden or if he did, he'd somehow disappear while there. Why do you think Assange didn't take up Russia's visa? His plane would never have made it to Russian airspace before being grounded by a compliant ally, with Assange dragged off to some black site.
Fantasy? Wikileaks has proven the US and done far, far worse with less motivation. Assange has shown the US has used and abused legal proceedings and its own constitution so egregiously blind trust is in short supply, outside the usual blind US patriots. You reap what you sow; and it turns out all those spy movies quaintly underestimated the US capacity for subterfuge.
US leaders have made it clear they want Assange's head, so they will get it and he'll never make it to Sweden or if he did, he'd somehow disappear while there. Why do you think Assange didn't take up Russia's visa? His plane would never have made it to Russian airspace before being grounded by a compliant ally, with Assange dragged off to some black site.
Fantasy? Wikileaks has proven the US and done far, far worse with less motivation. Assange has shown the US has used and abused legal proceedings and its own constitution so egregiously blind trust is in short supply, outside the usual blind US patriots. You reap what you sow; and it turns out all those spy movies quaintly underestimated the US capacity for subterfuge.
13
Putin, Assange and Ann Coulter all want Trump to be elected. Talk about strange bedfellows!
7
Not at all.
1
Russia benefited from a long string of US military disasters from Vietnam right up/down to Libya et al. Do you think US neocons, Bush, Obama, HRC et al are actually stooges for Russia ...
6
A gossip columnist here in Houston used to say, "If you don't want to read about in the papers, don't do it." That remark ought to be directed at the US government by your newspaper, but of course you don't tell either. So that leaves it to Wikileaks, Snowden, and Manning. That God for them.
8
You don't have like Mr Assange, what he does is very important, it seems it is the only way, the NY Times and other news outlet won't tell the truth about Clinton's or DNC.
13
This is repeated word for word as another comment here, complete with bad grammar. Russian trolls?
6
Oh boy. It almost sounds as if Bob Britton is pining for those glory days of McCarthyism. Who'd have thunk?
1
Many comments are disturbingly ignoring the foundational problem with Russian conducting cyber warfare attacks on the United States.
The partisan political value of the stolen content being released through WikiLeaks should come second to the very existential threat and problem of an enemy foreign regime attacking the US. We, as Americans, should not let our domestic partisan political battles cloud our judgement and unity in the face of an enemy regime in the Kremlin attacking the United States through its asymmetric use of propaganda and information. We are first Americans and we are secondly affiliated to a certain party or brand of politics. The Kremlin wants to divide us and for us to fight amongst each other with these attacks and when we only see the partisan domestic side of the information released in these attacks, we are doing the Kremlin's work for them. We can and should analyze the information, but we should also unite against a foreign enemy regime attacking us and using WikiLeaks as a tool to damage our system.
The partisan political value of the stolen content being released through WikiLeaks should come second to the very existential threat and problem of an enemy foreign regime attacking the US. We, as Americans, should not let our domestic partisan political battles cloud our judgement and unity in the face of an enemy regime in the Kremlin attacking the United States through its asymmetric use of propaganda and information. We are first Americans and we are secondly affiliated to a certain party or brand of politics. The Kremlin wants to divide us and for us to fight amongst each other with these attacks and when we only see the partisan domestic side of the information released in these attacks, we are doing the Kremlin's work for them. We can and should analyze the information, but we should also unite against a foreign enemy regime attacking us and using WikiLeaks as a tool to damage our system.
7
This is classical case of disinformation where NYT and the USG are intricately weaving a story with a conclusion that has been pre-decided. A few years back, it was all about China, and we were treated to how China was engaged in a full-scale cyber war with the U.S. at all levels Today's enemy is Russia. Now because of the present Administration's efforts to defeat Trump candidacy at all costs means Wikileaks must be discredited. Why? Because only a week back, Julian said that Wikileaks will release documents in September that will portray Mrs. Clinton in a bad light.
I feel bad for the U.S. journalists who are mostly very intelligent and possess high personal integrity - but they work for corporations that are politically corrupt and serve as surrogates for the government when directed by the Administration. Even the Obama Administration acknowledged that in the case of Iran, but you can see such "officially blessed" planted stories in the U.S. media every day. In the end, the U.S. publicity machine is no different that the Russian or the Chinese media machine - all work to advance their national interests. It is just that American public at large is so naive.
I feel bad for the U.S. journalists who are mostly very intelligent and possess high personal integrity - but they work for corporations that are politically corrupt and serve as surrogates for the government when directed by the Administration. Even the Obama Administration acknowledged that in the case of Iran, but you can see such "officially blessed" planted stories in the U.S. media every day. In the end, the U.S. publicity machine is no different that the Russian or the Chinese media machine - all work to advance their national interests. It is just that American public at large is so naive.
25
Julian Assange is a nasty piece of work, giving out home address and social security numbers? He's worse than the NSA. His hatred of America is pathological. Unfortunately he used and hurt Snowden who did what he did out of idealistic concerns about the misuse of power and information. Already what Snowden did has changed some things for the better. There is nothing good about Assange, he uses everyone. Funnily he does seem to be a stooge of Russia and Putin but that makes sense because he so hates America. The Ecuadorians must be sick of him.
15
Assange did not give out SS numbers; simply the final 4 digits, exactly like a shopping receipt. Please read the details of a situation to make an informed decision.
5
Well Quad, he is about to give ALL YOUR INFO, get ready
2
Assange is a publicity hound whose legacy consists solely of being an accused rapist.
Why does the Ecuadorian Embassy in London continue to shelter him? Does his mommy work there or something like that?
Why does the Ecuadorian Embassy in London continue to shelter him? Does his mommy work there or something like that?
5
"Does his mommy work there or something like that." Have we reached the playground, yet? Djanga, I think I hear your mommy calling for you. Go home.
2
This piece of McCarthyist er garbage represents a new low I think for NYT, but the way they are going I expect them to surpass it soon. Have you no sense of decency at long last? I guess not. Shame on you.
19
No big deal. Merely the NYT interceding on behalf of HRC and damage control.
22
"How Russia Often Benefits When Julian Assange Reveals the West's Secrets"
Do you think that Russia and every other "competitor" against the United States, both diplomatically and economically, also benefited from the release of secrets by those two heroes of the liberal progressives Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning?
Is Assange really now considered a "bad" person not because his secrets benefit Russia but because he has dared expose secrets that haven't helped a Democratic candidate for president? The hypocrisy within this article is enormous!
Do you think that Russia and every other "competitor" against the United States, both diplomatically and economically, also benefited from the release of secrets by those two heroes of the liberal progressives Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning?
Is Assange really now considered a "bad" person not because his secrets benefit Russia but because he has dared expose secrets that haven't helped a Democratic candidate for president? The hypocrisy within this article is enormous!
12
Did Wikileaks really release "nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails suggesting that the party had conspired with Hillary Clinton’s campaign to undermine" Bernie Sanders? The Times and others' reporting suggests that 3 or 4 of the 20,000 were pondering ways to undermine Sanders.
6
How interesting that Putin and the Russians never get hacked. All of this raises the question: whose payroll is Assange on? To compare Assange with the heroic revelations of earlier hackers is disingenuous. For his revelations to be consistently one-sided is proof enough of conspiracy.
..
..
12
More hankypanky.
3
Does nobody notice that Assange is starting to go off the rails? That Wikileaks recently published massive amounts of personal data that could be used by identity thieves, for no reason other than pettiness or sloppiness? That despite his denial, Assange is clearly being fed intel by Russia, whose ties to Trump are still hidden (probably a major reason for the non-release of tax returns), and which cannot be trusted? Strange to say, every time I think of Assange I wonder what it would be like to go four years without seeing a dentist, and this was actually addressed in the article. Who knows, maybe his teeth hurt so much that he can't sleep, and so he is getting stranger. Am I the only to observe this?
He recently called Hillary Clinton a demon. Anything he releases to damage her should be closely examined. It could easily be fake. Take warming.
He recently called Hillary Clinton a demon. Anything he releases to damage her should be closely examined. It could easily be fake. Take warming.
10
Assange may not be a likable person and he does make public information obtained by illegal means, but thanks to him, we do learn what's going on behind the scenes.
Of course, there are people who would disagree - just ask Debbie Wasserman-Shultz.
Of course, there are people who would disagree - just ask Debbie Wasserman-Shultz.
11
It seems the "see no evil hear no evil" crowd is out en masse this morning to smear the messenger...
How about addressing the message?
How about addressing the message?
12
tom,
you've actually got it inverted. it is the times that is smearing the messenger and ignoring the message: namely that the establishment candidate that the times and the media in general ushered into the nomination is guilty of quite possibly criminal acts.
you've actually got it inverted. it is the times that is smearing the messenger and ignoring the message: namely that the establishment candidate that the times and the media in general ushered into the nomination is guilty of quite possibly criminal acts.
1
@Tom
The content of the leaks related to the Russian cyber-warfare attack has been covered and is still being covered, but that is not the only story here.
An enemy regime is conducting asymmetric warfare with the help of WikiLeaks as an independent-looking front. Russia is using its intelligence and propaganda arms to attack the United States in an effort to damage our electoral process.
The content of the leaks is being covered and used in our domestic political partisan battles, but what about Russia conducting cyber warfare attacks and asymmetric informational war on the US electoral system?
Republicans, Democrats and all Americans should be united in concern and the need for a response to deal with Russia's aggression that is being used to create political divisions in America as well as with our allies. If we only concentrate on the substance and not on the enemy regime targeting us, we are doing the Kremlin's work for them and that is unacceptable, no matter what your politics are.
The content of the leaks related to the Russian cyber-warfare attack has been covered and is still being covered, but that is not the only story here.
An enemy regime is conducting asymmetric warfare with the help of WikiLeaks as an independent-looking front. Russia is using its intelligence and propaganda arms to attack the United States in an effort to damage our electoral process.
The content of the leaks is being covered and used in our domestic political partisan battles, but what about Russia conducting cyber warfare attacks and asymmetric informational war on the US electoral system?
Republicans, Democrats and all Americans should be united in concern and the need for a response to deal with Russia's aggression that is being used to create political divisions in America as well as with our allies. If we only concentrate on the substance and not on the enemy regime targeting us, we are doing the Kremlin's work for them and that is unacceptable, no matter what your politics are.
1
Well Assange is right about one thing: he is a hopeless Kremlin stooge.
4
As far as we can tell, our Government is no better than Mr. Assange in any way at all. They lie, cheat, steal, profit from poor people's misery. All of this has been proven in courts of law, we see it every day. Why then is it all of the sudden a BIG deal that the guy who gamed the system better than everyone else is turning out not to be such a great guy?
What is great about him is that he proved that one man CAN fight the system and the enormous power it has. THAT is why he is regarded as a hero. Someone has to keep those in power from becoming ALL POWERFUL. If not him, then who? I don't see any takers.
What if we all turned off our HHD's, HDTV's, Computers and Cell phones for one day? What if we orchestrated it with social media not to use social media for just one day? Could we endure the loss of self worth? The need to let everyone know what we are doing at this very moment? The need to constantly be entertained by everything in the world all at once right now? What if we did it for one week?
Mr. Assange will definitely go down in history a famous person. Probably as famous as Barrack Obama. But will he be good famous or bad famous? It will be in the bits and bytes for future generations to find out...and they will find out.
What is great about him is that he proved that one man CAN fight the system and the enormous power it has. THAT is why he is regarded as a hero. Someone has to keep those in power from becoming ALL POWERFUL. If not him, then who? I don't see any takers.
What if we all turned off our HHD's, HDTV's, Computers and Cell phones for one day? What if we orchestrated it with social media not to use social media for just one day? Could we endure the loss of self worth? The need to let everyone know what we are doing at this very moment? The need to constantly be entertained by everything in the world all at once right now? What if we did it for one week?
Mr. Assange will definitely go down in history a famous person. Probably as famous as Barrack Obama. But will he be good famous or bad famous? It will be in the bits and bytes for future generations to find out...and they will find out.
6
Journalism has hit a new low when the readers are smarter than the writers. Exhibit A: Russia often benefits from stories in the NYT. Exhibit B: Most commenters here got it right.
9
Aasange is a de facto tool of the Putinists. Trump is trying to become one.
6
Does he pay for room and board?
2
After reading this article, I ask, Why is there such enmity for Julian Assange ?
After reading the comments, I ask, Why is there such enmity for Julian Assange ?
Just as physicians & psychiatrists do not, ethically, comment without an "office visit", why do persons not familiar with Mr. Assange feel free to do so ?
After reading the comments, I ask, Why is there such enmity for Julian Assange ?
Just as physicians & psychiatrists do not, ethically, comment without an "office visit", why do persons not familiar with Mr. Assange feel free to do so ?
6
Nobody likes a rat.
4
Well sure, the US sometimes plays the role of the bully, and sometimes Russia too.
But we aren't even supposed to be in that category.
And yes it hurts that Assange leaks docs that put the US in a bad light.
But take for instance Syria right now.
What are we up to, a hundred thousand dead? in the fighting there, or is it two hundred thousand.
That's a lot of people killed needlessly, over what is essentially a dispute over a pipeline path to get Saudi/Qatari natural gas to Europe and disrupt Putin's monopoly supply position there.
Yet the US and Russia have undertaken no significant effort to work out their differences, in this commercial dispute, but instead have let proxies on the ground die in the fighting, more than a hundred thousand of them.
Or take Iraq, where over a million died during the US occupation after the uninvestigated crimes of 9/11, which launched these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which mostly benefited, oil and heroin cartels.
Thank goodness someone is releasing documents somewhere, since it seems our government has been irretrievably hijacked by the military industrial complex and cartels like those for oil, gas, heroin, weapons, etc, are willing to wage wars continuously in perpetuity for commercial gain, regardless of how many people on the ground are killed.
But we aren't even supposed to be in that category.
And yes it hurts that Assange leaks docs that put the US in a bad light.
But take for instance Syria right now.
What are we up to, a hundred thousand dead? in the fighting there, or is it two hundred thousand.
That's a lot of people killed needlessly, over what is essentially a dispute over a pipeline path to get Saudi/Qatari natural gas to Europe and disrupt Putin's monopoly supply position there.
Yet the US and Russia have undertaken no significant effort to work out their differences, in this commercial dispute, but instead have let proxies on the ground die in the fighting, more than a hundred thousand of them.
Or take Iraq, where over a million died during the US occupation after the uninvestigated crimes of 9/11, which launched these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which mostly benefited, oil and heroin cartels.
Thank goodness someone is releasing documents somewhere, since it seems our government has been irretrievably hijacked by the military industrial complex and cartels like those for oil, gas, heroin, weapons, etc, are willing to wage wars continuously in perpetuity for commercial gain, regardless of how many people on the ground are killed.
10
Maybe the US and the West should play nice with Assange, he may throw them some bones too.
3
What about Daniel Ellsberg's leak of the Pentagon Papers, which exposed Johnson administration lies to congress and the public regarding it's secret policies and conduct of the war in Vietnam. Wasn't it a certain "paper of record" which published the classified study front-page. Were some of those published revelations perhaps useful to declared enemies of the United States?
Considering so many readers, so quick to follow the Times' lead in condemning Assange, doesn't it strike anyone as oddly convenient that the authors would completely ignore such a prominent historical parallel?
Senator Sanders now out of the way, the Times is now targeting Ms. Clinton's most potent critics.
Considering so many readers, so quick to follow the Times' lead in condemning Assange, doesn't it strike anyone as oddly convenient that the authors would completely ignore such a prominent historical parallel?
Senator Sanders now out of the way, the Times is now targeting Ms. Clinton's most potent critics.
4
This article would never have been written if WikiLeaks' had unearthed the damaging goods on Republicans. Who cares what the Russian's are doing - they're doing the same thing as the U.S., Britain, Israel, China and numerous other countries are doing. The NYT has become Clinton's unabashed campaign PR firm for "all the news unfit to print"
11
Whether a tool of Russian intelligence or others is unclear.What is clear is that he is a tool. This guy is a self proclaimed judge and jury. He's no hero.
4
When did the NYTimes start championing suppresion of truth about our government and its officials?
Do you forget supporting Davis Ellsberg and publishing "The Pentagon Papers"?
Or how about the 1972 NYT glowing reviews of Halberstam's book "The Best and The Brightest" which revealed all the high level lies leading to and conducting the Viet Nam War???
And of course Washington Post's Woodward and Bernstein story on the watergate breakin that brought down Nixon and which this paper published followed ?
Or NYTimes lengthy coverage of the Clinton and Lewinsky scandal?
Don't you think the information in these stories was used extensively as Russian propoganda??????
Do you forget supporting Davis Ellsberg and publishing "The Pentagon Papers"?
Or how about the 1972 NYT glowing reviews of Halberstam's book "The Best and The Brightest" which revealed all the high level lies leading to and conducting the Viet Nam War???
And of course Washington Post's Woodward and Bernstein story on the watergate breakin that brought down Nixon and which this paper published followed ?
Or NYTimes lengthy coverage of the Clinton and Lewinsky scandal?
Don't you think the information in these stories was used extensively as Russian propoganda??????
15
The NYT, in addition to just about every American and western news source has and continues to cover the content of the released documents from the Russian cyber attack on the US, but that is only 1/2 the story when the Kremlin is actively using cyber warfare and asymmetric informational warfare against the US and West. The second 1/2 of this matter is just as important, if not more important, than the content of the stolen data.
1
'Mr. Assange proffered a vision of America as superbully: a nation that has achieved imperial power by proclaiming allegiance to principles of human rights while deploying its military-intelligence apparatus in “pincer” formation to “push” countries into doing its bidding, and punishing people like him who dare to speak the truth.'
Assange's greatest coup! Truth in the New York Times!
Assange's greatest coup! Truth in the New York Times!
12
I think its a bit disingenuous at best and a clear propaganda article at worst to have worded the headline in such a way
A far more accurate, honest and balanced wording (which we SHOULD expect from journalists) is that Russia benefited from the wests actions, nothing more
The idea that its somehow wrong to expose wrongdoing of a government, illegal acts, frauds, murder or anything else that a government shouldn't be doing in the first place is somewhat laughable
WikiLeaks hasn't exposed military secrets, merely wrongdoing, things that the governments involved weren't SUPPOSED to be doing to begin with and things that ANY decent, law abiding citizen of the world SHOULD expose or should want exposed by someone else
Articles like this are effectively saying that we should merely accept the one set of laws for us and NO laws for the ruling elite type dystopian system without question and that we should be angered by anyone who exposes when liberties have been taken by people in power
But instead we should expect far better behaviour from those in power than we would expect from those who aren't because of the power they yield and because how they wield it affects everyone.
Countries introducing laws to punish people who expose illegal actions, fraud and other types of wrong doing to try and deter people from knowing about such things is an utter travesty and one that should never be tolerated by any people from any government anywhere.
A far more accurate, honest and balanced wording (which we SHOULD expect from journalists) is that Russia benefited from the wests actions, nothing more
The idea that its somehow wrong to expose wrongdoing of a government, illegal acts, frauds, murder or anything else that a government shouldn't be doing in the first place is somewhat laughable
WikiLeaks hasn't exposed military secrets, merely wrongdoing, things that the governments involved weren't SUPPOSED to be doing to begin with and things that ANY decent, law abiding citizen of the world SHOULD expose or should want exposed by someone else
Articles like this are effectively saying that we should merely accept the one set of laws for us and NO laws for the ruling elite type dystopian system without question and that we should be angered by anyone who exposes when liberties have been taken by people in power
But instead we should expect far better behaviour from those in power than we would expect from those who aren't because of the power they yield and because how they wield it affects everyone.
Countries introducing laws to punish people who expose illegal actions, fraud and other types of wrong doing to try and deter people from knowing about such things is an utter travesty and one that should never be tolerated by any people from any government anywhere.
13
Next to Assange Edward Snowden may seem have more flair and character. It's despicable that Assange goes to great lengths not to alienate Putin. No wonder he has lost respect among Russian journalists, some of who had been murdered for their investigative journalism, while he questions their integrity in favour of the Kremlin.
Julian Assange should remain holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy and languish there. It looks as though President Rafael Correa is glad to let him stay where he is and not let him into Ecuador. The 24/7 surveillance outside the embassay has cost London police more than £10m so far. According to The Guardian last February, the YouGov poll shows that most people do not accept finding by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention that Assange is being arbitrarily detained. Two in three Britons respond he had voluntarily avoided lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy since June 2012. So it was his own fault.
Julian Assange should remain holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy and languish there. It looks as though President Rafael Correa is glad to let him stay where he is and not let him into Ecuador. The 24/7 surveillance outside the embassay has cost London police more than £10m so far. According to The Guardian last February, the YouGov poll shows that most people do not accept finding by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention that Assange is being arbitrarily detained. Two in three Britons respond he had voluntarily avoided lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy since June 2012. So it was his own fault.
6
The New York Times and Islamic Militants have no known direct ties, yet the latter have benefited from the Times coverage. I offer first the drumbeat of the Times coverage of the Iraq War in 2003. And the coverage of the Libyan misadventure.
The fundamental flaw with this article is its post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy of treasoning.
The fundamental flaw with this article is its post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy of treasoning.
15
Julian Assange is a hero. He is doing what journalists used to do - reporting the truth. It seems the media demonize him only to divert attention from their own failings, when the blame for all of this lies solely with the perpetrators of the deeds exposed - not with the messenger, If the NYT had been doing it's job, the content of Assange's leaks would not have been news. It's appalling really - would you ever have imagined Woodward and Bernstein being treated this way? - after all, the information they reported (Deep Throat) was leaked as well.
23
Assange is no hero to Americans. As a foreigner, the way he leaked the Democratic party's emails demonstrates his partisanship and hostility towards to U.S. His intention is similar to Putin- to embarrass HRC and to help to elect Trump. At the end, what could be worst for U.S. than President Trump? This is a dream for all enemies of U.S.
Recently AP story on how wanton and reckless Wikileaks is in releasing personal information contained in many of the secret documents Wikileaks released. This demonstrates Assange's motive in releasing these secret documents may not be as pure as he claimed.
I hope Manning is the last American to be deceived by Assange. Wikileaks is not an organization any patriotic American should be supporting.
Recently AP story on how wanton and reckless Wikileaks is in releasing personal information contained in many of the secret documents Wikileaks released. This demonstrates Assange's motive in releasing these secret documents may not be as pure as he claimed.
I hope Manning is the last American to be deceived by Assange. Wikileaks is not an organization any patriotic American should be supporting.
3
NYCLAW - I am a proud unpatriotic American and I think Assange is a hero.
3
Any fallout would be entirely the fault of the Democratic Party. If they hadn't done the misdeeds in the first place, there would have been nothing to leak and none of this would matter. I believe you already know that - you just don't happen to like it. Seriously, you focus on the timing?
Although democratic governments keep too much information secret from the public it should not result in empowering Assange and WikiLeaks the right to hack private information and make that information public. This power as never given to WikiLeaks and WikiLeaks should respect the right of privacy especially when it comes to non-governmental information. Information related to the workings of government should be public but private citizens should have their privacy respected by hackers who run the risk of making public information that could lead to miss interpretations (i.e. guilt by association) and irreparable personal harm.
6
You should all go read the wikileaks response to this propa.ganda piece. Jo Becker was exposed and embarrassed by Assange during her poor attempt at an interview (can see it on facebook).
Also, might as well check out Greenwald's interview where he addresses this Clinton/Democrat McCarthyism that's happening. It's incredibly concerning that it's this easy to paint anyone who is not in agreement with you as the enemy - and more concerning are all the sheep that just let it happen, and cheer it on.
"If those in charge of our society — politicians, corporate executives, and owners of press and television — can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." - Howard Zinn
Comment moderation too, wonderful - gg NYT.
Also, might as well check out Greenwald's interview where he addresses this Clinton/Democrat McCarthyism that's happening. It's incredibly concerning that it's this easy to paint anyone who is not in agreement with you as the enemy - and more concerning are all the sheep that just let it happen, and cheer it on.
"If those in charge of our society — politicians, corporate executives, and owners of press and television — can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." - Howard Zinn
Comment moderation too, wonderful - gg NYT.
15
American people believe that they stay in the dreamland of freedom and opportunity just because the U.S. has the most powerful media machine capable of making such an illusion. The only thing that Assange does wrong is to expose dirty truth about "the liberal world", just like American media's daily routine job to Russia and China. Wikileaks makes it clear that the "democracies" are doing the same terrible work as the dictators they usually criticize.
This is really irritating to Americans because it disrupts their naive imagination. It is funny to see how NYT picks the comments that are all against Assange, just like Chinese Communist Party to highlight posts supporting the regime.
Maybe Clinton is a better candidate than Trump and Wikileaks may indirectly help Trump to win, but it cannot justify the dirty work that the Democrats do to Sanders -- well, it may be a little bit better than what Putin did, but still dirty. Yes, this is what politics truly is. This is how the world truly is.
The liberalism tradition tells us that It is WRONG to blame the one who tell the truth, even if the truth teller has his/her own motivation or agenda. Well, the "freedom world" are forgetting this creed when the troubles come to their own.
Welcome to the adult world, Americans.
This is really irritating to Americans because it disrupts their naive imagination. It is funny to see how NYT picks the comments that are all against Assange, just like Chinese Communist Party to highlight posts supporting the regime.
Maybe Clinton is a better candidate than Trump and Wikileaks may indirectly help Trump to win, but it cannot justify the dirty work that the Democrats do to Sanders -- well, it may be a little bit better than what Putin did, but still dirty. Yes, this is what politics truly is. This is how the world truly is.
The liberalism tradition tells us that It is WRONG to blame the one who tell the truth, even if the truth teller has his/her own motivation or agenda. Well, the "freedom world" are forgetting this creed when the troubles come to their own.
Welcome to the adult world, Americans.
10
Thank you for speaking truth to power and piercing America’s “naïve imagination.” Life in the “liberal world” is unquestionably every bit as dismal and suffocating as living under Putin or the Chinese Communist Party; the only thing that keeps our fellow dimwitted citizens in the dark from this undeniable reality is our “powerful media machine.” Surely we need to get the word out to all the naïve fools living underneath dictatorships from every continent clamoring to get to the U.S.
What a burden, KKV, be one of the few adults living amongst children.
What a burden, KKV, be one of the few adults living amongst children.
1
''American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services.''
But that won't stop the NYT and the rest of the Western MSM from spinning the messenger is the problem calumny.
The problem is not that Hillary cheated or that the DNC by deciding BEFORE the election that a Cheneyite GOP wanna be is the only oligarch SELECTION to be permitted (ala Margaret Thatchers; 'there is no alternative'.) but that the released E Mails are doing what this very media are SUPPOSED to do, (ie INFORM us not FORM us) while telling us the truth and proving Sanders right about DNC corruption.
Hillary USED To lecture the Chinese about the need for an open internet but in the last 3 years this changed to 'we are losing control of the narrative'. Now the new line is to ensure controls more effective than the Chinese Governments totalitarian control attempts, by just selling the internet to big Corporations who will prioritize the search engines to secure pro corporate censorship, steered by big business not the people any more.
Perfect and the media now as one have the same pro war, pro big business and anti socialist message (neither Sander NOR Corbyn, who won rather than lost should be allowed to win. We do not have a free press.
If we did there would be no need for Assange, Snowdon or Manning, who are doing Western Civilization an heroic service. Telling us the lies and evil doings of OUR governments and Elite to their own cost.
But that won't stop the NYT and the rest of the Western MSM from spinning the messenger is the problem calumny.
The problem is not that Hillary cheated or that the DNC by deciding BEFORE the election that a Cheneyite GOP wanna be is the only oligarch SELECTION to be permitted (ala Margaret Thatchers; 'there is no alternative'.) but that the released E Mails are doing what this very media are SUPPOSED to do, (ie INFORM us not FORM us) while telling us the truth and proving Sanders right about DNC corruption.
Hillary USED To lecture the Chinese about the need for an open internet but in the last 3 years this changed to 'we are losing control of the narrative'. Now the new line is to ensure controls more effective than the Chinese Governments totalitarian control attempts, by just selling the internet to big Corporations who will prioritize the search engines to secure pro corporate censorship, steered by big business not the people any more.
Perfect and the media now as one have the same pro war, pro big business and anti socialist message (neither Sander NOR Corbyn, who won rather than lost should be allowed to win. We do not have a free press.
If we did there would be no need for Assange, Snowdon or Manning, who are doing Western Civilization an heroic service. Telling us the lies and evil doings of OUR governments and Elite to their own cost.
16
If the United States is such an awful place, why are immigrants from all over the world beating a path to our doors. Why do all peoples, both poor and rich, want to live here. Why do Chinese and Russian Oligarchs set up nests in New York? When was the last time we saw people clamoring to let into China or Russia.
Yes, our Democracy is far from perfect. But a world dominated by Russia, China or another nation would be a far far darker place...
Yes, our Democracy is far from perfect. But a world dominated by Russia, China or another nation would be a far far darker place...
18
The issue is not over which country is a better place -- the U.S. or China and Russia. The issue is What is the U.S. doing wrong and how do we correct it.
This is a quote often attributed to Admiral Decatur:
“Gentlemen, to America, right or wrong. May she always be right.
And when she is wrong, may we have the courage to change her.”
This is a quote often attributed to Admiral Decatur:
“Gentlemen, to America, right or wrong. May she always be right.
And when she is wrong, may we have the courage to change her.”
51
Wonderful!
This article and the readers' comments read very much like the coverage of the olympic doping whistle blowers by the Russian press. Bravo the NYT! Another step in the 'right' direction!
6
The overall lesson - internet communications can never be truly secure. For any kind of privacy or top secret information, a whole new system seems to be required. Because the hacking will never cease.
3
The Times’ reporters are doing their imitation of the three blind mice. Thorough going as their examination was, they entertain all of three possible reasons why Russia reaps the benefits of WikiLeaks disclosures (and the unstated corollary — that the US suffers): conviction, convenience, and coincidence. There doesn’t seem to be anything else. And guess what? Assange is not a Russian spy. Nice work, boys and girls. Now here’s some cheese for you.
3
Again NYT,
As a fugitive from justice, Mr. Assange must be busy in that embassy have need of a neck tie. A better story whould be in the form of a simple list of who goes in and out of the building.
By the way I hope Trump can renegotiate our financial relationship with the Ecuadorean government. Are we paying for Mr. Assange like we did for Iranian hostages?
As a fugitive from justice, Mr. Assange must be busy in that embassy have need of a neck tie. A better story whould be in the form of a simple list of who goes in and out of the building.
By the way I hope Trump can renegotiate our financial relationship with the Ecuadorean government. Are we paying for Mr. Assange like we did for Iranian hostages?
2
Julian KNOWS if he messes with Putin he will be assassinated. Thus he wears kid gloves as regards Russia.
7
Julian, it must be tough to have been confined for so long but you do need to get some perspective on just what the effect of your actions has on the world at large. Calling Clinton a demon is certainly not credible. Willingly or not, you are aiding a demagogue, narcicist, and all-round bad guy in his effort to rule the free world. You're better than that fella.
7
Wiki Leaks took on the wrong crew when it took on Mrs. Clinton and the democrats.
5
Drag this slimy creep out into the street and throw him in a dungeon. Other than sexual predation charges, maybe a few for espionage.
6
The reason why the diplomatic cables had the lowest level of classification (restricted) was so all new hires could freely access them to read and understand the background of the countries and important personnel they were to work in/with. Publishing the names of informers and activists; and now, credit card and social security numbers of civilians, puts them all in danger. While Snowden has been important in our dialogue of increased transparency, Assange has not contributed to that debate in a constructive and meaningful way.
Always be wary of narcissists. Their cause is themselves above all else.
Always be wary of narcissists. Their cause is themselves above all else.
12
This ridiculous article dares not to challenge the truthfulness of Wikileaks publications, as they are all too true. Due to the secretive nature of the US government this has become necessary. Everything Edward Snowden said was true and everything Ms. Manning ever revealed about the US was true. Since I am expected to vote here I must be informed and the evidence is clear, that without these brave peoples revelations I would not be informed, and that is why the US government would like to see these three brave and honest people jailed or worse.. I am on their side 100%.
14
Let's go in and drag Assange out of his hiding hole.
4
So, Alan. You are suggesting we trespass into one friendly nation, the UK, with armed military and invade another friendly nation, Ecuador, in order to illegally kidnap a man who has broken no laws of either of those countries -- or ours.
3
Yeah Alan! That sounds like something a fascist country would do!
USA! USA! USA!
USA! USA! USA!
2
What a silly, slanted, propaganda-laden article. While US gov’t has been completely powerless to stop highly embarrassing revelations by Wikileaks, its shoot-the-messenger strategy has certainly been successful in driving Assange personally into desperate isolation. Can anyone blame him for seeking refuge among those few who offer it, namely various governments with their own scores to settle with the US, or for then refraining from targeting them? And it’s not just Assange, the Obama administration has been pushing the envelope in pursuing recipients of leaks, including members of the press, when it can’t find the source. Whether Assange is a hero or a childish megalomaniac, it’s difficult to deny that, on balance, his revelations of how the elites who run the world actually conduct their business, have been a good thing.
10
It's notable how all the comments are about the messenger and not the message. The US government has played their hand well in keeping the focus away from the disclosures and on the messengers/whistle blowers. The same tactic has been used successfully on Snowden and Manning. The US public has played along.
Obama has cracked down on whistle blowers like no other president in newer history. He has also classified more documents than any other president. Also with increased spying on US citizens (NSA) and death lists (Drone usage), it should not come as a surprise that the USA, "The Beacon of Freedom" and the transparency president Obama draws attention when employing tools common in Russia and other dictatorships.
I am not supporting Assange as a person, but the concept of "honey trap" comes to mind in the Swedish case. And let's not forget how the USA force landed a plane on suspicion that Snowden was onboard. If you on top of that believe that you might be charged with violatingthe Espionage Act, then you know there is little chance for a transparent and fair hearing in court. And the possibility of being getting the same treatment that Manning has gotten, you might not want to take your chance of getting extradited.
I think the public should be informed as much as possible what the government is doing. And that there should be enough transparency to hold government officials accountable for breaking the law. For this I am glad for whistle blowers providing us with tio
Obama has cracked down on whistle blowers like no other president in newer history. He has also classified more documents than any other president. Also with increased spying on US citizens (NSA) and death lists (Drone usage), it should not come as a surprise that the USA, "The Beacon of Freedom" and the transparency president Obama draws attention when employing tools common in Russia and other dictatorships.
I am not supporting Assange as a person, but the concept of "honey trap" comes to mind in the Swedish case. And let's not forget how the USA force landed a plane on suspicion that Snowden was onboard. If you on top of that believe that you might be charged with violatingthe Espionage Act, then you know there is little chance for a transparent and fair hearing in court. And the possibility of being getting the same treatment that Manning has gotten, you might not want to take your chance of getting extradited.
I think the public should be informed as much as possible what the government is doing. And that there should be enough transparency to hold government officials accountable for breaking the law. For this I am glad for whistle blowers providing us with tio
13
There are no shortages of articles in this or any US based publication regarding the content of the WikiLeak distributed information from the Russian cyber warfare attacks on the United States. The other side of this story is certainly important when an enemy regime is conducting asymmetric warfare against the United States.
4
I do not agree with the NYT to give to this guy so much in the paper. It is time to ignore sometimes the follow up news when is enlarging the figure of the criminal or the perpetrator
Oh come on. So moral of the story -- all whistle blowing is pro Russian and if you see something, do NOT say anything because you will be helping Russia.
Or is this a disguised piece to undermine the upcoming release (if that is true) that Assange claims will reflect badly on Clinton -- whom many of your reporters have worked for or for the Clinton White House?
WHere is the objectivity? This is reminiscent of the Cold War bonk shoved down our throats. Yes, Russia poses threats to us but consider your paper's own role in masking that by its focusing on dumbed down aspects or fabricated in some other ways? Shame on your paper
Or is this a disguised piece to undermine the upcoming release (if that is true) that Assange claims will reflect badly on Clinton -- whom many of your reporters have worked for or for the Clinton White House?
WHere is the objectivity? This is reminiscent of the Cold War bonk shoved down our throats. Yes, Russia poses threats to us but consider your paper's own role in masking that by its focusing on dumbed down aspects or fabricated in some other ways? Shame on your paper
15
And Wikileaks does that by showing Russia, and every other country on the planet, just how weak, ignorant, incompetent and useless liberals are when they are in public office.
5
Bush was competent? Starts a war based on lies around WMD which has killed thousands of Americans. I guess you can be competent without being ethical.
I have to give the Times credit for this masterful shell game. Think about it. The DNC scams its own voters and rigs its own primary. But that's not the story. The story is that MAYBE Russian hackers broke into the DNC computers and MAYBE they were connected to the Russian government and MAYBE this is all a conspiracy to tilt the election to Trump, who MAYBE might be more favorable than the more hawkish Clinton.
The real story of we the people being scammed by the DNC has receded to the back pages. And that's not even the end of what was done. Rolling Stone just released an article by Greg Palest that shows that DNC voter shananagins continued in California as thousands of likely Sanders votes were never counted.
But according to the Times the real story isn't this betrayal of democracy by are own people, but some vague, possible conspiracy between Wikileaks, that simply revealed this crime and Russia who allegedly seeks to capitalize on it.
Why not a story that applies the international standards for fair elections, which we insist that other nations abide by and see if our own elections measure up to what we call fair and free?
No need for conspiracies or innuendo for the substance of the story. My guess is that if we measure what we do to our own citizens by these standards we will come up short, often by a wide margin. It will also show that the powerful forces that are working against democracy are right at home, not in Russia.
The real story of we the people being scammed by the DNC has receded to the back pages. And that's not even the end of what was done. Rolling Stone just released an article by Greg Palest that shows that DNC voter shananagins continued in California as thousands of likely Sanders votes were never counted.
But according to the Times the real story isn't this betrayal of democracy by are own people, but some vague, possible conspiracy between Wikileaks, that simply revealed this crime and Russia who allegedly seeks to capitalize on it.
Why not a story that applies the international standards for fair elections, which we insist that other nations abide by and see if our own elections measure up to what we call fair and free?
No need for conspiracies or innuendo for the substance of the story. My guess is that if we measure what we do to our own citizens by these standards we will come up short, often by a wide margin. It will also show that the powerful forces that are working against democracy are right at home, not in Russia.
16
As noted by The Intercepts's Glenn Greenwald, one of the few skilled investigative reporters left in the world, the Democratic Party has a long history of blaming its own transgressions on Russian plots.
6
If you don't the message, shoot the messenger...
Shame on you.
Shame on you.
10
Mr. Assange is a thorn in everybody's side but probably more so to the US than anyone else. He obviously does not like much about the United States and certainly very little about Hillary Clinton. Just because he is not particularly critical of Putin does not necessarily mean that he likes Putin or anything he does. Maybe Putin is just a little more secure in his communications leaving Assange with very little to use against him.
What constantly mystifies me about the comments we make about Assange is how upset we are over his having access to highly sensitive emails that were sent by and to the US government. Yet, we barely slapped Hillary Clinton on the wrist for using a series of private unsecure email servers to conduct the foreign policy of the United States for the entirety of her tenure as Secretary of State. Certainly, these emails flowing through Clinton's unsecure servers must be in the hands of many hackers. Assange seems to suggest that he has something, even if he will not say what it is at this time. I guess were going to have to wait and see how badly Clinton's private unsecure email servers were hacked.
What constantly mystifies me about the comments we make about Assange is how upset we are over his having access to highly sensitive emails that were sent by and to the US government. Yet, we barely slapped Hillary Clinton on the wrist for using a series of private unsecure email servers to conduct the foreign policy of the United States for the entirety of her tenure as Secretary of State. Certainly, these emails flowing through Clinton's unsecure servers must be in the hands of many hackers. Assange seems to suggest that he has something, even if he will not say what it is at this time. I guess were going to have to wait and see how badly Clinton's private unsecure email servers were hacked.
5
"Melinda Taylor, one of Mr. Assange’s lawyers, said that he needed dental work and a magnetic resonance imaging scan for a painful shoulder, but that those procedures could not be done inside the embassy for practical and insurance reasons. He also has a vitamin D deficiency from a lack of sunlight, she said, and “severe depression exacerbated” by his legal travails."
Fortunately, treatment for all these ills is available to him in Sweden. He should go there.
Fortunately, treatment for all these ills is available to him in Sweden. He should go there.
7
I have little doubt the Swedish justice system is doing its job, but I'm dead certain the CIA has as well. The arrangement with a couple of prostitutes is just too conventional and convenient to be believed.
The US has abused legal proceedings and its own constitution so egregiously blind trust is something in short supply. US leaders have made it clear they want Assange's head, so they will get it and he'll never make it to Sweden or if he did, he'd somehow disappear while there.
Why do you think Assange didn't take up Russia's visa? His plane would never have made it to Russian airspace before being grounded by a compliant ally, with Assange dragged off to some black site. Fantasy? Wikileaks has proven the US and done far worse with less to motivate it. Turns out all those spy movies quaintly underestimated the US capacity for subterfuge.
The US has abused legal proceedings and its own constitution so egregiously blind trust is something in short supply. US leaders have made it clear they want Assange's head, so they will get it and he'll never make it to Sweden or if he did, he'd somehow disappear while there.
Why do you think Assange didn't take up Russia's visa? His plane would never have made it to Russian airspace before being grounded by a compliant ally, with Assange dragged off to some black site. Fantasy? Wikileaks has proven the US and done far worse with less to motivate it. Turns out all those spy movies quaintly underestimated the US capacity for subterfuge.
2
If wikileaks had published documents exposing Russia,China and north Korea I am sure you would not be whining abut privacy concerns and how the revelation benefits USA & it's western Allies.
8
"Another person who collaborated with WikiLeaks in the past added: “He views everything through the prism of how he’s treated. America and Hillary Clinton have caused him trouble, and Russia never has.”"
---------------------
In other words, he is a narcissistic, egomaniacal nut just like trump...
---------------------
In other words, he is a narcissistic, egomaniacal nut just like trump...
6
And Messianic.
1
The more poignant question is why so often the interest of the United States is at odd with freedom and liberty. The stuff Wikileak leaked is to the benefit of foreign power/people because it shattered the facade of good vs. evil that American often portrait international conflicts involving the US.
China is all-seeing while US protects privacy... we know that's not true now. US is an innocent bystander only interested in human rights in Syrian civil war... we know the US is actively involved from the start.
Wikileak is damaging because it revealed the emperor has no clothes.
China is all-seeing while US protects privacy... we know that's not true now. US is an innocent bystander only interested in human rights in Syrian civil war... we know the US is actively involved from the start.
Wikileak is damaging because it revealed the emperor has no clothes.
7
An alleged rapist and confirmed coward, hiding out in plain sight and entertaining himself as best he can.
5
Assange needs to arrested. Hiding within the Ecuadorian Embassy will not be forever. if Assange has an indictment within the US and one day when he leaves, Assange will be extradited to the US. As such, he will be then spending time in a US prison with Ms Manning.
4
So, I suppose the pretext here is that this stretch to continue to conflate Wikileaks with the Russians will not benefit Hillary? NYTs is becoming too obvious with it's propaganda.
10
The latest talking points from the DNC to the NYTimes: Assange is acting in concert with Russia to help Trump..please promote and disseminate. thank you.
When will the NYTimes be an non partisan newspaper again?
When will the NYTimes be an non partisan newspaper again?
11
Here we go again. We should ignore the content of all future Clinton email bombshells because there something's fishy going on with Russia. THAT's the real story, right, NYT?
11
The Russians! The Russians! The aluminum tubes! The aluminum tubes! How fitting as we head toward another September 11 anniversary here in New York City the Times is now setting us all up for a confrontation with Russia while trying to simultaneously discredit Wikileaks and protect Clinton and the Democratic Party. The paper that brought you the Pentagon Papers now brings both the current war (still going strong in the Near and Middle East) for which it advocated and the next.
13
And they bring you Hillary, Hawk Extraordinaire.
2
Mr. Assange and men and women like him are egotist to the nth degree. Hacking into anyone's information is nothing but theft of property that is not yours no matter the reason. Why is it OK for this man to hack your info but not for someone taking your credit card info. A crime is a crime you cannot justify it because because you like the results or who they're attacking. If a friend of yours goes out and tells your secrets that you told them in private to the world, I doubt that person will be a friend for long. Wiki-leaks is nothing but a bunch of babies trying to get back at mommy and daddy for not giving them enough attention. We have seen this act before.
4
He has not been charged . So many people here rant about him being a whatever ....charge him and arrest him.
You say the Russian media is propaganda, they say you are writing propaganda. For the rest of the world, at least those who care, the question is who to believe ? Maybe propaganda and self righteousness is everywhere ?
2
Perhaps one of the reasons the US is embarrased so often is due to our cult-like devotion to hypocrisy.
4
Great hit piece by the NYT. Shooting the messenger is a time honored tactic for avoiding the content of the messages. Whose interests are you serving, NYT? Does "All The News That's Fit to Print" really mean all the news that the some censor deems fit?
It's a betrayal of the principles of the fourth estate for a media outlet to distract or confuse readers, or to whitewash the product of a whistle blower's efforts, in order to curry favor with the very governments, people, or organizations that a whistle blowing group or individual exposes.
The NYT could be building on information uncovered by groups like Wikileaks to expose and eradicate bad conduct that is exposed. But, the NYT has chosen, instead, to side with wrongdoers by marginalizing troves of information uncovered and attacking the people with the dedication and courage to expose the wrongs.
Do your job. Please. Why are you crafting stories about Donald Trump's models and Andrew Weiner's texting at the expense of investigating the disappearance of $6.5 trillion dollars from the Pentagon's coffers? Are you worried that someone will get upset?
It's a betrayal of the principles of the fourth estate for a media outlet to distract or confuse readers, or to whitewash the product of a whistle blower's efforts, in order to curry favor with the very governments, people, or organizations that a whistle blowing group or individual exposes.
The NYT could be building on information uncovered by groups like Wikileaks to expose and eradicate bad conduct that is exposed. But, the NYT has chosen, instead, to side with wrongdoers by marginalizing troves of information uncovered and attacking the people with the dedication and courage to expose the wrongs.
Do your job. Please. Why are you crafting stories about Donald Trump's models and Andrew Weiner's texting at the expense of investigating the disappearance of $6.5 trillion dollars from the Pentagon's coffers? Are you worried that someone will get upset?
23
I think it's time to give the NYT a rest.
4
But you have to admit that Assange's towering hypocrisy is notable, don't you? Even if he hasn't been proven to be a Russian agent yet.
1
Becker, Erlanger and Schmitt's attempt at journalism fails the smell test. They would do better to engage in some investigative journalism themselves that exposes governments' lies, mythologies, and misdemeanors rather than harp on about drawing comparisons between Assange and Russia.
Then again, the Editors of the NYT find little stomach for exposing truths, so what's new with this article? Nothing!
Then again, the Editors of the NYT find little stomach for exposing truths, so what's new with this article? Nothing!
11
This is hilarious! When Wikileaks published secrets about W's misdeeds, the New York Times loved them. Now that Wikileaks is publishing secrets about Hillary Clinton, the New York Times digs up the ghost of Joe McCarthy.
Do you people realize what a walking self-parody you've become?
Do you people realize what a walking self-parody you've become?
19
"in an interview on Russia Today, the Kremlin-controlled English-language propaganda channel"
I'm reminded of the anecdote about Secretary of State Seward, who caught Lincoln, who was unused to Washington, polishing the presidential boots. Seward lectured the president, "In Washington, we do not blacken our own boots." Lincoln replied, "Indeed? So whose boots to you blacken, Mr. Secretary?"
Whose boots do you blacken at the NYtimes?
I'm reminded of the anecdote about Secretary of State Seward, who caught Lincoln, who was unused to Washington, polishing the presidential boots. Seward lectured the president, "In Washington, we do not blacken our own boots." Lincoln replied, "Indeed? So whose boots to you blacken, Mr. Secretary?"
Whose boots do you blacken at the NYtimes?
14
We all know the answer to that one. It's glaringly obvious.
2
The New York Times ought to remember when it published the Pentagon Papers, an act thought to be unpatriotic by some. We need to know when those in the service of our government make bad judgements and do things that discredit us and can only harm us in the long run - either abroad or at home when citizens become cynical.
9
But Assange is not an American -- he can't even claim that he's doing his patriotic duty. He can't claim that he's out to improve America in the long term by harming its national security in the short term.
1
The "is Julian Assange a good guy or bad guy" story was done much better in the 2013 movie "The 5th Estate" starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Assange.
As for the timing of this piece: it's obviously NYT's attempt to preëmptively cast doubts on Wikileaks' motives and the provenance of documents yet to be leaked that will embarrass Hiĺlary in the coming weeks.
As for the timing of this piece: it's obviously NYT's attempt to preëmptively cast doubts on Wikileaks' motives and the provenance of documents yet to be leaked that will embarrass Hiĺlary in the coming weeks.
17
Snoden, Assange, and Glenn Greenwald seem to be
the few investigative sources of what is happening
in our country with the Democrats and Clinton.
You won't find the news they report about objectively
covered on these pages.
the few investigative sources of what is happening
in our country with the Democrats and Clinton.
You won't find the news they report about objectively
covered on these pages.
13
Say what you will, the truth is, at the end of the day all we have. Governments in times of war get it via any means neccessary. We are in a time of war, idealogically speaking anyways. Borders are being wiped out, bed rock frames of tradtional thought are being challenged as we sit and get our news faster than ever before.
It's scary when you think about it. So heck yeah, give me Mr. Assange. Give me anyone! But give me the truth!
It's scary when you think about it. So heck yeah, give me Mr. Assange. Give me anyone! But give me the truth!
13
Emerging consensus is what we need
Something to wrap ourselves in to
Truth is that we don't never gonna be here when it happens
It's like utopia before our eyes that's running away from us
Something to wrap ourselves in to
Truth is that we don't never gonna be here when it happens
It's like utopia before our eyes that's running away from us
Hey I'll tell you a secret. whenever an islamic state guy reveals their secrets guess who suffers. Yes. Islamic state. And guess who is affected when an Iranian scientist reveals his countries secrets. Yep, you got it again. I hope this sets you thinking. So what else is new?
1
Curiously-timed mud-sling at Wiki full of innuendo. Granted Assange's no saint, but it'll take more than creative writing to tie all leaks to Putin. Get rid of the blinders Times! The DNC hack wouldn't and couldn't have happened without insiders driving it. Very likely Sanders supporters disappointed by the NYT's hands-off approach to Clinton dirt.
Back to curious timing, not that curious really. Just posturing for the next leak, another dump from Clinton's server. Except this time it just might deliver a critical blow to Clinton, and with it, a reputational blow to the NYT for maintaining their hands-off policy.
Will the leak be about the Clinton foundation? The evidence that doesn't exist to date because the server's been made off limits, and no one, especially not this paper wants to go after? One sure hopes so.
Unfortunately for the press, Julian promises to finish the job they refused to start. The NYT's response? Fly to London and fish Assange for answers. Probably threw him a carrot too to spin this write-up favorably. But Julian didn't play, didn't say it won't be so, left the NYT simmering and forcing them to use the stick. Hence the unflattering headline (for you Julian) and mud-sling (voters) prepping readers to disbelieve it all because bad boy Putin ordered it.
Are voters that dumb? Maybe. At any rate, never mind the Assange, he's only doing what this paper's played-down. Next up, dump. Let's call it the October surprise, shall we? Be here.
Back to curious timing, not that curious really. Just posturing for the next leak, another dump from Clinton's server. Except this time it just might deliver a critical blow to Clinton, and with it, a reputational blow to the NYT for maintaining their hands-off policy.
Will the leak be about the Clinton foundation? The evidence that doesn't exist to date because the server's been made off limits, and no one, especially not this paper wants to go after? One sure hopes so.
Unfortunately for the press, Julian promises to finish the job they refused to start. The NYT's response? Fly to London and fish Assange for answers. Probably threw him a carrot too to spin this write-up favorably. But Julian didn't play, didn't say it won't be so, left the NYT simmering and forcing them to use the stick. Hence the unflattering headline (for you Julian) and mud-sling (voters) prepping readers to disbelieve it all because bad boy Putin ordered it.
Are voters that dumb? Maybe. At any rate, never mind the Assange, he's only doing what this paper's played-down. Next up, dump. Let's call it the October surprise, shall we? Be here.
6
Just because Russia benefit does not mean that the leaks are not true. From what I have read, there is no evidence that any of the leaks have been of fabricated information. Russia benefits from SELECTIVE disclosure, but it appears that everything that is being disclosed is true.
9
Assange needs to get out more. The idea of neutrality in his operation is false. It is impossible to be neutral in that business. By the way, it was Pravda.
1
This seems more like a hate piece against Assange (starting with the awful photo and the "increasingly isolated" bit) than news or analysis. I would argue that our democracy has benefitted from having the DNC's shenanigans in favor of Mx Clinton exposed. Gain or loss to Russia is irrelevant.
We now know that one of the Democratic candidates conspired with the umpire to defeat the other. And that the NY times was part of it. You seem a bit petty.
We now know that one of the Democratic candidates conspired with the umpire to defeat the other. And that the NY times was part of it. You seem a bit petty.
8
"Who can trust that what he leaks is real?"
We don't know. You're free to reject anything he publishes.
Do you?
We don't know. You're free to reject anything he publishes.
Do you?
2
Of course! His intentions are clear. And, he's willing to manufacture to achieve his "goals." He's a arrogant, cowardly rapist. Those are his credentials.
3
The beginning of WikiLeaks' response to this article, below. For the rest, visit
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/771188978133245953
"The New York Times Editorial Board has endorsed Hillary Clinton, however this is not disclosed in the article. The lead author, Jo Becker last retweeted Hillary Clinton (a smiling and dancing animated Hillary Clinton), on March 3.
The only hard news in the article is that "American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services."
WikiLeaks has published more than 650,000 documents about Russian & president Putin, most of which is critical. See https://search.wikileaks.org/
It is false that Russia issued a visa for Julian Assange.
It is false that the book 'The WikiLeaks Files' (which is about US diplomacy), contains no criticism of Russia. It contain numerous critical references to Russia including a whole chapter on US diplomatic relations with Russia with numerous references to Russian corruption.
It is false that Mr. Assange 'muse[d] to associates about relocating' to Russia. He openly joked in a press conference about how absurd it would be if a western press freedom activist would be forced to seek asylum in Cuba.
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/771188978133245953
"The New York Times Editorial Board has endorsed Hillary Clinton, however this is not disclosed in the article. The lead author, Jo Becker last retweeted Hillary Clinton (a smiling and dancing animated Hillary Clinton), on March 3.
The only hard news in the article is that "American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services."
WikiLeaks has published more than 650,000 documents about Russian & president Putin, most of which is critical. See https://search.wikileaks.org/
It is false that Russia issued a visa for Julian Assange.
It is false that the book 'The WikiLeaks Files' (which is about US diplomacy), contains no criticism of Russia. It contain numerous critical references to Russia including a whole chapter on US diplomatic relations with Russia with numerous references to Russian corruption.
It is false that Mr. Assange 'muse[d] to associates about relocating' to Russia. He openly joked in a press conference about how absurd it would be if a western press freedom activist would be forced to seek asylum in Cuba.
10
Thank you Karen for the link and other information. I'm sure you are busy but would you please include more details, for example page numbers from the book you mention?
I hope Assange floods us with many more secrets. Each revelation is like a Molotov cocktail blazing against the hegemony of Western neoliberalism.
7
NYT, how about focusing on the contents of the leaked emails and information, rather than speculating on Assange's motivations? This article looks like a hatchet job, ghost written by our NSA.
8
So, after going after Assange with a prosecutor's zeal you came up with nothing solid but published the hit piece anyway. Well done, paper of record.
Here's a simple way to cut through the insinuations. Why does Wikileaks focus more on the U.S than on Russia? The question is easily answered.
1. Most of the volunteers are English speakers
2. Assange is striking back. The U.S. has convened a grand jury to convict him, the US works to undermine the work of his group, Clinton thinks journalism is a form of warfare; she describes publishing the truth as 'an attack'
This article is part of the new McCarthyism:
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/8/31/a_new_mccarthyism_greenwald_on_cli...
Shame on you.
Here's a simple way to cut through the insinuations. Why does Wikileaks focus more on the U.S than on Russia? The question is easily answered.
1. Most of the volunteers are English speakers
2. Assange is striking back. The U.S. has convened a grand jury to convict him, the US works to undermine the work of his group, Clinton thinks journalism is a form of warfare; she describes publishing the truth as 'an attack'
This article is part of the new McCarthyism:
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/8/31/a_new_mccarthyism_greenwald_on_cli...
Shame on you.
8
Tbe biggest benficiaries of WikiLeaks transparency are ordinary Americans, those who have no secret accounts in Honduras, no secret vendettas against foreign leaders, no suppressed desire to conduct torture, and no irrational fears of Russia. Thanks to WikiLeaks, we know about the lies and violations of our liberty and privacy by unconstitutional surveillance at the NSA. For the NY Times to print this biased, fearmongering, security-obsessed article is akin to a Fox News hit piece. Wait... Hillary is in favor of prosecuting WikiLeaks, Assange, and Snowden... and the NY Times favors Hillary... I get it now.
12
Mr. Assange is not a friend of the USA and the American people. We should start acting accordingly.
5
NYT probably have no direct ties to the Clinton multi-billion dollar campaign, BUT their articles often benefit her candidacy—whether by conviction, convenience or coincidence.
Do you guys listen to yourselves sometimes? I am amazed at how low NYT has fallen in just a few months and there seems to be no end to the downfall. I still read this paper from time to time, hoping to see signs of a return to journalistic integrity and balance. But I am losing hope, and have started to look for other sources of information, especially when it comes to the US elections (the international coverage is still OK).
Do you guys listen to yourselves sometimes? I am amazed at how low NYT has fallen in just a few months and there seems to be no end to the downfall. I still read this paper from time to time, hoping to see signs of a return to journalistic integrity and balance. But I am losing hope, and have started to look for other sources of information, especially when it comes to the US elections (the international coverage is still OK).
12
Ari:
100% correct.
The Times is no longer center left, it is now unabashedly far left regarding this election. I'm stunned by the degree of anti-Trump and mostly pro-Clinton bias. They don't just have a thumb on the scale, they are standing on it while holding a set of barbells.
It has become the Fox News/MSNBC of newspapers, and that is actually sad.
100% correct.
The Times is no longer center left, it is now unabashedly far left regarding this election. I'm stunned by the degree of anti-Trump and mostly pro-Clinton bias. They don't just have a thumb on the scale, they are standing on it while holding a set of barbells.
It has become the Fox News/MSNBC of newspapers, and that is actually sad.
3
John: "it is now unabashedly far left regarding this election."
If it were, don't you think it would have treated Bernie Sanders better than they did?
If it were, don't you think it would have treated Bernie Sanders better than they did?
2
Dave:
Good point. All too often readers mistakenly equate writers of columns and opinion with ownership. Hillary Cinton is a Washington insider/corporate establishment type all the way. Bernie Sanders and his policies represented a direct threat to the establishment and the status quo, hence, the constant negativity towards him, his policies and his supporters that is until, they could find someone to blame if she happened to lose the election.
Good point. All too often readers mistakenly equate writers of columns and opinion with ownership. Hillary Cinton is a Washington insider/corporate establishment type all the way. Bernie Sanders and his policies represented a direct threat to the establishment and the status quo, hence, the constant negativity towards him, his policies and his supporters that is until, they could find someone to blame if she happened to lose the election.
The American government knows exactly who Assange is working for. That's why he's where he is.
1
The New York Times shames itself. Disliking the message, it makes the story about the messenger. Given its prominent role in the lead-up to the Iraq War, The Times perhaps should be less judgmental about the possible manipulation on a news source by a powerful government. More recently, at the behest of the current administration, The Times has willingly quashed stories about spying on U.S. citizens.
"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind/Cannot bear very much reality." - The New York Times channeling T.S. Eliot
"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind/Cannot bear very much reality." - The New York Times channeling T.S. Eliot
5
Assange, being the loyal Putin stooge that he is, will make a perfect CIA director in the administration of that other Putin stooge Trump.
4
The suggestion that the Times is attempting to "smoke out the players" in the Democratic National Committee hack is deliberatingly misleading. Most people would take exception to what was revealed instead of just who revealed it.
Yes, let us blame the inconvenient facts, if not out right wrongs revealed upon Russia since this suits certain organizations (DNC) or "American officials".
Yes, let us blame the inconvenient facts, if not out right wrongs revealed upon Russia since this suits certain organizations (DNC) or "American officials".
3
Let's see a rapist and a traitor, whose leaks mostly hurt USA. And, I'm supposed to admire them somehow?
5
Assange seems weirder and weirder to me. Snowden is the real visionary.
1
Wait around long enough, the Times will trash Snowden as well, when the US corporate and money grubbing govt calls.
2
Meanwhile, in Russia, they blow up their own people in their apartments in order to foment a war of aggression against an ethnic minority and the world does nothing to reveal let alone punish this gross violation of basic human dignity and international law.
SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings
SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings
3
The truth will out! Thank God and Wikileaks! And, if the Russians are involved, thank them too!
2
Journalists attacking the sources of those who expose corruption is an oxymoron unless the target is a Democrat..
2
Excellent example of investigative journalism, of which there should be far more in all manner of news reporting. Kudos to Becker, Erlanger and Schmitt, and to the NYT for supporting them.
3
Assange is another idiot narcissist. When he was recently on Bill Maher's show Assange's true colors appeared. Maher gave a tough interview and this clown was hemming and hawing and making it all about him. In the beginning when news broke about this guy, I supported him. Now I think he's just another idiot grandstanding....not to mention a coward.
6
It seems as if the NYT's focus has been on Russia's potential role in this entire DNC leak situation, rather than the implications that the leak actually reveal (which demonstrated, clearly, undemocratic and voter-repressive practices by the DNC).
5
How do we know that these hacked emails weren't heavily edited by the Russians to make it appear that the DNC was pushing Hillary over Bernie. After all, Hillary did get more votes. Isn't that what a Democracy is supposed to be about?
2
Assange needs to be in prison for his rape.
Trump will do or say anything for money and power.
Putin is using Trump as his puppet and is pulling his strings.
Trump will do or say anything for money and power.
Putin is using Trump as his puppet and is pulling his strings.
5
How unsurprising.
1
Wikileaks is bad for the Empire of Evil.
It goes without saying that if you don't like the message....attack the messenger. Many, many non-Americans are very apprehensive about both Hillary and Trump. Trump broadcasts his belligerence while Hillary, from the point of view of abroad has demonstrated aggression and a lack of empathy. Both of these candidates exhibit the two main components of a sociopathic personality. I would think whatever the source, we ought to know-in particular-what it is they don't want the public to know.
5
Assange and Putin....Trump's greatest supporters.
And, not to fail to note, both are enemies of the United States.
Yet, we see Trump considering them 'best buddies'.....
Does this not raise alarm bells with you?
And, not to fail to note, both are enemies of the United States.
Yet, we see Trump considering them 'best buddies'.....
Does this not raise alarm bells with you?
4
"Assange and Putin....Trump's greatest supporters."
Citation needed.
Citation needed.
Elfton,
You're kidding, right? Trump has praised both men, repeatedly, sir. But apparently, you are inept at basic web search....so let me help you:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vlad...
Donald Trump: "I said that Putin has much better leadership qualities than Obama" pic.twitter.com/oQ7cfl2UYt
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/01/julian-assange-donald-t...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/08/15/why_is_assange_push...
You're kidding, right? Trump has praised both men, repeatedly, sir. But apparently, you are inept at basic web search....so let me help you:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vlad...
Donald Trump: "I said that Putin has much better leadership qualities than Obama" pic.twitter.com/oQ7cfl2UYt
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/01/julian-assange-donald-t...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/08/15/why_is_assange_push...
Trump may well support and praise Putin and Assange but I have seen no reciprocal fawning by them of him.
[[In any event, he said, Kremlin corruption is an old story. “Every man and his dog is criticizing Russia,” he said. “It’s a bit boring, isn’t it?”]]
Well gee, Julian - go ahead and ignore Russian censorship and assassinations, then. We certainly wouldn't want you to be "bored".
Well gee, Julian - go ahead and ignore Russian censorship and assassinations, then. We certainly wouldn't want you to be "bored".
3
he's a soviet stooge,a putin patsy,a trump trojan horse!
4
"Another person who collaborated with WikiLeaks in the past added: “He views everything through the prism of how he’s treated. America and Hillary Clinton have caused him trouble, and Russia never has.”
A good summary of a narcissist. That statement shows his moral compass to a T. He claims he is Wikileaks. A
A good summary of a narcissist. That statement shows his moral compass to a T. He claims he is Wikileaks. A
2
"A good summary of a narcissist."
A good summary of your average human being too.
A good summary of your average human being too.
The Times gives far too much credit to Snowden for mildly criticizing Putin, which pales in comparison to his being Putin's willing flunky on a televised call-in show where Snowden accepted without question Putin's claims of not engaging in mass surveillance.
1
Assange asks: "[criticizing Russia] is a bit boring, don't you think?"
No, it's not boring at all: over 20 journalists have been murdered under Putin - but almost no convictions. Nine thousand dead in Ukraine. Mysterious apartment building explosions. Murder of Putin political enemies/critics. Etc.
But when you're as skin-crawlingly creepy as Assange is, I would guess those stats merely make him grin.
No, it's not boring at all: over 20 journalists have been murdered under Putin - but almost no convictions. Nine thousand dead in Ukraine. Mysterious apartment building explosions. Murder of Putin political enemies/critics. Etc.
But when you're as skin-crawlingly creepy as Assange is, I would guess those stats merely make him grin.
4
Looks like the Clinton bots have been assigned their talking points and told to get out more comments on this article. Tackling this issue using the 'boring' quote - 3rd comment in a row. Guess that boring comment really aggravates the Clinton coronation committee, eh?
2
Who cares as long as the data gets out there. Russia benefits, but the American citizens benefit more. Seems the more data about Hillary's quasi-criminal State Department secret life, the more Howard Hughes she becomes. By November, it seems, she'll be invisible.
How then will the NYT Editorial Board deal with Madame Bobble-Head's wild-eyes, delusional speeches, and wanting charisma?
Bernie's got to be feeling her pain right now. Sad, he could have been a contender if not for the DNC Politburo's embrace of Hillary's time-in-grade.
How then will the NYT Editorial Board deal with Madame Bobble-Head's wild-eyes, delusional speeches, and wanting charisma?
Bernie's got to be feeling her pain right now. Sad, he could have been a contender if not for the DNC Politburo's embrace of Hillary's time-in-grade.
7
Russia and Wikileaks in bed? What's next, the US and just about every other Western nation on our planet sharing a cot?
1
Perhaps fix: WikiLeaks neither targets not spares any particular nation, he added...."
How and why would anyone praise these two as heroes? They have this self appointed sense of importance, voces verorum. If they are indeed this voice of truth why not expose other regime around the world. I have zero sympathy for both of them. They deserve this "exile". What they have done there is a term I learned in the Boy Scouts. It has to do with "your mess kit". If I spell this out the Times will reject. Old Scouts will get it ...
1
If Julian Assange did with Russian secrets as he has done with US secrets, he would be decomposing as I type. He would find out what a "bit player" does when it's unhappy.
3
Is the NYTimes just itching for WWIII? The drumbeat of anti-Russian stories reminds me of the time leading up to the invasion of Iraq. If news published through any source is damaging, maybe it's not the fault of the source--maybe it's the fault of the policies enacted by our government. We're becoming a one-party nation with a monolithic news service, actually dis-service.
7
Not surprising NYT seeks to delegitimize Assange's information when he keeps releasing material embarrassing to Hillary Clinton.
6
Julian Assange - bedfellow with Putin, shamelessly threatening to give us President Trump.
Maybe we'll luck out and he'll yet be put in jail.
Maybe we'll luck out and he'll yet be put in jail.
2
Back in the day, when leaks by Daniel Ellsberg and Deep Throat brought down Nixon, the leakers were considered heroes by the NYT and its readers, and Nixon was rightly considered a paranoid nut, with an enemies list of 'traitors' bent on bringing him down. Honest citizens should evaluate leaked information on its merits, whether or not it supports their 'team'.
6
And? He is doing very well helping Russia, what should do he? To help USA? He is not american and your government is persecuting him for disclosing the true.
4
I'm a little worried about the bold stance taken against Mr. Assange in many of these comments: whatever else may be said about him, he does not appear to be a fabricator. Regardless where he's getting his information, it appears - largely - to be true, which makes him nothing more than a quasi-journalist with an agenda. There is nothing especially wrong with that. If you're happy to vilify him, you're saying you'd rather be ignorant of the information he's provided. That is not good. We, as a country, could minimize the impact of his revelations by being a little more transparent, a little more honest, a little more forward-leaning in our discourse.
I'd reserve my ire for his sources, if anything. Given the technology of today, the emergence of a platform like his was inevitable. But if people are feeding the demon, it seems unintelligent to blame the beast for simply thriving.
I'd reserve my ire for his sources, if anything. Given the technology of today, the emergence of a platform like his was inevitable. But if people are feeding the demon, it seems unintelligent to blame the beast for simply thriving.
90
I don't agree with Assange's methods. However, it is interesting that the U.S. has weathered this storm. The U.S. government didn't fail, the people had discussion, some in typical American fashion shrugged their shoulders, and moved on with their lives. Assange sought to shock the foundations of U.S. Government, shake it to its core. The irony is that by attacking a government of the people, he attacked the people themselves. Americans know their government is flawed. Their healthy skepticism of government goes back to the founding of the country. The greatest difference is that Americans still fundamentally feel the government is theirs. Underneath a mountain of skepticism and cynicism, they still understand that it is their responsibility to own the government and change it, not Assange's.
99
He's allowed to have an agenda; but more often than not the information is not overly earth-shattering and it jeopardizes lives/livelihood of decent people doing their jobs. He is allowed to go on a crusade against over-reach of US security apparatus; however, to publish e-mails of diplomats and civil servants without discretion is unethical and dangerous. He has no respect for people's privacy while he fights against US Intelligence because the invade people's privacy.
1
A filter is simply a fabricator with a slightly more limited source of raw material.
I am a big liar and (surprise!) my biggest rival benefits when I am caught lying. This is news?
One investigative journal (NYTimes) undercuts another (WikiLeaks)? Good news for corruption everywhere!
One investigative journal (NYTimes) undercuts another (WikiLeaks)? Good news for corruption everywhere!
4
While there is at least some (and possibly much) merit to what Edward Snowden did and has done (and said) since his initially self-imposed but now legally required exile - and even some merit in Chelsea Manning's actions - the more we hear and find out about Julian Assange, the more clear it becomes that he is an agenda-driven, possibly paranoid monomaniac: a self-appointed "accountability messiah" who does not practice what he preaches. I would sooner grant Snowden full immunity and repatriation than give Assange even one more paragraph in the NYT.
The only reason the story was written was to prep readers for the upcoming disclosures against the NYT's candidate of choice: Hillary Clinton. Deflecting blame to Russia and Assange just befuddles the clueless NYT readers.
2
Don't run a piece on how Hillary Clinton benefits when she HAS secrets from selling out the American people.
Just cut it out, already.
Julian Assange is not the problem. The press that acts as a shill for a political bent IS the enemy, rather than conduct objective, comprehensive reporting and investigation.
Just cut it out, already.
Julian Assange is not the problem. The press that acts as a shill for a political bent IS the enemy, rather than conduct objective, comprehensive reporting and investigation.
9
I think that you are over dramatizing this just a little bit. What politicians are corrupt! Who knew
Does the fault lie with the content of emails or their leakage?
7
Good call!
Judging from the hysterical criticism this hatchet job on Assange has stirred up, the effort to discredit his work and mitigate the damage it has inflicted on the reputation of the US.
Are his critics aware of the US government's grand jury case against Assange and its pressure on Sweden to extradite him to face a "treason" trial for the crime of documenting US corruption and war crimes?
Are his critics aware of the US government's grand jury case against Assange and its pressure on Sweden to extradite him to face a "treason" trial for the crime of documenting US corruption and war crimes?
5
The interview of Assange by Jo Becker is on the Wikileaks Facebook page. Watch it, then contrast and compare with this opinion piece. Funny how the narrative about the leakers can be spun, and attention diverted away from the content of the leaks.
7
It is not surprising to see a Clintonesque hit article in the NYT, but Eric Schmitt joining in for a Hillary piece is a bit shocking. What starts reasonably turns out to just be another Clintonian anti-Putin, anti-Assange piece of propaganda preparing Clintons' next war with Russia.
The embarrassment of Hillary when she was a failed Secretary of State is clear, but had she admitted the mess she made she could withdraw her claws from Assange's back and Putin's front and move onto what is more important than her petty, personal vengeance.
This small-mindedness is why she is not trusted and so intensely disliked. It's a pity that the NYT has become part of her machine.
The embarrassment of Hillary when she was a failed Secretary of State is clear, but had she admitted the mess she made she could withdraw her claws from Assange's back and Putin's front and move onto what is more important than her petty, personal vengeance.
This small-mindedness is why she is not trusted and so intensely disliked. It's a pity that the NYT has become part of her machine.
Is the implication that the interests of WikiLeaks and the interests of the American democratic polity do not dove-tail? The WikiLeaks records have told us a great deal about how our own political system works, or doesn't. Why the constant drumbeat about Putin and Russia? Is the NYT preparing us for war--again?
6
" ... Just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not after you ..."
Ohh please, this is getting ridiculous.
Neither Assange nor Snowden work for Russia, no matter what the journalists or the authors of this article write.
Russia has no real advantage from their investigations as the problem lies solely in the West's ability to keep their business clean.
Trying to paint a picture that Russia and the big bogeyman of the US, Putin, may profit when the dirty secrets of the West are published is pure Cold War warriorship and thing of the past, or at least it should have been.
Putin would have no "advantage" if the West had done it's job in a clean and legal way.
Sorry guys, but the problem is you and those whose dirt you are trying to protect, not Russia and Putin.
Putin is in a very comfortable position.
All he needs to do is to relax, sit back and call for the popcorn while watching some people in the US going at each others throats for being a crook.
It is not the audience of the play that is to be blamed, it is the actors and, as one can see perfectly clear in this case, it is also not the investigative guys like Assange and Snowden but the culprits whose crimes, fraud and crooked behaviours they have published.
Snowden and Assand would have no business if it was not for the illegal and crooked behaviour of others.
Get real and get you act clean, but do not try to silence those who found you out.
Ohh please, this is getting ridiculous.
Neither Assange nor Snowden work for Russia, no matter what the journalists or the authors of this article write.
Russia has no real advantage from their investigations as the problem lies solely in the West's ability to keep their business clean.
Trying to paint a picture that Russia and the big bogeyman of the US, Putin, may profit when the dirty secrets of the West are published is pure Cold War warriorship and thing of the past, or at least it should have been.
Putin would have no "advantage" if the West had done it's job in a clean and legal way.
Sorry guys, but the problem is you and those whose dirt you are trying to protect, not Russia and Putin.
Putin is in a very comfortable position.
All he needs to do is to relax, sit back and call for the popcorn while watching some people in the US going at each others throats for being a crook.
It is not the audience of the play that is to be blamed, it is the actors and, as one can see perfectly clear in this case, it is also not the investigative guys like Assange and Snowden but the culprits whose crimes, fraud and crooked behaviours they have published.
Snowden and Assand would have no business if it was not for the illegal and crooked behaviour of others.
Get real and get you act clean, but do not try to silence those who found you out.
10
He is a self serving egotist...
7
By not exposing Kremlin corruption he avoids being poisoned or being beaten to death.
4
I believe that the Democratic Party and the media moguls who want to stay in office and continue their dismantling of our constitution and economy, as well as the moral standards a decent and respectable society enjoin to build has paid the writers of this article and newspaper. Maybe the New York Times email and correspondence system needs to be subpoenaed by U. S. Congress for this collusion to commit treason against our government. Everyone is not whitewashed into stupidity.
2
Wikileaks claims to fight for human rights and against corruption World Wide. How come there has never been a Wikileaks of documents from Russia or China?
From my perspective, Wikileaks is now just another tool used by Russia’s Putin to attack the West.
The American Voter cannot believe any of the new “emails” being released by Wikileaks because their authenticity is now suspect. There is no way for Wikileaks to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the emails they are releasing are the true, unaltered emails from the DNC or the US Government.
For all we know, everything that Wikileaks is revealing about the West has been “doctored” by the Russian Government as part of a massive dis-information campaign.
With that in mind, Wikileaks’ “October Surprise” should be viewed as the “Big Lie” from Wikileaks and Russia’s Putin. Therefore, any Wikileaks release in September and October should be ignored by the American Voter as unverified lies from the Russian government.
From my perspective, Wikileaks is now just another tool used by Russia’s Putin to attack the West.
The American Voter cannot believe any of the new “emails” being released by Wikileaks because their authenticity is now suspect. There is no way for Wikileaks to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the emails they are releasing are the true, unaltered emails from the DNC or the US Government.
For all we know, everything that Wikileaks is revealing about the West has been “doctored” by the Russian Government as part of a massive dis-information campaign.
With that in mind, Wikileaks’ “October Surprise” should be viewed as the “Big Lie” from Wikileaks and Russia’s Putin. Therefore, any Wikileaks release in September and October should be ignored by the American Voter as unverified lies from the Russian government.
13
LOL! since when do journalists have to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt?
To uncover the dirt in US politics actually is a service Assange is doing to the American People and the US as a nation. And of course the politics-managed papers like this one try to discredit him, just to discredit the information he provides because it is a menace for the politicians with their dirty jobs.
The Power controls the media to depict those who try to help people as The Criminal. Usually it works. If you are Christian you should know what I'm talking about.
The Power controls the media to depict those who try to help people as The Criminal. Usually it works. If you are Christian you should know what I'm talking about.
1
Your analysis of the alleged “service” that Assange is performing for the United States is totally wrong. Assange’s attacks are totally one sided, attacking the USA and the Democrats. How come no hacking of the Republican National Committee? Are they pure as the driven snow and above board in all their dealings? I think not.
Why no revelations from China or Russia? Those countries are not exactly models of virtue or transparency.
At this point Assange is carrying out his own petty vengeance. The American Voter should be extremely suspect of any documentation that Assange releases this October. Given his penchant for retribution, any information that Wikileaks reveals will most likely have been altered by the Russians or by Wikileaks itself. There is no way to prove anything Wikileaks releases is authentic.
Why no revelations from China or Russia? Those countries are not exactly models of virtue or transparency.
At this point Assange is carrying out his own petty vengeance. The American Voter should be extremely suspect of any documentation that Assange releases this October. Given his penchant for retribution, any information that Wikileaks reveals will most likely have been altered by the Russians or by Wikileaks itself. There is no way to prove anything Wikileaks releases is authentic.
"Mr. Assange proffered a vision of America as superbully: a nation that has achieved imperial power by proclaiming allegiance to principles of human rights while deploying its military-intelligence apparatus in 'pincer' formation to 'push' countries into doing its bidding, and punishing people like him who dare to speak the truth."
Mr. Assange's vision sounds pretty accurate to this American. And if Russia benefits from inconvenient truths about a country that purports to be the greatest and freest in the world, so does every American interested in knowing what our government does in our names. If Assange doesn't focus on Russia as much as the US, it might be because Russia wields far less influence than the US in global affairs.
But enough about Mr. Assange. Recent NYT coverage has reached the point where you might as well publish press releases direct from the Clinton campaign on your front page. It seems that everyone presenting a threat to Clinton - Trump, Assange, even Jill Stein - suddenly has connections to Russia. This comes after months of marginalizing and mocking Clinton's primary opponent. Can we expect a piece on how Hillary Clinton often benefits from the timing of NYT stories?
When you run a front page story detailing how Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation helped Russian companies obtain uranium, you might restore some of the credibility you've lost. Until then, here's hoping some readers see your McCarthyite tactics for what they are.
Mr. Assange's vision sounds pretty accurate to this American. And if Russia benefits from inconvenient truths about a country that purports to be the greatest and freest in the world, so does every American interested in knowing what our government does in our names. If Assange doesn't focus on Russia as much as the US, it might be because Russia wields far less influence than the US in global affairs.
But enough about Mr. Assange. Recent NYT coverage has reached the point where you might as well publish press releases direct from the Clinton campaign on your front page. It seems that everyone presenting a threat to Clinton - Trump, Assange, even Jill Stein - suddenly has connections to Russia. This comes after months of marginalizing and mocking Clinton's primary opponent. Can we expect a piece on how Hillary Clinton often benefits from the timing of NYT stories?
When you run a front page story detailing how Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation helped Russian companies obtain uranium, you might restore some of the credibility you've lost. Until then, here's hoping some readers see your McCarthyite tactics for what they are.
12
so true, and remember their coverage of Brexit prior to the vote? A jokey front page article featuring Monty Python. But these pretentious clowns aren't laughing now.
1
Thanks, Bluelotus. One reason I keep my NYT subscription in spite of the damaging and biased front page is to see reader comments like yours------- we are not alone!
1
I doubt that even one of the armchair detractors in these comments would give up what Julian Assange has given up to make public the ugly things that our government would rather we didn't see, starting with the deliberate targeting of bystanders in Iraq.
4
Reading the NYT for the last few months would make one suspect the Cold War had resumed. But the fact is that Assange was correct as quoted in this article: Russia is a bit player on the world stage which the US owns and manages. There is no Comintern, there are no fellow travelers in Paris. Frankly, it's a bit ludicrous that the NYT has gotten involved in this resurrected narrative structure of Russian conspiracies to undermine the West. Let me put it this way: Russia in increasingly being painted as the evil foe who Hillary Clinton will oppose. All who are aligned against her will somehow wind up, however unwittingly, serving Russian interests. Perhaps in several more years we will learn that Clinton was unable to achieve her campaign pledges because some senator was the Kremlin's creature?
7
Why do Times readers think Assange should be a "fair and balanced" leaker? Our own intelligence services, assuming they're competent, can to leak whatever they want about our perceived enemies without leaving fingerprints.
3
If critical thinking is a "hobby" still practiced by many in this land of ours we could be hearing about how interest groups are the ones who are truly benefitting; which, of course, would suggest as a mere possibility that Mr. Assange is "one of us".
Say it isn't so, the NYTimes is saying uncovering information that reveals
the lies, fraud, corruption and abuse of power of our government officials is bad for our republic because it benefits Russia? The lies, fraud, corruption and abuse of power by our government officials does far more damage to our republic than Russia. In fact, corrupt government officials are our most serious security risk and that is exactly why whistleblower protection laws should not only be expanded and strengthen, but we should also financially reward whistleblowers who successfully expose corrupt government officials. "Let the people know the facts and the country will be safe." Abraham Lincoln, U.S. President.
Please keep up the good work WikiLeaks in furthering Lincoln's idea of "government of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE."
Now let's connect some dots: You know what dovetails with the agenda of this article? Hillary Clinton's desire to discredit WikiLeaks out of concern of what it may reveal about her before the November election. The article also dovetails with the NYTimes' agenda to see Hillary Clinton president.
Disclosure: I'm unhappily voting for Clinton because of concerns over Trump's likely Supreme Court appointments, but I also want full disclosure about her deceptions.
the lies, fraud, corruption and abuse of power of our government officials is bad for our republic because it benefits Russia? The lies, fraud, corruption and abuse of power by our government officials does far more damage to our republic than Russia. In fact, corrupt government officials are our most serious security risk and that is exactly why whistleblower protection laws should not only be expanded and strengthen, but we should also financially reward whistleblowers who successfully expose corrupt government officials. "Let the people know the facts and the country will be safe." Abraham Lincoln, U.S. President.
Please keep up the good work WikiLeaks in furthering Lincoln's idea of "government of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE."
Now let's connect some dots: You know what dovetails with the agenda of this article? Hillary Clinton's desire to discredit WikiLeaks out of concern of what it may reveal about her before the November election. The article also dovetails with the NYTimes' agenda to see Hillary Clinton president.
Disclosure: I'm unhappily voting for Clinton because of concerns over Trump's likely Supreme Court appointments, but I also want full disclosure about her deceptions.
9
There is not much in this article – it reads as a (now) standard NYT character assassination of Julian Assange. The only relevant question about WikiLeaks is whether any of the documents released been shown to be false. So far it seems the answer is no, out of many hundreds of thousands none have been challenged for accuracy. This is absolutely remarkable and cannot be said by any intelligence agency, newspaper or TV channel.
11
@Robert Jennings
I do not believe the credibility of any document has been questioned because they are direct disclosures of stolen data by Russian intelligence.
I do not believe the credibility of any document has been questioned because they are direct disclosures of stolen data by Russian intelligence.
2
If Julian Assange was active in 1972-74, and disclosing Nixon's dirty secrets, 99% of the commentators here would hail him as a patriot. just like Woodward and Bernstein were justifiably praised for showing the American people what their leadership was up to.
14
Bravo! Glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
Trump should publically condemn any foreign intrusion into the US election process. However, he seems to be inviting it.
3
No such intrusion has been proven-- it's all a "conspiracy theory" to cover up things for the Democrats/Clintons. Are they willing to win an election even if it stirs up antagonisms with Russia? Is it a "wag the dog" situation building while most of us wring our hands about Trump?
1
I've never seen this reported in the American press, but one result of the revelations of Assange and Snowden is to send European leaders to the sea for their meetings. Whether it's in the North Sea or off the coast of Italy, when Merkel and Hollande (and now Renzi) have major strategic decisions to make, they head to the open seas, where spying is the most difficult. This is not because they are afraid of Russian spying. This is because they are afraid of American spying.
Europe is grateful for Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden.
Europe is grateful for Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden.
5
Yes, Russia may benefit from some of Assange's work. As has Angela Merkel and Dilma Rousseff, (two world leaders who didn't wish to be spied on), and countless civilians. I can understand the Times nursing a longstanding grudge toward Assange dating back from its days as an Iraq war promoter -- but that Russians may benefit, or that Assange has priorities that belie WikiLeaks image of neutrality? Fair enough, but not front-page news. Turkish dissidents who feel undermined by WikiLeaks? Dirty tricks specialist Roger Stone's recent attempts to contact Assange for the sake of the Trump campaign? Those are actual events not fully complimentary to WikiLeaks I'll be glad to read about, though it won't make me forget how the Bush and Obama administrations both made WikiLeaks necessary.
3
Perhaps because of his long confinement, after a very peripatetic life, Assange is growing batty; he has a serious God complex about fixing the world.
3
"[Assange is] a punk who should be extradited and go on trial for espionage against our country."
I'm puzzled: Has Assange ever been charged with any wrongdoing by the US? Not that I'm aware of.
I'm puzzled: Has Assange ever been charged with any wrongdoing by the US? Not that I'm aware of.
2
Why Wikileaks? If Wikileaks did not fill an important function in today’s world we wouldn’t be talking about it. And certainly there would not be long articles in important newspapers about its influence and biases. So, what is that function? It’s to supply us – the people of a Republic – with necessary information that we otherwise would not have. Without Wikileaks we would not have the “collateral damage” video that shows American forces committing war crimes in Iraq. Or the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs that give us an insight into our wars. Or the diplomatic cables that show the internal workings of our State Department. Or the Stratfor revelations that reveal how a private intelligence agency secretly operates. Or the draft of the TPP agreement that makes it clear that this is much more that a trade deal. Or so much more.
The reason that Wikileaks is so vital in today’s world is because our main stream media no longer does its job. Our media is now in the hands of large corporations and looks more to its bottom line than to informing us what we need to know – especially in an age of a super-secret government.
Thomas Jefferson warned us that if he had to choose between “a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” Wikileaks is simply trying to do the job that our media – including the New York Times – once did.
The reason that Wikileaks is so vital in today’s world is because our main stream media no longer does its job. Our media is now in the hands of large corporations and looks more to its bottom line than to informing us what we need to know – especially in an age of a super-secret government.
Thomas Jefferson warned us that if he had to choose between “a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” Wikileaks is simply trying to do the job that our media – including the New York Times – once did.
7
@Red Dog
That sounds absolutely lovely, but when Assange uses WikiLeaks as a tool against the West while completely ignoring the very lofty goals you just mentioned, it becomes nothing greater than a tool of authoritarians, dictatorships and the truly worst nations of this world to vindicate their own atrocities and human rights violations.
That sounds absolutely lovely, but when Assange uses WikiLeaks as a tool against the West while completely ignoring the very lofty goals you just mentioned, it becomes nothing greater than a tool of authoritarians, dictatorships and the truly worst nations of this world to vindicate their own atrocities and human rights violations.
2
"But WikiLeaks’ disclosures often benefit Russia, our examination found — whether by conviction, convenience or coincidence.". the solution is obvious - quit doing the stuff that WikiLeaks exposes.
5
Russian hackers get into the DNC and the DCCC (part of Congress) and then WikiLeaks releases everything (or whatever Assange decided to release). That included hundreds of credit card numbers, Social Security information and other private information on American citizens. Are you saying that citizens are at fault? The hacking into private systems was exactly what identity thieves do for the purposes of large-scale fraud. Are you saying that the victims of criminals are at fault?
WikiLeak Assange has an arrest warrant against him for rape and sexual molestation. Maybe he should quit doing the stuff that harms women and that law enforcement arrests people for. And have the decency to go back and face the charges instead of hiding like a coward for years, not coming out for sunlight.
WikiLeak Assange has an arrest warrant against him for rape and sexual molestation. Maybe he should quit doing the stuff that harms women and that law enforcement arrests people for. And have the decency to go back and face the charges instead of hiding like a coward for years, not coming out for sunlight.
2
Whether paid by the Russians or motivated by petty emotional instability, Assange still is a pimple on the bottom of mankind.
5
Now -- It's very hard to believe or trust wikileaks when they are clearly having an ax to grind. I doubt their integrity. So their releases are losing impact.
5
Is he a Russian agent or a useful idiot? Does it make any difference? This is only the tip of the iceberg in Russia's gigantic information war in the west. From Trump and his Russian investors, to Marine Le Pen with her Russian bank loans; to the factories in Russia poisoning the internet, to the mysteriously well-funded opponents to fracking in western Europe, it adds up to a calculated attack to divide which the west hasn't been able to effectively respond. Doubtless there is more to this story. Please investigate further, New York Times.
8
The American Public profit also. Much of what is released are thing we should know but our government or some private organization is trying to hide it,
If our government would release the material then Hooray for Wikileaks.
We found all about the corruptions and manipulation or the primary process by the DNC thanks to a release. Also we get more HRC E-Mails and learned by the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and Pay to Play scheme.
Wikileaks is helping the US public by showing up the level of dishonesty in our government. I hope to see more Wikileaks releases in the future. They are doing the job our Press used to do until it got in the tank with HRC and picked up all her covert habits.
If our government would release the material then Hooray for Wikileaks.
We found all about the corruptions and manipulation or the primary process by the DNC thanks to a release. Also we get more HRC E-Mails and learned by the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and Pay to Play scheme.
Wikileaks is helping the US public by showing up the level of dishonesty in our government. I hope to see more Wikileaks releases in the future. They are doing the job our Press used to do until it got in the tank with HRC and picked up all her covert habits.
9
The Putin regime is painting itself so far into a corner that it eventually has to fall, whether in 10 or 20 years (change of metaphor), when the panting husky Putin falls, and no other vicious dog can keep up the pace.
3
Julian Assange publishes stolen material. He is a criminal. He uses the guise of transparency to settle personal grudges. In addition, he might very well be a rapist. Swedish prosecutors will decide if charges will be filed. It's astonishing the respect this scoundrel gets from his adoring fans.
2
Until Assange procures and publicizes the doubtless massive electronic communications from Russia that detail the invasion of Crimea and the Ukraine by Russian Army forces, and the shooting down of a commercial airliner by either Russians or Russian proxies, he appears to be nothing more than a tool wielded by Vladimir Putin.
2
The truth is we know exactly what kind of thug Vladamir Putin is and how toxically freedom is supressed in Russia. What most Americans appear to know little about is the actual nature of US foreign policy, especially its covert side. Anyone who is seriously interested can, of course, pick up a copy of former NYT reporter Tim Weiner's history of the CIA, Legacy of Ashes, but since most will not, Wikileaks has helped provide Americans with a clearer picture of how tainted and cynical American foreign policy really is. The United States likes to portray itself as a great supporter of freedom and democracy but Assange, personally repugnant as he is, has helped pull aside the curtain and reveal what really goes on. Of course his inexcusable failure to adequately redact material that puts individuals at risk must be condemned. As for Snowden, evidence free assertions by some posters that he is somehow a Russian collabrator, or that he never criticizes Putin or Russia should actually read what he writes or listen to what he says on videos that are widley available as they are dead wrong.
3
Isn’t it a bloody shame that whistleblowers like Assange and Snowden have to find refuge in the shadow of Putin’s wings? Doesn’t that tell us more about the state of our crumbling freedoms in the West, than Russia’s, which already almost hit rock bottom in curtailing the freedoms of its citizens? Are Assange and Snowden the “prophets” which are without honour in their home town, among their relatives and in their own house ? Listen carefully to the contents of their message, do not smother the messenger. The messengers are only human and all too fallible. The State that considers itself infallible tends to become inhuman.
4
If Assange were supported by Moscow he'd be living there rather than the Ecuadorian embassy. He could hang out with Snowden drinking coffee by day, vodka by night, two colleagues. It sounds like something from a Tolstoy novel. I'm sure the FSB has the skills to bring him from a friendly embassy to Moscow undetected so the fact that he isn't there speaks volumes. I agree with Assange that this is "neo-McCarthyist hysteria about Russia."
[Shortly after releasing the war logs in 2010, Mr. Assange threatened to make good on that promise. WikiLeaks, he told a Moscow newspaper, had obtained compromising materials “about Russia, about your government and your businessmen.”]
It is curious to me that he never released this information and soon was releasing documents that damaged the U.S.A. and fed into Putin and Russia's interests. Could it be that Assange was threatened by Putin that he either cooperates with them and becomes their stooge or he is eliminated from the world stage and maybe from any stage?
It is curious to me that he never released this information and soon was releasing documents that damaged the U.S.A. and fed into Putin and Russia's interests. Could it be that Assange was threatened by Putin that he either cooperates with them and becomes their stooge or he is eliminated from the world stage and maybe from any stage?
1
My sincere hope is that Assange spends the rest of his days holed up in that embassy. A self-promoting narcissist who cares for only himself, and apparently now Russian intelligence.
2
Yes, Russia benefits, 99 percent of Americans benefit and billions of misinformed citizens of the world benefit. Not a bad deal.
4
We (the American electorate) benefit too. We often get a true glimpse as to what's really going on in Washington and our own Press that we would have never have known without the leaks. It too bad that the government of the people by the people is so often been shielded from the truth. Not the open government our founders had hoped for.
3
Constantly demonizing Russia is not constructive.
How about some balance? Maybe a special report on the positive aspects of Russian-US relations, or Russia’s stabilizing influence in Central Asia?
Most people here don’t understand why the US hates or fears Russia, which only serves to unite them under Putin. US Foreign Policy makers lack understanding and are thus dangerous. The US must be more “democratic.”
Russia is not your enemy. The only evidence is to the contrary. Rather than encouraging Russia after the USSR, older hardline, Cold War conservatives (idiots like McCain) saw it as an opportunity to contain and weaken Russia.
After constant pushing in Russia’s sphere of influence, in Chechnya, Georgia and now Ukraine, of course Russia finally pushed back (Crimea). I don't agree with Crimea but I understand it.
Give Russia a little respect and see how much better the world gets along. Believe me, a strong Russia is better for the world than a weak defensive Russia.
How about some balance? Maybe a special report on the positive aspects of Russian-US relations, or Russia’s stabilizing influence in Central Asia?
Most people here don’t understand why the US hates or fears Russia, which only serves to unite them under Putin. US Foreign Policy makers lack understanding and are thus dangerous. The US must be more “democratic.”
Russia is not your enemy. The only evidence is to the contrary. Rather than encouraging Russia after the USSR, older hardline, Cold War conservatives (idiots like McCain) saw it as an opportunity to contain and weaken Russia.
After constant pushing in Russia’s sphere of influence, in Chechnya, Georgia and now Ukraine, of course Russia finally pushed back (Crimea). I don't agree with Crimea but I understand it.
Give Russia a little respect and see how much better the world gets along. Believe me, a strong Russia is better for the world than a weak defensive Russia.
2
@Nikita
Russia has been given by the West far more respect that it gives or deserves, given Russia's behavior in the world.
Russia has been given by the West far more respect that it gives or deserves, given Russia's behavior in the world.
More and more Assange appears to be giving voice to the Russian intelligence agencies whose hacking of western data systems is well documented.
2
The democratic party under the "esteemed" tutelage of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are, in a bizarre kind of way and as a means to deflect the subject away from the questionable E-Mails and party incompetence, are attempting to create another cold war with Russia. The fact remains, despite all the rhetoric from them and the media, every investigation to date further confirmed by the FBI, there has never been any proof whatsoever that hackers from Russia were responsible for the Wikileaks E-Mails.
6
Intelligence officers are fairly consistently saying these are Russian hackers, and the FBI has now issued a warning to state elections board. The Russian hackers just stole a couple of hundred thousand voters names and information from Illinois, in addition to those of another state. This has zero to do with Harry Reid. Please face facts (although the Russian trolls who are all over the comment boards these days are probably paid per lie).
Correction: SMB
It would seem you did not take notice of my point of origin so, ultimately, for you a lesson in remedial geography is in order here. It seems you forgot that once the first batch of E-Mails were released, in order to divert attention away from the content, in less than 24 hrs.,the leaders of the DNC announced, with no proof whatsoever, it was Russian hackers. The election warning deal is just another diversion. Rumors of the potential hacking of electronic voting machines has been an issue since at least the 2000 presidential election.
I might also suggest you look at other than the mainstream media alternative news sources that are pretty adamant that, right from the outset, Pelosi and Reid have been very much involved. New Cold War?
Maybe yes, maybe no, but it is rather coincidental that the U.S. military/industrial complex has received just lately a rather substantial increase in their budget.
It would seem you did not take notice of my point of origin so, ultimately, for you a lesson in remedial geography is in order here. It seems you forgot that once the first batch of E-Mails were released, in order to divert attention away from the content, in less than 24 hrs.,the leaders of the DNC announced, with no proof whatsoever, it was Russian hackers. The election warning deal is just another diversion. Rumors of the potential hacking of electronic voting machines has been an issue since at least the 2000 presidential election.
I might also suggest you look at other than the mainstream media alternative news sources that are pretty adamant that, right from the outset, Pelosi and Reid have been very much involved. New Cold War?
Maybe yes, maybe no, but it is rather coincidental that the U.S. military/industrial complex has received just lately a rather substantial increase in their budget.
The New York Times is being very professional and polite by not directly linking the plainly obvious connection between Julian Assange and Russian intelligence and propaganda. I sincerely believe it has become plainly obvious Assange is Russia's independent-appearing front man for Russian intelligence and propaganda attacks on the West.
On a related note, I also believe the Administration's silence and lack of response to Russian cyber warfare attacks on the United States is a complete mistake which is only encouraging more and greater Russian attacks on the US. The Kremlin needs to have its incentives corrected and that will only happen when attacking the United States comes with too great a cost to Russia. Enough is enough. Russia needs to be taught a lesson about the serious costs of attacking the United States.
On a related note, I also believe the Administration's silence and lack of response to Russian cyber warfare attacks on the United States is a complete mistake which is only encouraging more and greater Russian attacks on the US. The Kremlin needs to have its incentives corrected and that will only happen when attacking the United States comes with too great a cost to Russia. Enough is enough. Russia needs to be taught a lesson about the serious costs of attacking the United States.
4
No one cares what you believe. I'd like the truth, not a pile of propaganda and a bunch of yes men telling us what they believe. This ain't Sunday at church.
1
You provided no evidence at all for your broad assertion, Jeff.... Just your," I sincerely believe it has become plainly obvious..." hogwash...
2
The line between public and private, between transparency and secrecy, has to be constantly negotiated. It defines politics in any age, but especially in a modern environment. In the West a free press has been a major player in those negotiations. In the US we've even institutionalized that negotiating process, referring to it as the fourth branch of government. In some sense, negotiating that line is an example of what William James called "a moral equivalent of war." In that "war," Julian Assange is calling for unilateral disarmament. He's, quite simply, both ignorant and dangerous, as this excellent article demonstrates. He's also a bellwether of media developments undermining the free press. We'd all better wake up.
100
Peru has a new President, an ex-Wall Street executive who wants to develop the country's stagnant economy. Mr. Assange should expect an eviction notice in the very near future and will now be able to move to his beloved Russia.
Assange is in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Peru is an entirely different country. Comprende?
I believe Julian Assange is a delusional pawn who thinks he is a champion of transparency but is reality of pawn of people much more devious and clever than he. But he's a figurehead for the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people who believe whole heartedly in the type of conspiracies only science fiction script writers in Hollywood cold dream up. Putin and his army of hackers make some of our CIA activities in the late 20th century seem like boy scout camp.
2
WikiLeaks needs to separate itself from Mr. Assange, who is exhibiting more frequent signs of paranoia and other delusions.
There is a place in the world for organizations who strive to make unnecessary secrets public, especially now that newspapers no longer play a powerful role in investigative journalism, but WikiLeaks under Julian Assange is little more than yellow journalism.
Julian no longer even pretends to be fair about what he chooses to publish. He has a limited number of specific targets he wants to damage, so that's all the rest of us see. William Randolph Hearst would approve.
There is a place in the world for organizations who strive to make unnecessary secrets public, especially now that newspapers no longer play a powerful role in investigative journalism, but WikiLeaks under Julian Assange is little more than yellow journalism.
Julian no longer even pretends to be fair about what he chooses to publish. He has a limited number of specific targets he wants to damage, so that's all the rest of us see. William Randolph Hearst would approve.
2
I try hard to give Assange the benefit of the doubt but he consistently proves himself to be a contemptible, morally obtuse fool. The fact that he plays the part of willing tool for the Kremlin and Putin speaks volumes about his hypocrisy and phony holier than thou stance.
2
Asange is nothing more than a Felony Burglar.
Nothing less.
He respects no one's privacy, nor right to privacy.
The Constitution's right for each person to privacy does
not exist in Assange's twisted belief in his omnipotent power.
He has no ethics. None.
Attacking the world's oldest Liberal Progressive political party,
so viciously, the party of Civil Rights and Women's Rights,
has taken Assange to a new low.
Nothing less.
He respects no one's privacy, nor right to privacy.
The Constitution's right for each person to privacy does
not exist in Assange's twisted belief in his omnipotent power.
He has no ethics. None.
Attacking the world's oldest Liberal Progressive political party,
so viciously, the party of Civil Rights and Women's Rights,
has taken Assange to a new low.
2
Assange is a boy who felt bullied. In his little room, he decided to become powerful. These motives are cheap, thoughtless, and easy to manipulate. A legnd in his own mind. Absolutely not a neutral 'freedom of information' fighter. Just a prisoner of his own resentments.
2
I wish we could stop giving this sociopath attention. He's holed up in that embassy because he's alleged to have tried to conceive random children by nonconsensually sabotaging condoms during otherwise consensual one night stands. If those stories are true, then he really just sees humans as objects he can hack and manipulate to leave his special mark on the world. There's no reason to listen to him analyzing our country's flaws. We Americans can examine our country's flaws on our own without his help.
1
He would be a bad husband and father. He wants to pass his genes on though. Very paranoid person, in a world of spies.
This is a bizarre assertion that should never have been posted.
I'm sure that Wikileaks, Assange, and Snowden started out thinking they were going to save the world. I don't think they were sophisticated enough to avoid getting entangled in Putin's cynical web. I honestly think they are cooperating with Putin's efforts to undermine a democratic election in the United States.
3
Hey wait a minute. The leaks expose the west because the west has so much dirty linen to expose. I mean when you look at the content of the leaks, they show what a two timing lying bunch of jerks the rulers in the west really are. Don't shoot the messenger, fix up the propaganda ridden information that passes for truth in WEstern countries. Ukraine, really just an innocent bunch trying to be democratic or a puppet of europe and the US. Nato promises not to extend to Russias border, but do so anyway. Has Russia done stuff that is worse than Iraq or Vietnam or what is happening on the West Bank. Look to our own house before we play the outrage card.
3
Talking about smearing of critics. Seems like American press doesn't object to smearing of critics of their Government. How dare Assange to leak the documents that presented the US is not very favorable light? He must be Kremlin's stooge! Otherwise, he would criticize Russia, not America. On the other hands, what difference does it make? Shouldn't authenticity of leaked documents be a main concern of American media? Who cares how the truth was revealed if it is truth? Assange don't have balanced views and leaked more documents about the American Government than about the Russian? And? The American journalists don't have balanced views as well. They criticize the Russian Government much more often than the American, and that doesn't bother them at all. Why should we worry about Assange? I think it is not bad at all. American media will supply us with critique of the Russian Government and Assange will supply us with critique of the Western Governments, and at the ends we will end up with opportunity to form our own opinion based on the true facts.
3
What matters is the content, if they are genuine. So, we need judgement on whether these leaked documents are fake or not. If they are genuine, the who leaked them is irrelevant. And, nobody claims that they are fake. Therefore, this piece is about finding excuses for wrongdoings, and spinning around facts does not work for the most people, at least outside US. Period.
3
Idealists often are very well intentioned but may not see the bigger picture.
Ed seems genuine and he has made a difference. What was being done on the American public was a serious crime. Obama made changes based on Ed's actions. Eric Holder speaks of Ed's work with praise. Ed has spoken out about Russia critically. His desire was for Ecuador but after his passport was revoked by the US he had little choice but to stay in Russia after leaving China. Julian appears to be more about control, anger and what appears to be revenge.
Ed seems genuine and he has made a difference. What was being done on the American public was a serious crime. Obama made changes based on Ed's actions. Eric Holder speaks of Ed's work with praise. Ed has spoken out about Russia critically. His desire was for Ecuador but after his passport was revoked by the US he had little choice but to stay in Russia after leaving China. Julian appears to be more about control, anger and what appears to be revenge.
As hackers get more and more sophisticated we will only see more of this.
As inconvenient as it may be, state secrets, as much as possible, should be discussed in person or through good old fashioned letters.
It worked that way just fine for thousands of years.
As inconvenient as it may be, state secrets, as much as possible, should be discussed in person or through good old fashioned letters.
It worked that way just fine for thousands of years.
3
Snowdon and Assange are ultimate examples of what happens when an intelligence establishment, motivated by ego and revenge, tries to catch flies with vinegar instead of honey. Had the US intelligence establishment being more willing to swallow its pride, it wouldn't have pushed them into Russia's arms.
I support Putin and Russia and Assange. For our own benefit, the U.S. Government needs a real and powerful State enemy. That's the reason I am also a "second amendment people".
1
I don't think he is a "stooge for the Russians" as some have claimed, but he seems to be uncritical of Putin, or sometimes an apologist. He reminds me of my father's cousin who was a registered communist in the 40s and 50s. He gave upon the party when he found himself offering logically convoluted justifications of Joe Stalin once too often. While it's true that many do criticize Putin, few of them are in Russia, or at least still alive in Russia,
1
The point is: his revelations only show that the West has its faults unlike the what is seen in the propaganda from the Western mainstream media and it seems this is what really upset the Western establishment rather than the revealed faults themselves. The best conceptualization for hypocrisy.
6
If a thief were allowed to sneak into homes and rifle personal files so he could use damning evidence against the homeowner we would clearly see that as an insidious crime. Just as important as our freedom of speech is our freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. The fourth amendment is as important as the first, second or any other amendment. Mr. Assange does not respect our Constitution.
His vindictive attacks on our country and the Democratic Party are traitorous. His release of personal information, including Social Security and credit card numbers reflects his callous disrespect for individual's rights.
He has now become an agent of the KGB, releasing their stolen and sometimes altered records without a real regard for truth. Future releases should be looked at with a grain of salt, as the veracity of those documents is questionable.
His vindictive attacks on our country and the Democratic Party are traitorous. His release of personal information, including Social Security and credit card numbers reflects his callous disrespect for individual's rights.
He has now become an agent of the KGB, releasing their stolen and sometimes altered records without a real regard for truth. Future releases should be looked at with a grain of salt, as the veracity of those documents is questionable.
4
From its onset, WikiLeaks has been about one thing: notoriety. Assange is an unprincipled opportunist driven solely by the desire for celebrity under the transparent guise of divulging government secrets for the sake of privacy and security.
2
It is more than revealing of motives when the NYT assails the illegal obtaining and disseminating of incriminating state actions EXCEPT when these episodes do not serve this organ of the democratic party's interests. This is the journal that published Ellsberg's theft of state secrets because doing so hurt the opposition party; here they indict those releasing information embarrassing to a democratic administration and its anointed successor. This is the daily that lobbied a republican governor for tax breaks while decrying incentives provided to other businesses. In short dear readers, nothing you read on these opinion pages is even-handed journalism; in every case except thinly veiled token softball articles from mildly opposed op-eds, they are shills for the elite's status quo and mock our very existence.
10
@Malcolm
The Russian cyber warfare attacks do not serve any American. That is both Republican and Democrat. Republicans and Democrats may battle it out in our domestic partisan political landscape but at the end of the day, Republicans and Democrats are both Americans who are both under attack from Russia. Domestic partisanship ends where a foreign enemy is attacking our country.
The Russian cyber warfare attacks do not serve any American. That is both Republican and Democrat. Republicans and Democrats may battle it out in our domestic partisan political landscape but at the end of the day, Republicans and Democrats are both Americans who are both under attack from Russia. Domestic partisanship ends where a foreign enemy is attacking our country.
2
Did you read the comment acknowledging that this country needs a worthy opponent such as a reinflated Russia to pull together against? Russia is not exactly a strong economy or military power at present. Setting up Russia as a powerful enemy if only in the minds of Americans, a propaganda job the Times is quite eager to do, is what Democrats do instead of the hard work of keeping this society functioning. As more jobs are replaced by automation, and there is no demand left in this highly unequal economy, watch for more bogus enemies, and fears drummed up by the left as well as the right. It serves both Putin and the US oligarchs to keep us -citizens of both countries - afraid.
And Daniel Ellsberg helped Russia by releasing the Pentagon Papers,
and Woodward and Bernstein helped Russia by exposing the rot in the White House, and John Mattes helped Russia by revealing Iran-Contra, and so on. But the point is, of course, that these people helped the US a lot more, by revealing the truth so that something could be done about it.
Instead of smearing the source (and sending a strong negative signal about the NYT to any future national security whistleblowers), a real newspaper would take the information revealed by Assange and others and run with it to determine, for example, exactly how Hillary's campaign worked with the DNC to sabotage Bernie Sanders, possibly stealing a US election.
The role of the media in a free society is to reveal the truth. Only those with something to hide stand in opposition to this.
and Woodward and Bernstein helped Russia by exposing the rot in the White House, and John Mattes helped Russia by revealing Iran-Contra, and so on. But the point is, of course, that these people helped the US a lot more, by revealing the truth so that something could be done about it.
Instead of smearing the source (and sending a strong negative signal about the NYT to any future national security whistleblowers), a real newspaper would take the information revealed by Assange and others and run with it to determine, for example, exactly how Hillary's campaign worked with the DNC to sabotage Bernie Sanders, possibly stealing a US election.
The role of the media in a free society is to reveal the truth. Only those with something to hide stand in opposition to this.
18
The US cuts off Wikileaks' credit card funding mechanism... Coincidentally, eight days before WikiLeaks releases a massive trove of American diplomatic cables, a warrant for Assange's arrest is issued...
And then we are surprised when Assange accepts Russian support? And in exchange for that support his promised revelations about Russia disappear?
Whether Assange is a good guy or a bad guy, Don Quixote or just a jerk, we should see what the US government's heavy handed attempts to silence him have accomplished.
Less than nothing.
After all, before we cut off his funding, Assange promised to reveal truths about one of America's adversaries. Then we pushed Assange into that adversaries' arms. Only a fool would think that was a positive accomplishment.
Who was Secretary of State then? Sigh.
I look forward to another four years of similarly successful foreign policy coups.
And then we are surprised when Assange accepts Russian support? And in exchange for that support his promised revelations about Russia disappear?
Whether Assange is a good guy or a bad guy, Don Quixote or just a jerk, we should see what the US government's heavy handed attempts to silence him have accomplished.
Less than nothing.
After all, before we cut off his funding, Assange promised to reveal truths about one of America's adversaries. Then we pushed Assange into that adversaries' arms. Only a fool would think that was a positive accomplishment.
Who was Secretary of State then? Sigh.
I look forward to another four years of similarly successful foreign policy coups.
6
A poor analyses by the New York Times in regard to Wikileaks, with a 'wink, wink, nudge, nudge' about that organization serving Russian interest, saying the they probably don't have no direct ties but....As far as we know candidate Clinton or president Obama probably don't have direct ties with the Kremlin either and so do most of us. It is a symptom of bad reporting to discuss what is probably not...
Embarrassing information about abuse of power by the US authorities and the Democratic party might serve Russia - the new boogieman - on the propaganda level, but it mostly serves the American people who can at last learn what is done on our behalf and with our tax money, and how many times we have been lied to. It serves democracy first and foremost.
I guess the Times is trying preemptively to discredit Wikileaks in case information about the Mrs. Clinton would be put forward that might put the candidate in a grim light (Perhaps foundation donors got fast track access to the madam secretary). Clinton is already the second most detested and unpopular candidate in recent history, second to Trump only.
Of course The New York Times probably have no direct ties to the the Clinton campaign but its reporting mostly benefits Clinton.
Embarrassing information about abuse of power by the US authorities and the Democratic party might serve Russia - the new boogieman - on the propaganda level, but it mostly serves the American people who can at last learn what is done on our behalf and with our tax money, and how many times we have been lied to. It serves democracy first and foremost.
I guess the Times is trying preemptively to discredit Wikileaks in case information about the Mrs. Clinton would be put forward that might put the candidate in a grim light (Perhaps foundation donors got fast track access to the madam secretary). Clinton is already the second most detested and unpopular candidate in recent history, second to Trump only.
Of course The New York Times probably have no direct ties to the the Clinton campaign but its reporting mostly benefits Clinton.
7
This article makes the same mistake that Jo Becker made in her interview of Mr. Assange earlier today: it inappropriately conflates the "West" with the plethora of powerful Western institutions and individuals whose wrongdoing and abuses have been exposed by Wikileaks revelations.
The exposure of the corrupt inner workings of the DNC by Wikileaks led directly to the resignations of five top DNC officials. Only a news organization so completely in the tank for the Democratic Party would be so daft as to construe this as an attack on the West as a whole.
The exposure of the corrupt inner workings of the DNC by Wikileaks led directly to the resignations of five top DNC officials. Only a news organization so completely in the tank for the Democratic Party would be so daft as to construe this as an attack on the West as a whole.
6
On balance, good article. While you had to stretch the story to attack Assange, still you brought attention to many undisputed facts on all sides that most people who follow public affairs don't know.
And as a side benefit, reporting these events helps build public understanding of how wars happen. In the corporate world, it is often considered a mistake not to pursue every available advantage, to grab market dominance for example. Translated to statecraft, that means do everything you can to take advantage of another's weakness, pushing right up to their front door and beyond. No provocation needed, and forget about legitimacy, the principle is to push your advantage. With survival at stake, the target is motivated to fight back.
And another way wars happen is that states get bad habits from how they treat, mistreat, grind into the ground, or just assassinate their own citizens and other people around the world, when they want to. Then these bad habits, picked up against individuals, carry over into their dealings with other states, which often have similar habits, and far stronger means to fight back. So war is likely.
What Assange and WikiLeaks stand for (not always perfectly) is saying NO to conducting human affairs this way. Maybe we don't need to keep fighting war after war with ever more powerful technology until we exterminate the human race.
And as a side benefit, reporting these events helps build public understanding of how wars happen. In the corporate world, it is often considered a mistake not to pursue every available advantage, to grab market dominance for example. Translated to statecraft, that means do everything you can to take advantage of another's weakness, pushing right up to their front door and beyond. No provocation needed, and forget about legitimacy, the principle is to push your advantage. With survival at stake, the target is motivated to fight back.
And another way wars happen is that states get bad habits from how they treat, mistreat, grind into the ground, or just assassinate their own citizens and other people around the world, when they want to. Then these bad habits, picked up against individuals, carry over into their dealings with other states, which often have similar habits, and far stronger means to fight back. So war is likely.
What Assange and WikiLeaks stand for (not always perfectly) is saying NO to conducting human affairs this way. Maybe we don't need to keep fighting war after war with ever more powerful technology until we exterminate the human race.
4
This article plays to a very tired, old "fear Russia" cold war concept - us vs them. But the oligarchy in this country is not us - it is not at all supportive of average Americans. Truth out serves the common good by exposing the collusion of corporate interests with this government. There are plenty of hackers who threaten Putin's regime secrets just as those threatening those of the banking and corporate oligarchy in this country.
3
It never fails to amuse me how some of the public is continually screaming for transparency in our government. Those same people who want it probably wouldn't even know what most of it means, because those same people have never researched anything, and buy whatever their told as long as it fits into their ideology. Someone much wiser then me said it best, "Most people are not gifted with exceptional intelligence, so they memorize what they consider facts, and use it as proof of their own intellectual ability!"
2
Interesting. The NY Times was one of the world offenders of the DNC/HRC/Media collusion exposed by the leak. Surely they wouldn't want to distract us from that fact by implicating the whole thing into a Russian ploy, but providing no proof.
Asking who Deep Throat is, is the wrong question... heck, Nixon even tried to make Watergate out to be a Russian plot in '73. I'm sure Russia benefited from a weak US executive branch then too, but that didn't make them the source of the leak. The relevant story was the corruption in the US government.
Asking who Deep Throat is, is the wrong question... heck, Nixon even tried to make Watergate out to be a Russian plot in '73. I'm sure Russia benefited from a weak US executive branch then too, but that didn't make them the source of the leak. The relevant story was the corruption in the US government.
11
Amazing personality, just like Trump. A similar one is the former Greek finance minister, Yannis Varoufakis. Putin of course is the biggest of all. These men have huge egos in common, along with narcissism, and a fondness for multiple women.
But they are not the most interesting part. We are! The most shocking event of all is that humans seem set up pay attention and believe such people.
Evolution has put such men in control of humans time and again. We are all bred to accept them as leaders. And this is very bad news for world peace.
But they are not the most interesting part. We are! The most shocking event of all is that humans seem set up pay attention and believe such people.
Evolution has put such men in control of humans time and again. We are all bred to accept them as leaders. And this is very bad news for world peace.
2
It's been obvious to me since seeing the documentary on Assange that he is bizarrely unaware of the irony of his existence: a deeply secretive, manipulative, self-interested and hostile man seeking to expose deeply secretive, manipulative, self-interested and hostile nations.
2
Wikileaks, Snowden, it's all worked out brilliantly for "that bit player on the world stage" Russia. Russia is even playing an unprecedented role in the U.S. election by hacking the Democratic National Committee and promoting Donald Trump. I rather doubt this was the intention Assange and Snowden, but there it is. In an effort to promote transparency, Assange and Snowden have managed to aide and abet the world's most secret and corrupt society outside of China. Their reward? Assange is kept in an Ecuadorian birdcage in London and Snowden lives at the mercy of Vladimir Putin on a daily basis in Moscow. Oh, yes. Snowden gets to be portrayed in an Oliver Stone movie.
1
There are few recent developments more depressing than the tack taken recently by the Democratic Party to attempt to undermine its critic by tying them to Putin. They've done this with Snowden, Assange, Greenwald, Stein, et cetera, as well as Trump. Basically anyone who criticizes Democrat or the national security state from the left or the right is now an unpatriotic Russian agent. This is so reminiscent of the tactics of the most vicious hawk cold warriors of the last few decades. It is hard to tell the difference anymore between Kissingers, Cheneys, McCarthys, and the DNC, Clinton, NYT so-called liberal national security consensus. It is incredibly depressing to me as a civil libertarian leftist who wants more transparency and less warfare.
10
I've always felt that Julian Assange was emotionally unbalanced and had ravaged self esteem, and that Wikileaks was fundamentally about him trying to find a way to compensate for that by being a kind of Superman. It has turned him instead into a kind of predator.
For him everything has always been black and white and he has never cared about consequences. That's a very dangerous trait. He may have started with good intentions, but they didn't last as his lust for attention got out of control. And the isolation that his own actions have led to have magnified his neuroses ten-fold, especially his paranoia and his Machiavellian ability to exploit it in others.
How do we know that everything he leaks is the truth? We don't. We have no way of knowing. It's ironic that the man who preaches honesty is super-selective about what he exposes and won't face the world about his own actions. His paranoia about the big bad US government wanting to kill him if he leaves the safety of his cocoon is pretty convenient. So we'll never know the truth about his behavior in Sweden.
And Vladimir Putin now has two emotionally unstable friends in the West, who thrive on paranoia and conspiracy theories, who have an uncanny capacity to seduce people into believing they're the truth-tellers when in fact they are predators, and who will do anything for attention. Donald Trump and Julian Assange.
For him everything has always been black and white and he has never cared about consequences. That's a very dangerous trait. He may have started with good intentions, but they didn't last as his lust for attention got out of control. And the isolation that his own actions have led to have magnified his neuroses ten-fold, especially his paranoia and his Machiavellian ability to exploit it in others.
How do we know that everything he leaks is the truth? We don't. We have no way of knowing. It's ironic that the man who preaches honesty is super-selective about what he exposes and won't face the world about his own actions. His paranoia about the big bad US government wanting to kill him if he leaves the safety of his cocoon is pretty convenient. So we'll never know the truth about his behavior in Sweden.
And Vladimir Putin now has two emotionally unstable friends in the West, who thrive on paranoia and conspiracy theories, who have an uncanny capacity to seduce people into believing they're the truth-tellers when in fact they are predators, and who will do anything for attention. Donald Trump and Julian Assange.
2
It's really sad to see that many people attack Assange because he exposes the fraud. Or support an idea that information about misdeeds should not be disclosed lest it damage the image of the country.
That's exactly why leaks are so helpful. They are a good wake up call for government and political parties to either start doing what they're preaching or stop being hypocrites.
That's exactly why leaks are so helpful. They are a good wake up call for government and political parties to either start doing what they're preaching or stop being hypocrites.
10
The actual is worth knowing and important to know.
These leaks from other sources are going to continue, whistles blow and it'll be most of how we find out, plus by other media what's going on.
It seems the old club has lost the war on this one, huge scoops always win especially if they bring the truth.
So let's discuss content instead of messenger. Silence was deafening on that.
These leaks from other sources are going to continue, whistles blow and it'll be most of how we find out, plus by other media what's going on.
It seems the old club has lost the war on this one, huge scoops always win especially if they bring the truth.
So let's discuss content instead of messenger. Silence was deafening on that.
8
American citizens have benefited from Wikileaks as it gives us an understanding of our government's behaviors in the Middle East -- to see the lies, distortions, and evasions on which our foreign policy is built. That policy does not stand the light of day and successive administrations want to keep citizens in the dark about what is being done in our name.
9
Would it not be better to say that Russia often benefits from the bad behavior, including poor management of classified information, revealed by WikiLeaks? It is the bad behavior revealed that weakens the U.S. to the benefit of Russia.
5
How many people on this comment board have bothered to read, "The WikiLeaks Files, The World According to U.S. Empire"?
Fascinating stuff, and we have a responsibility to know what our government is doing.
But the obedient NYT readers are dutifully posting how much they despise the truth teller.
The NYT has its reasons for disparaging Assange, and one reason may have something to do with discrediting any further leaks that emerge about Hillary.
The GroupThink taking place in this comment section is scary stuff.
Eventually America will have to confront the destruction our policies have created.
We need a moral awakening in this country based on the basic rights of humans on the planet.
For the sake of dark-skinned people across the planet, I hope it happens soon.
Fascinating stuff, and we have a responsibility to know what our government is doing.
But the obedient NYT readers are dutifully posting how much they despise the truth teller.
The NYT has its reasons for disparaging Assange, and one reason may have something to do with discrediting any further leaks that emerge about Hillary.
The GroupThink taking place in this comment section is scary stuff.
Eventually America will have to confront the destruction our policies have created.
We need a moral awakening in this country based on the basic rights of humans on the planet.
For the sake of dark-skinned people across the planet, I hope it happens soon.
16
But actually, many of the commenters agree with you.
1
AGH - Chappaqua
I too am surprised at the "Groupthink" of reader's comments.
Some of the groupthinker's comments numbered in the two or three digits.
There are a few voices in the wilderness but they seem to be in the single digits amongst the commenters.
I wonder, also, if their reading list included Animal Farm and/or 1984 ?
I too am surprised at the "Groupthink" of reader's comments.
Some of the groupthinker's comments numbered in the two or three digits.
There are a few voices in the wilderness but they seem to be in the single digits amongst the commenters.
I wonder, also, if their reading list included Animal Farm and/or 1984 ?
1
Mr. Assange's stated purpose, and thereby WikiLeaks, are compormised by Mr. Assange's monomania. Superheroes are the stuff of fiction. While most of us want honesty and clarity to be foundations of our relations with others, we understand that extreme self-regard, apparent greed, and need for social standing and cultural dominance too often get in the way. Is WikiLeaks serving as an agent of honesty and clarity, or as an agent of yet one more cohort who have succumbed to a fiction of greatness?
1
Assange has become the Lex Luthor of the world. How do his emails and personal info avoid hacking and dissemination into free cyberspace? What ever happened to his taking down the international corporations and oligarchs that largely control the planet? One must imagine that he has sold his immunity for a hands off approach except to entities who are no threat to his livelihood. He may be a captive but he is hardly suffering, and makes no effort to hide his delight and pleasure in the havoc he wreaks.
2
When will we stop this? Are a bunch of countries + the USA not powerful enough to face the Kremlin's clown?
If he attacks our countries with propaganda, we should hire some of our best hackers and whistleblowers to reveal russia's scandals and see how they handle the pressure.
Btw, what happened to Litwinenko (ex russian spy), after he escaped to England trying to reveal some of Putins intrigues? He got murdered. In England! There were no investigations. Imagine who would shout and blame the west immediately when Snowden would die under similar cirumstances?
Wake up, people!
If he attacks our countries with propaganda, we should hire some of our best hackers and whistleblowers to reveal russia's scandals and see how they handle the pressure.
Btw, what happened to Litwinenko (ex russian spy), after he escaped to England trying to reveal some of Putins intrigues? He got murdered. In England! There were no investigations. Imagine who would shout and blame the west immediately when Snowden would die under similar cirumstances?
Wake up, people!
2
Drake - Deutschland
True, Litvinenko was extirpated in England & Bin Laden in Pakistan.
Bad behavior all around.
I include the NYTimes for this besmirching article.
True, Litvinenko was extirpated in England & Bin Laden in Pakistan.
Bad behavior all around.
I include the NYTimes for this besmirching article.
You could use some facts. Assange didnt use propoganda, it was factual information he released.
Of course the murder of the Russian spy was investigated! We know he was poisoned with an isotope that came from Russia.
Of course the murder of the Russian spy was investigated! We know he was poisoned with an isotope that came from Russia.
1
There was a thorough and public investigation by the UK government, well reported on by The Guardian at theguardian.co.uk and completely ignored by the US media. Of course.
Putin's Russia not sufficiently bruised? Who cares. It's news to noone the kind of regime he runs. When purporting to be the leader of the free world standing on principles it systematically violates without remorse and the emperor is found to have no clothes, that is news.
The author attempts to read Assange's motivations with the same lens one would a state actor and in so doing, in my opinion, fails miserably. Questioning the timing of releases, the objects of his ire, his "one-dimensional" editorial choices, smearing by association, etc only serve to highlight that this is one man up against some pretty nasty institutions. Flawed he might be but he has done the world a great service by lifting the hypocritical veil of moral sanctity from what is objectively biggest bully on the planet. Thank you Mr Assange, for rubbing the hypocrites' noses in their own excrement. No thanks to this author for a lightweight read.
The author attempts to read Assange's motivations with the same lens one would a state actor and in so doing, in my opinion, fails miserably. Questioning the timing of releases, the objects of his ire, his "one-dimensional" editorial choices, smearing by association, etc only serve to highlight that this is one man up against some pretty nasty institutions. Flawed he might be but he has done the world a great service by lifting the hypocritical veil of moral sanctity from what is objectively biggest bully on the planet. Thank you Mr Assange, for rubbing the hypocrites' noses in their own excrement. No thanks to this author for a lightweight read.
9
The leaks about the _clearly criminal activities_ in the case of Watergate and Nixon have actually been a great and positive influence. But much other leaking is of interest only in the community of journalists who nearly worship it. I believe most leak of U.S. Government material in the long run have influence public opinion and policy very little, and been of only passing interest.
Assange's very strong leaning toward fascist Russia under Putin, and the strong probability that Putin simply plays him should be quite sobering for him. For the rest of us, we should just want to see theft of data and documents drastically reduced.
The stolen campaign documents has made clear it is Putin mucking in our elections and has likely backfired on both Putin and Assange.
I think the News media like the NY Times has become well to fascinated with leaks instead of other ways to conduct investigative reporting.
I get a little sick to my stomach seeing pictures of Assange or Snowden and Assange is worse.
Assange's very strong leaning toward fascist Russia under Putin, and the strong probability that Putin simply plays him should be quite sobering for him. For the rest of us, we should just want to see theft of data and documents drastically reduced.
The stolen campaign documents has made clear it is Putin mucking in our elections and has likely backfired on both Putin and Assange.
I think the News media like the NY Times has become well to fascinated with leaks instead of other ways to conduct investigative reporting.
I get a little sick to my stomach seeing pictures of Assange or Snowden and Assange is worse.
It is maddening to hear and read the absurd notion that the bias of Julian Assange is merely a coincidence.
Assange regularly receives information or misinformation from Russia, publishes it on the internet without checking the sources, never misses a chance to release hacked emails of United States government officials and of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton, and makes absolutely no effort to do the same with Donald Trump, Russia or Vladimir Putin.
It is difficult to decide who performs the worse disservice to our democracy: the writers and pundits who claim that the one-sidedness of Assange is just a coincidence, or those who claim that Assange acts out of a strong conviction that secrecy in high places is always bad and transparency is always good.
This hypocritical lover of the spotlight belongs in a jail cell without a phone, laptop or other means of communication beyond a pad of paper to send messages to his lawyer, after the jailer has read them.
Until his incarceration ends, Assange should not be allowed to manipulate the gullible media by granting jailhouse interviews.
Assange regularly receives information or misinformation from Russia, publishes it on the internet without checking the sources, never misses a chance to release hacked emails of United States government officials and of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton, and makes absolutely no effort to do the same with Donald Trump, Russia or Vladimir Putin.
It is difficult to decide who performs the worse disservice to our democracy: the writers and pundits who claim that the one-sidedness of Assange is just a coincidence, or those who claim that Assange acts out of a strong conviction that secrecy in high places is always bad and transparency is always good.
This hypocritical lover of the spotlight belongs in a jail cell without a phone, laptop or other means of communication beyond a pad of paper to send messages to his lawyer, after the jailer has read them.
Until his incarceration ends, Assange should not be allowed to manipulate the gullible media by granting jailhouse interviews.
Once again, human idealism gets in the way of reality. Sometimes we lie not to hurt, and other times we lie in order to inflict hurt. Even orangutan females, apparently, steal food from an interested male in order to determine the quality of his reaction to the theft. As her concern is for the welfare of her children, can we honestly condemn the female orangutan's admittedly devious attempt to ascertain the 'truth' of a would-be suitor's temperament, if the lives of her children are at stake?
As every reality-tv show, marriage, psychologist, and anthropologist will tell you: There is no relationship, no society, and frankly, no social species on the planet that would long survive anything like 'total transparency'. It is quite the paradox that any and every social society of humans or animals studied has shown that it could not function without some degree of an ability to hold back or otherwise be less-than-forthcoming with what would, objectively speaking, be called the 'full truth'. Whether we call it 'being polite' or 'being realistic' there are small and large reasons why we, as a species, use our capacity to lie.
There are a million reasons, good and bad, why we lie, and why Mother Nature has given us the means to be so good at it. Mr. Assange seems to me to be one of those idealists that is too enamored of his goals to understand the true complexities of everyday life. Call it the curse of the Utopian, to always simplify reality just enough to believe the ideal.
As every reality-tv show, marriage, psychologist, and anthropologist will tell you: There is no relationship, no society, and frankly, no social species on the planet that would long survive anything like 'total transparency'. It is quite the paradox that any and every social society of humans or animals studied has shown that it could not function without some degree of an ability to hold back or otherwise be less-than-forthcoming with what would, objectively speaking, be called the 'full truth'. Whether we call it 'being polite' or 'being realistic' there are small and large reasons why we, as a species, use our capacity to lie.
There are a million reasons, good and bad, why we lie, and why Mother Nature has given us the means to be so good at it. Mr. Assange seems to me to be one of those idealists that is too enamored of his goals to understand the true complexities of everyday life. Call it the curse of the Utopian, to always simplify reality just enough to believe the ideal.
1
“Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it.”
Mr. Assange is locked in his little cage and raging against the machine as to why he is there but will not look at or judge all of his jailers equally including himself. He's turned into a small man in two small rooms and rapidly becoming like all old media; those holding on to relevance increasingly screech the loudest when their position in the world becomes less important. Old comes early in cyberspace and irrelevance rarely goes quietly.
I admire whistle blowers. They have a plan and they roll it out as best they can. The most effective whistle blowers' agenda expires when the truth is revealed, any other action after that point becomes a crusade if no one else picks up the cause. Crusaders are good too, unless their cause is the the only truth that matters.
Lonely men make bad decisions.
Mr. Assange is locked in his little cage and raging against the machine as to why he is there but will not look at or judge all of his jailers equally including himself. He's turned into a small man in two small rooms and rapidly becoming like all old media; those holding on to relevance increasingly screech the loudest when their position in the world becomes less important. Old comes early in cyberspace and irrelevance rarely goes quietly.
I admire whistle blowers. They have a plan and they roll it out as best they can. The most effective whistle blowers' agenda expires when the truth is revealed, any other action after that point becomes a crusade if no one else picks up the cause. Crusaders are good too, unless their cause is the the only truth that matters.
Lonely men make bad decisions.
This article is a hit piece rather than reasoned or principled analysis.
In the never-ending propaganda war between powerful countries, any revealed secrets might benefit one side or another, but the secrets themselves are the more important problem, since they undermine democracy. Secrets about American politics, policies and actions are secrets from the American people. In most cases the intelligence services of rival countries already know those secrets. Democracy at home is impossible without an informed citizenry, and the citizenry cannot be informed if the major parties and high government officials are able to keep their lies, misdirection and corruption secret.
Why is this article a hit piece? What is the motivation? Considering that the Times has been pulling out all its big guns in support of Hillary Clinton, it is reasonable to suppose that the motivation is to undermine any additional embarrassing revelations that might come from Wikileaks or other sources.
Distract readers from corruption in U.S. politics by focusing attention on Russia. Shades of McCarthyism and the Cold War! By the way, I write this not as a supporter of Trump or the Republicans, but as one who has long been fed up with the hypocrisy and manipulations of elite rulers and the two party system.
In the never-ending propaganda war between powerful countries, any revealed secrets might benefit one side or another, but the secrets themselves are the more important problem, since they undermine democracy. Secrets about American politics, policies and actions are secrets from the American people. In most cases the intelligence services of rival countries already know those secrets. Democracy at home is impossible without an informed citizenry, and the citizenry cannot be informed if the major parties and high government officials are able to keep their lies, misdirection and corruption secret.
Why is this article a hit piece? What is the motivation? Considering that the Times has been pulling out all its big guns in support of Hillary Clinton, it is reasonable to suppose that the motivation is to undermine any additional embarrassing revelations that might come from Wikileaks or other sources.
Distract readers from corruption in U.S. politics by focusing attention on Russia. Shades of McCarthyism and the Cold War! By the way, I write this not as a supporter of Trump or the Republicans, but as one who has long been fed up with the hypocrisy and manipulations of elite rulers and the two party system.
5
In 1976, I traveled around the world, and came home with 4 observations:
1. Women have it pretty tough in most of the world -- including here, but especially in Third World countries.
2. An aggressive military (for example, the US military) that routinely intervenes in foreign wars is a luxury that very, very few countries can afford.
3. Muhammad Ali is, hands down, the most famous human being on the planet.
4. The US thinks Russia (the Soviet Union, back then) is a much bigger deal than the rest of the world does, which tends to think there is just one superpower -- the US -- with Russia and China as very distant also-rans, and is sincerely mystified that we (the US) seem not to understand this.
#4 seems to be rearing its ugly head lately. Russia is a big country, but far less of a big deal than we're making it out to be. If any country is a "threat" to the US, it isn't Russia. It's China. Putin is probably as bemused, and amused, as most of the rest of the world that we're paying so much attention to him lately.
1. Women have it pretty tough in most of the world -- including here, but especially in Third World countries.
2. An aggressive military (for example, the US military) that routinely intervenes in foreign wars is a luxury that very, very few countries can afford.
3. Muhammad Ali is, hands down, the most famous human being on the planet.
4. The US thinks Russia (the Soviet Union, back then) is a much bigger deal than the rest of the world does, which tends to think there is just one superpower -- the US -- with Russia and China as very distant also-rans, and is sincerely mystified that we (the US) seem not to understand this.
#4 seems to be rearing its ugly head lately. Russia is a big country, but far less of a big deal than we're making it out to be. If any country is a "threat" to the US, it isn't Russia. It's China. Putin is probably as bemused, and amused, as most of the rest of the world that we're paying so much attention to him lately.
Could it be that Russia benefits because the facts show that the United States is more the sinner than the sinned against in the conduct of world affairs? The lst great contributions = and they wee great - to to the good governance of the world were the US support fro the creation of European Social Democracy (as a benign capitalist alternative to Soviet communism). the rebuilding of Japan, adb the deg]fence of Korea. All the US's many military aggressions, suppression of even moderate reform movements, and the mischief of violent regine changes have disgraced the term democarcy,
I am assured by two senior psychiatrist friends @ NYC not only that the newly discovered syndrome "putinoia" will, with virtual certainty, be recognized in the forthcoming DSM-6, but that the DNC and the NY Times will also likely be implicated as force multipliers in having helped facilitate the current contagion. Thanks to my insider information, I am also advised that the only thing that's really still at issue between all the editors of the volume is whether or not, already, to recognize "putinoid psychosis" as a valid sub-species of the disorder, given its emergent yet still largely prospective status. It is confidently expected, though, that by the time the volume will appear the syndrome -- to be characterized as terminal -- will be rampant, and even running riot throughout the USA and Europe. So, one really has to wonder, will there be anyone still left around to study the newest sixth edition of the psychiatric gospel?
2
Could you ask these "friends" to evaluate the newest syndrome, "electionoia"? Homeland Security's involvement may be a symptom of a deep psychosis.
1
Unfortunately, my countryman Mr Assange is not the altruistic human-rights hero that his defenders make him out to be. Wikileaks is a business. It is a ruthless business and its decisions are subjective and made in its own interests so as to promote its brand. Mr Assange et al do not worry one bit about who they expose, betray or harm.
Mr Assange's self imposed isolation in the Equadorian Embassy is uber-hypocritical. Here's what Human Rights Watch says about Equador's civil rights record:
The administration of President Rafael Correa has expanded state control over media and civil society and abused its power to harass, intimidate, and punish critics. In 2015, thousands of people participated in public demonstrations against government policies, and security forces on multiple occasions responded with excessive force. Abuses against protesters, including arbitrary arrests, have not been adequately investigated. Other continuing concerns include limited judicial independence, poor prison conditions, and the limited access women and girls enjoy to reproductive health care because of Ecuador’s harsh laws against abortion.
Mr Assange's self imposed isolation in the Equadorian Embassy is uber-hypocritical. Here's what Human Rights Watch says about Equador's civil rights record:
The administration of President Rafael Correa has expanded state control over media and civil society and abused its power to harass, intimidate, and punish critics. In 2015, thousands of people participated in public demonstrations against government policies, and security forces on multiple occasions responded with excessive force. Abuses against protesters, including arbitrary arrests, have not been adequately investigated. Other continuing concerns include limited judicial independence, poor prison conditions, and the limited access women and girls enjoy to reproductive health care because of Ecuador’s harsh laws against abortion.
2
"Mr Assange is not the altruistic human-rights hero that his defenders make him out to be."
I do not know who Mr. Assange's "defenders" might be, but I doubt there are many who assert this about him: "altruistic human-rights hero". He is by all accounts a strange individual, but that is irrelevant to the issues at hand.
And, er, what does the so-called human rights record of Ecuador have to do with anything here?
I do not know who Mr. Assange's "defenders" might be, but I doubt there are many who assert this about him: "altruistic human-rights hero". He is by all accounts a strange individual, but that is irrelevant to the issues at hand.
And, er, what does the so-called human rights record of Ecuador have to do with anything here?
On the contrary, I think that what hurts the United States the most is the betrayal of our principles and promises.
When we do things that are objectively bad, against the law, or scandalous in some way or another; when we try to cover it up and lie to ourselves about what we do; when we are caught lying, or a covered-up scandal is exposed, ; if we rig democracies to protect the interests of an oligarchy; if we engage in clandestine torture and acts that could be considered war crimes, we empower our rivals and we deserve every bit of criticism that we receive.
The United States does many great things. Like any powerful country, it also does terrible things. If we are honest with ourselves about who we are and what we do, we can work on becoming better than we currently are. Placing the blame for a sullied image on one who exposes it to the world is only a weak attempt to shrug responsibility to someone else.
Does the exposure of our more nefarious side benefit countries like Russia? Absolutely. Does this mean that we should hide from who we really are, and pretend that whistle blowers are to blame? Absolutely not.
When we do things that are objectively bad, against the law, or scandalous in some way or another; when we try to cover it up and lie to ourselves about what we do; when we are caught lying, or a covered-up scandal is exposed, ; if we rig democracies to protect the interests of an oligarchy; if we engage in clandestine torture and acts that could be considered war crimes, we empower our rivals and we deserve every bit of criticism that we receive.
The United States does many great things. Like any powerful country, it also does terrible things. If we are honest with ourselves about who we are and what we do, we can work on becoming better than we currently are. Placing the blame for a sullied image on one who exposes it to the world is only a weak attempt to shrug responsibility to someone else.
Does the exposure of our more nefarious side benefit countries like Russia? Absolutely. Does this mean that we should hide from who we really are, and pretend that whistle blowers are to blame? Absolutely not.
3
There seems to be a lot of false equivalences with what Mr. Assange alleges he is doing. Arguments can reasonably be made against DNC for being biased. However, Mr. Assange seems to be more interested in his political motivation of undermining the politics and democracy of the United States, and more specifically the Democratic Party. Before Mr. Assange leaks information on Russia's wrongdoings and Trump's tax return, it seems reasonable to view him as a unwitting and willing pawn of Russia than someone advancing public interests.
Given all that happening, I am wondering what is the law here. Since Mr. Assange thinks it is fair to leak private information, perhaps it's only fair that people start releasing his credit card numbers and private information.
Given all that happening, I am wondering what is the law here. Since Mr. Assange thinks it is fair to leak private information, perhaps it's only fair that people start releasing his credit card numbers and private information.
Oy, will the NYTimes please desist from its anti-Russia, anti-Putin, anti-Russian crusade? That is all that this is.
Wikileaks is a tiny entity that does soime good for the citizens of the world, notably to the citizens of the USA, in its willingness to publish the facts behind the endless lies told to the citizenry by government officials and others with power and influence about one atrocity or another committed by said government officials or associates.
Once the USA governmental powers-that-be became aware that Wikileaks could obtain supposedly secret, but highly revelatory, information about USA governmental actions that was likely to outrage at a portion of the citizenry, those governmental powers have done their best to excessively punish anyone involved in publishing the facts.
Whatever ruse, regardless of specific facts about Mr. Assange's behavior, used in Sweden to put Mr Assange into the physical control of Swedish authorities was intended solely to enable his extradition to the USA, where his treatment would mirror Mr. Manning's.
Wikileaks is a tiny entity that does soime good for the citizens of the world, notably to the citizens of the USA, in its willingness to publish the facts behind the endless lies told to the citizenry by government officials and others with power and influence about one atrocity or another committed by said government officials or associates.
Once the USA governmental powers-that-be became aware that Wikileaks could obtain supposedly secret, but highly revelatory, information about USA governmental actions that was likely to outrage at a portion of the citizenry, those governmental powers have done their best to excessively punish anyone involved in publishing the facts.
Whatever ruse, regardless of specific facts about Mr. Assange's behavior, used in Sweden to put Mr Assange into the physical control of Swedish authorities was intended solely to enable his extradition to the USA, where his treatment would mirror Mr. Manning's.
6
If WikiLeaks truly wanted to create transparency, then why not publish now all the emails it has that may be damaging to Clinton? Assange declines to "curate" any information released by WikiLeaks because its integrity could be damaged by the curators' biases. But releasing information already available to him in tranches that are admittedly timed to achieve maximum political impact reveals such blatant bias that it negates the very idea of openness and transparency that he professes to promote.
No, Assange, and by extension, likely WikiLeaks as a whole is a political enterprise with clear intent. It serves the enemies of Western democracies (and Russia is not the only one of them), plays into the hands of those wishing to do us harm (terrorists among them), and damages elected democratic governments more accountable than any in history.
No, Assange, and by extension, likely WikiLeaks as a whole is a political enterprise with clear intent. It serves the enemies of Western democracies (and Russia is not the only one of them), plays into the hands of those wishing to do us harm (terrorists among them), and damages elected democratic governments more accountable than any in history.
4
I haven't read the story yet, but lemme guess:
Russia benefits when the people who criticize it as an ethically- and morally-challenged, self-centered player of money politics and willing user of military and paramilitary force to advance its not-so-enlightened goals are also shown to be ethically- and morally-challenged, self-centered players of money politics and willing users of military and paramilitary force to advance their not-so-enlightened goals.
As many people in the world have an inability to deal with gradations of such things - and, realistically, much of this activity will be the subject of analysis by warring factions within shrinking university departments of the social sciences, and rampant distortions by semi-intellectual consultants and non-ideological marketeers, for decades - Russia can make dueling claims of foundational corruption and lack of ethics on a systematic level when being confronted by the US and EU about its behaviors.
And that "you broke the middle east" argument is going to follow the US like the reverse of our "we won WW2" claim to goodwill, which has been swept away by that breaking of the middle east thing and will last until China takes over. This, when we know that Russia has been militarily destabilizing the middle east for longer than there has been a United States, and that Russia won WW2.
Am I right?
Russia benefits when the people who criticize it as an ethically- and morally-challenged, self-centered player of money politics and willing user of military and paramilitary force to advance its not-so-enlightened goals are also shown to be ethically- and morally-challenged, self-centered players of money politics and willing users of military and paramilitary force to advance their not-so-enlightened goals.
As many people in the world have an inability to deal with gradations of such things - and, realistically, much of this activity will be the subject of analysis by warring factions within shrinking university departments of the social sciences, and rampant distortions by semi-intellectual consultants and non-ideological marketeers, for decades - Russia can make dueling claims of foundational corruption and lack of ethics on a systematic level when being confronted by the US and EU about its behaviors.
And that "you broke the middle east" argument is going to follow the US like the reverse of our "we won WW2" claim to goodwill, which has been swept away by that breaking of the middle east thing and will last until China takes over. This, when we know that Russia has been militarily destabilizing the middle east for longer than there has been a United States, and that Russia won WW2.
Am I right?
3
..since USA - as a democratic nation - unfortunately has made herself guilty of so many right violations, war triggerings, manipulations and illegal spy attacks, that it helps Assange in portraying such a negative picture of the USA. Of course this does not whitewash other countries as Russia and China. But their actions in other countries than their own had not that fatal consequences for so many pople in these countries. We shouldn't forget these when we judge about Assange (whom I personally never liked). Cocncerning the Emails of the Democratic party for example - instead of speculating about an Russian conspiration without revealing any proves of the assumption, we as worried democrats would do better of putting blame on these shameful actions and stand up against it!
2
Wait, the Russians benefit when someone exposes our corruption? I am so naive I thought that we wanted to know about our government and have free access to information. The Russians can live in denial if they want. I want freedom of information, free press, whistleblowers and access to know about government corruption. It seems to me that Assange is doing us a favor. If we are afraid of Russia influencing our corrupt political system maybe we should start by cleaning up our act instead of blaming those that are only exposing the problem.
13
Assange is no less an enemy of the United States than those we proclaim to be, i.e. Isis, etc.
We have the ability to bring the Ecuadorian government to reality and have it expel Assange to meet his fate in courts in Sweden or beyond. We should use that ability to impose the most severe sanctions possible on Ecuador, beginning with a bar to any money being sent from here to there by the tens if not hundreds of thousands of Ecuadorians who have come to the U.S. in the past 30 years. If we shut down Ecuador's international trade and access to international banking, they will disgorge this creature from the apartment in London they call and embassy that has been his refuge for the past four years.
He is a loathsome snake, a spreader of confusion and hatred, who does it in the name of an open sunlit world but serves the darkest interests in the world.
There are things nations need to do in their own interest, that our nation has always needed to do in our interest, that are best never known or at least never known until long after they are done.
We have the ability to bring the Ecuadorian government to reality and have it expel Assange to meet his fate in courts in Sweden or beyond. We should use that ability to impose the most severe sanctions possible on Ecuador, beginning with a bar to any money being sent from here to there by the tens if not hundreds of thousands of Ecuadorians who have come to the U.S. in the past 30 years. If we shut down Ecuador's international trade and access to international banking, they will disgorge this creature from the apartment in London they call and embassy that has been his refuge for the past four years.
He is a loathsome snake, a spreader of confusion and hatred, who does it in the name of an open sunlit world but serves the darkest interests in the world.
There are things nations need to do in their own interest, that our nation has always needed to do in our interest, that are best never known or at least never known until long after they are done.
3
It's disturbing to read such a misinformed comment from a US citizen. Perhaps you need to read your own constitution, but after all you have every right to proudly displaying your own lack of understanding of the foundation of your country.
2
Suppose internet organizations were required to also meet the same standards as print news? Leaking government documents, sexting, internet bullying, cyber stalking, privacy hacking and other problems come from the same push of a button, and enable the well meaning among us as well as bullies and worse. What is the solution? Someone can propagate misinformation online, and while there are legal protections for serious slander, leaking credit card information and other crimes, it could take months or years (and lots of $) to obtain financial justice in court, and in the meantime what real harm has this misinformation garnered?
You are simply mistaken, news outlets have no such requirement. Reagan abrogated the truth in news doctrine in 1987 and since then news has literally become infotainment in the US. Ask Fox news, that's literally its legal defence in the lawsuits against it for lying : "our viewers want and expect entertainment, and we give it to them". Shame on the NYT for following it into the gutter.
2
I expect no less from the NYT than to follow the U.S. government line on our strange new cold war with Russia. Thank goodness the United States is so above any ulterior or nefarious motives. So glad that whistleblowers, WikiLeaks, Assange are so easily recognized as the bad guys.
What I find more interesting than all that typical propaganda put out jointly by the NYT and our government - are the top Readers' Picks. How obediently people follow along with the program. How very conformist and proper their opinions in keeping in line with our most powerful government agencies - NSA, CIA, FBI - not to mention the Pentagon. The gov't needs its secrets and needs its so-called enemies vanquished and these commenters are securely on the side of the powerful U.S. gov't - buying into the new Red Scare as easy as pie. Reading through repetitive, acquiescent comment after comment, I'm struck anew at the utter lack of critical thought, but of a sort of blind allegiance to U.S. power and p.r. So, so strange and dreary.
What I find more interesting than all that typical propaganda put out jointly by the NYT and our government - are the top Readers' Picks. How obediently people follow along with the program. How very conformist and proper their opinions in keeping in line with our most powerful government agencies - NSA, CIA, FBI - not to mention the Pentagon. The gov't needs its secrets and needs its so-called enemies vanquished and these commenters are securely on the side of the powerful U.S. gov't - buying into the new Red Scare as easy as pie. Reading through repetitive, acquiescent comment after comment, I'm struck anew at the utter lack of critical thought, but of a sort of blind allegiance to U.S. power and p.r. So, so strange and dreary.
11
Right on!
2
Given that he has been locked up for four years thanks to dark manipulations by the Obama administration one can hardly blame Assange for seeing America as a superbully.
Even the Times has noted that the Panama Papers - as far as published - say very little about US citizens. It is also well known that the US government is putting tax havens under pressure. So it isn't amazing when Assange suggests that the US government may have had a hand in this.
There can be little doubt that Snowden is a more mature person than Assange. But so what?
Maybe there is a more mundane reason why Assange prefers US documents: they provide much more publicity and they are researched by much more people.
Leaks are as old as humanity and although the internet has given them a new dimension I don't think that has fundamentally changed how they work out. There have always been people who consciously leak in order to further their own agenda. However, I don't see that as a reason for the Times to reject the information. Politicians and officials try to further their agenda too and they too are selective in what they disclose. So one should celebrate the extra information - while be careful not to be swept up in selective indignation about it.
Even the Times has noted that the Panama Papers - as far as published - say very little about US citizens. It is also well known that the US government is putting tax havens under pressure. So it isn't amazing when Assange suggests that the US government may have had a hand in this.
There can be little doubt that Snowden is a more mature person than Assange. But so what?
Maybe there is a more mundane reason why Assange prefers US documents: they provide much more publicity and they are researched by much more people.
Leaks are as old as humanity and although the internet has given them a new dimension I don't think that has fundamentally changed how they work out. There have always been people who consciously leak in order to further their own agenda. However, I don't see that as a reason for the Times to reject the information. Politicians and officials try to further their agenda too and they too are selective in what they disclose. So one should celebrate the extra information - while be careful not to be swept up in selective indignation about it.
4
The hacking of DNC servers exposed corruption within the Democratic Party. The forensic dive into the wiped Secretary Clinton server exposed corruption and obstruction of justice. Motive, intent, and execution are all documented. Why then are the stories continually about those big bad Russians? We've been told my entire life that the Russians act covertly, that the Russians siphon money from the commonwealth to those in power, that the Russians are so corrupt that behind the scenes dealings are the only way to get anything done. We've heard all about Russian spies being poisoned, and Russian leakers being murdered. We take it for granted that the Russians spy, that the Russians have a different agenda than the US, that the Russians are ultimately expansionist. How the Russians think and act is old news. That the American political system has been hijacked using Russian tactics, evidenced by the actions of the DNC and the corruption of Secretary Clinton, that is the story which we need to expose, investigate deeply, and understand thoroughly. Please stop with the diversion attempts, and do some critical journalism. We would love you for it, NYT.
21
You hit the nail right on the head APG. The real story is the vast, intricate and mostly legalized web of corruption that exists in the United States. The United States is in great danger.
2
The DNC leaks revealed not much. Thats why everybody is talking about Russian hackers.
Who gets to decide?
The United States has committed illegal acts (subversion of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran in 1953, overthrow of the government of Chile in 1973, selling missiles to Iran to conduct a secret illegal war in Nicaragua in the mid 1980's--to name a few). While much that the US does is secretive, the president and congress are elected to make decisions on behalf of the citizens. In other words, the American people choose their leaders and remove them (occasionally). The US president and congress are entrusted to act on behalf of the citizens (we can all point to numerous failures). However imperfect, Americans have the right to choose our leaders and our leaders make decisions (many that upset the American people) based on information they have, which we do not have. We place our trust in them. What is the alternative?
We know that we enjoy many freedoms not permitted in other countries. In other countries criticizing the government could cost you years in prison if not your life. These countries are led by tyrants like Mr. Putin who make decisions for their citizens, without .
Then there is Mr. Assange. Who elected him to decide what is right, what should be kept secret, what should be made public? Oh, he elected himself. So Mr. Assange is the all powerful Oz; he pulls the strings and rules on countries' motives. He answers to no one. I don't think I want to trust in him; I'll take my chances with our imperfect democracy.
The United States has committed illegal acts (subversion of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran in 1953, overthrow of the government of Chile in 1973, selling missiles to Iran to conduct a secret illegal war in Nicaragua in the mid 1980's--to name a few). While much that the US does is secretive, the president and congress are elected to make decisions on behalf of the citizens. In other words, the American people choose their leaders and remove them (occasionally). The US president and congress are entrusted to act on behalf of the citizens (we can all point to numerous failures). However imperfect, Americans have the right to choose our leaders and our leaders make decisions (many that upset the American people) based on information they have, which we do not have. We place our trust in them. What is the alternative?
We know that we enjoy many freedoms not permitted in other countries. In other countries criticizing the government could cost you years in prison if not your life. These countries are led by tyrants like Mr. Putin who make decisions for their citizens, without .
Then there is Mr. Assange. Who elected him to decide what is right, what should be kept secret, what should be made public? Oh, he elected himself. So Mr. Assange is the all powerful Oz; he pulls the strings and rules on countries' motives. He answers to no one. I don't think I want to trust in him; I'll take my chances with our imperfect democracy.
The authors put great weight on timing and coincidence in building their highly circumstantial case for linking Assange to Putin.
Why go after Assange at this particular time?
The answer is in another equally or more credible coincidence: Assange attacks Hillary Clinton, the NY Times's choice for President, so the Times promptly attacks Assange.
It's feeble to single out Russia's benefit from Wikileaks revelations as evidence of Assange's sympathy for Putin; all of the USA's enemies profited by them. That was Assange's stated intention--to undermine the US government by blighting its international reputation, not to mention turning a great many Americans against their own political establishment.
The Times played its own part in helping him. What are we to make of that?
Hillary Clinton is currently touting American Exceptionalism, the febrile national myth that gave us the catastrophic blunders of Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. If only acting out the myth could be based on the medical ethos of "first do no harm," but it's not.
If Wikileaks shows the world more of Hillary Clinton's real intentions before the election, I won't mind, since her very competence, in contrast to Trump's buffoonery, provokes a different kind of unease about what her election will mean for the world.
Why go after Assange at this particular time?
The answer is in another equally or more credible coincidence: Assange attacks Hillary Clinton, the NY Times's choice for President, so the Times promptly attacks Assange.
It's feeble to single out Russia's benefit from Wikileaks revelations as evidence of Assange's sympathy for Putin; all of the USA's enemies profited by them. That was Assange's stated intention--to undermine the US government by blighting its international reputation, not to mention turning a great many Americans against their own political establishment.
The Times played its own part in helping him. What are we to make of that?
Hillary Clinton is currently touting American Exceptionalism, the febrile national myth that gave us the catastrophic blunders of Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. If only acting out the myth could be based on the medical ethos of "first do no harm," but it's not.
If Wikileaks shows the world more of Hillary Clinton's real intentions before the election, I won't mind, since her very competence, in contrast to Trump's buffoonery, provokes a different kind of unease about what her election will mean for the world.
6
This is a typical perspective of conspiracy. Yet we are mocking at Trump? All the same.
Mr. Assange rivals Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in the depth of his blinding narcissism. As for the loathsome Mr. Putin, the enemy of his enemy is his friend.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
www.endthemadnessnow.org
5
Assange and WikiLeaks would not survive long if - he/they - went after Putin, Russia or even China. There is the reason why Assange is keeping silence on Putin's crimes. He is just scared - he is scared legally both of Sweden and the possibly the USA justice. But he has to be much more worried of Putin - the Russians don't play games - just observe how many of their own journalists and lawyers they killed and continue killing.
4
This article has the rhetoric and all the inrellectual rigour of a red scare era harchet job.
5
Laughable that the NY Times would publish such an article. OF course Russia sometimes benefits from Wikileaks. So does France, and Germany, and The UK, and China. But mostly, the ones who benefit the most are ordinary citizens everywhere, and in the US especially, who are interested in finding our what our Government is really doing. We certainly cannot rely on our own Government officials or our main stream media to tell us that.
12
what would happen if the ecudorian embassy caught fire? would the british have the obligation to pull JA out of the building?
1
From now on, let's just refer to WikiLeaks as RussiaLeaks.
That seems much more appropriate, after all, it is a lapdog to the Russian totalitarian regime and has nothing in common with any Wiki organization.
Though one could argue that we should also retire the "leaking" part. As Malcolm Gladwell recently pointed out, this is stealing, not leaking. He's not telling us what's in his mail, but rather, he's having Russians break into someone else's mailbox, copy their mail, and then give it to him so he can embarrass those who dare stand up to Russia's totalitarian regime (which of course does not include Donald T).
That seems much more appropriate, after all, it is a lapdog to the Russian totalitarian regime and has nothing in common with any Wiki organization.
Though one could argue that we should also retire the "leaking" part. As Malcolm Gladwell recently pointed out, this is stealing, not leaking. He's not telling us what's in his mail, but rather, he's having Russians break into someone else's mailbox, copy their mail, and then give it to him so he can embarrass those who dare stand up to Russia's totalitarian regime (which of course does not include Donald T).
2
WikiLeaks - a good idea with great potential to do good, gone wrong. What did Assange expect tickling the dragon's tail?
As for his seeming uncritical aiding of Putin and Russian narratives, he is no fool. They are the only one left to watch his back - AND he does not want to suffer a "polonium" death like Mr. Alexander Litvinenko a few years ago in London.
As for his seeming uncritical aiding of Putin and Russian narratives, he is no fool. They are the only one left to watch his back - AND he does not want to suffer a "polonium" death like Mr. Alexander Litvinenko a few years ago in London.
1
It's interesting - but not surprising - that the NYT has changed its tune about Assange and now considers him to be a Russian stooge peddling unreliable information because he is about to release some embarrassing details about Hillary Clinton and her Democratic party cronies.
10
Assange is the kind of old-school anarchist whom Dostoyevski would quickly recognize. A malcontent, someone who stirs up trouble for its own sake and doesn't mind where the chips fall so long as they fly high and hit hard.
What everyone should understand about him and his cache of stolen goods is that it is precisely that. It lacks provenance. It definitely came from somewhere. But precisely where he will not say; nor through whom.
Some might have been stolen from Clinton's now-infamous server by Russians working for its so-called Security Bureau; or not.
Some might have been added later, fabricated in whole or part by that same Security Bureau's specialists, made to resemble others that were stolen; or not.
How did it get to Assange? Whose hands touched it before it did?
I'm forced to say "might" and "or not" because their provenance is suspect. No chain-of-custody, no paper trail. No audit possible. No way to separate what's genuine from what's missing and what's altered from what's forged, coming from people who wouldn't give forgery a second thought.
Not even hearsay. Worthless evidence in any court of law except, perhaps, a Russian, Chinese or Soviet one; or the court of public opinion. And it comes from an enemy through a twisted little man who freely admits that he hates Clinton and wants to destroy her personally and professionally.
Don't believe the Grand Inquisitor/anarchist Assange; nor his documents.
Don't be played for the fool he makes you out to be.
What everyone should understand about him and his cache of stolen goods is that it is precisely that. It lacks provenance. It definitely came from somewhere. But precisely where he will not say; nor through whom.
Some might have been stolen from Clinton's now-infamous server by Russians working for its so-called Security Bureau; or not.
Some might have been added later, fabricated in whole or part by that same Security Bureau's specialists, made to resemble others that were stolen; or not.
How did it get to Assange? Whose hands touched it before it did?
I'm forced to say "might" and "or not" because their provenance is suspect. No chain-of-custody, no paper trail. No audit possible. No way to separate what's genuine from what's missing and what's altered from what's forged, coming from people who wouldn't give forgery a second thought.
Not even hearsay. Worthless evidence in any court of law except, perhaps, a Russian, Chinese or Soviet one; or the court of public opinion. And it comes from an enemy through a twisted little man who freely admits that he hates Clinton and wants to destroy her personally and professionally.
Don't believe the Grand Inquisitor/anarchist Assange; nor his documents.
Don't be played for the fool he makes you out to be.
7
Whatever his initial motives Assange has become a tool of the Russian intelligence services. They have lots of experience making use of people like him. They have been doing it since the 1920's and the trade craft has never been forgotten.
22
Remember too that Assange's releases have entirely, bar none, been to the benefit of Trump. His propaganda is directly linked to Putin, just as Manafort was.
Agree. Snowden is another example of just that as well.
Self-proclaimed defenders of the people and of rights are often dangerous for their motives and associations are unclear. For one thing, they set themselves up as the sole arbitrators of right and wrong. Things like the diplomatic cables, while embarrassing when viewed publicly, mostly fall into the category of what all nations do and how all diplomatic corps talk to each other. It certainly does seem that Mr. Assange has an antipathy for the United States and an ongoing desire to do it harm on the world stage. His other motives seem murky.
53
Just for a minute, thing of this from the point of view of those Irakis who were tortured or massacred probably mistakenly but whose story would have been lost if it was not for wikileaks
Assange is releasing US secret documents that exposes the mistakes made during the Irak war, not writing negative editorials abour US foreign policy.
Assange is releasing US secret documents that exposes the mistakes made during the Irak war, not writing negative editorials abour US foreign policy.
1
I completely agree, which is why the Clintons should stop immediately.
You might also say that the U.S. Government has an antipathy for Mr. Assange.
2
My question is whether wikileaks also hacked the Republicans. Where is that data?
22
@Tom
Midwest
WikiLeaks didn't hack anyone. They just served as a conduit to leak the information which came from the Russian intelligence agencies.
Midwest
WikiLeaks didn't hack anyone. They just served as a conduit to leak the information which came from the Russian intelligence agencies.
9
Wikileaks has hacked no one. Wikileaks is a news organization like this paper. It receives information from undisclosed sources and distributes that information to other news agencies.
Tom: And especially Trump's tax returns? Where are they?
As Putin's fancied dream is to revive the demised Soviet Union imperial glory, it's but logical he would play welcoming host to the US dissenters like the Wikileaks editor Assange and the American whistle-blower Snowden and benefit by their disclosures about the Washington establishment. Nothing but a replay of the old cold war.
25
Neither Assange, nor Snowden seem to be neutral, or amenable to investigating both types of countries. And there does seem to be a bias towards the totalitarian Russian kleptocracy, while there is a prejudice against countries designated democracies, whether warranted or not.
For instance, what is not discussed here is the number of those who have criticized Russia, Putin, and his oligarch buddies. Subsequently, almost all of them mysteriously end up dead in other countries, even in the US.
Why hasn't this duo noted anything about those incidents, and discussed them with Russia? Shouldn't those incidents be investigated and criticized, as well?
Those living in asylum should think about throwinng stones. No country, its leaders nor its people are perfect. Unfortunately, that is life. However, some are better and more tolerant than others along the continuum of freedom. So one has the right to choose. If one doesn't like the US, they have plenty of other choices. But choose wisely.
For instance, what is not discussed here is the number of those who have criticized Russia, Putin, and his oligarch buddies. Subsequently, almost all of them mysteriously end up dead in other countries, even in the US.
Why hasn't this duo noted anything about those incidents, and discussed them with Russia? Shouldn't those incidents be investigated and criticized, as well?
Those living in asylum should think about throwinng stones. No country, its leaders nor its people are perfect. Unfortunately, that is life. However, some are better and more tolerant than others along the continuum of freedom. So one has the right to choose. If one doesn't like the US, they have plenty of other choices. But choose wisely.
43
"..Neither Assange, nor Snowden seem to be neutral, or amenable to investigating both types of countries." -- You might be right here. But one reason could be that no other country during the last 2 or 3 decades had made the world a more insecure and war-torn place than the US. Whereever in the world war lingers or has shaken a country, nearly each time US military, NSA or CIA is in one way or other involved. I think this is a great danger for world peace. Therefore to make public the secrecies and hidden links behind actions of US agencies is of more interest for the world than the undemocratic struktures of the Russian or Chinese states.
1
"The enemy is Russia, the enemy has always been Russia." Did I get that right, NYT? Assange is on the money when he decries your descent into neo-McCarthyism. It would be laughable if it did not have so many dire consequences.
Ironically given the subject of this article, the NYT has become America's Pravada, more concerned with pleasing American government officials (or soon-to-be government officials, like those in the Hillary Clinton campaign) than reporting and analysing the news. Would it be throwing this kind of slime at Wikileaks if it weren't worried that more disclosures about Clinton aren't in the works?
Ironically given the subject of this article, the NYT has become America's Pravada, more concerned with pleasing American government officials (or soon-to-be government officials, like those in the Hillary Clinton campaign) than reporting and analysing the news. Would it be throwing this kind of slime at Wikileaks if it weren't worried that more disclosures about Clinton aren't in the works?
114
Agree, with the above. Constantly demonizing Russia is not constructive.
How about some balance? Maybe a special report on the positive aspects of Russian-US relations, or Russia’s stabilizing influence in Central Asia?
Most people here don’t understand why the US hates or fears Russia, which only serves to unite them under Putin. US Foreign Policy must be more “democratic.”
Russia is not your enemy. The only evidence is to the contrary. Rather than encouraging Russia after the USSR, older hardline, Cold War conservatives (idiots like McCain) saw it as an opportunity to contain and weaken Russia.
After constant pushing in Russia’s sphere of influence, in Chechnya, Georgia and now Ukraine, of course Russia finally pushed back (Crimea). I don't agree with Crimea but I understand it.
Give Russia a little respect and see how much better the world gets along.
How about some balance? Maybe a special report on the positive aspects of Russian-US relations, or Russia’s stabilizing influence in Central Asia?
Most people here don’t understand why the US hates or fears Russia, which only serves to unite them under Putin. US Foreign Policy must be more “democratic.”
Russia is not your enemy. The only evidence is to the contrary. Rather than encouraging Russia after the USSR, older hardline, Cold War conservatives (idiots like McCain) saw it as an opportunity to contain and weaken Russia.
After constant pushing in Russia’s sphere of influence, in Chechnya, Georgia and now Ukraine, of course Russia finally pushed back (Crimea). I don't agree with Crimea but I understand it.
Give Russia a little respect and see how much better the world gets along.
1
Thank you for acknowledging that Hillary Clinton will probably become the president. But considering how little freedom of the press is enjoyed in Russia and that more than 20 journalists there have been killed,
Assange should really face his legal problems for his arrest warrant for questioning about rape and sexual molestation if he cares about truth and honesty, instead of holing up in his hiding place for years. His own life is spent in the shadows but leaves victims behind.
Assange should really face his legal problems for his arrest warrant for questioning about rape and sexual molestation if he cares about truth and honesty, instead of holing up in his hiding place for years. His own life is spent in the shadows but leaves victims behind.
1
Russian troll...
2
Wouldn't the simplest explanation be the best: Assange is a tool of Putin and the Russian intelligence (hacking) service.
45
It is indeed a simple explanation. It may well be the best. But it seems to be lacking somewhat in truth. Sorry about bringing in an irrelevance.
It would be a simple explanation, certainly, but it has a not-insignificant problem of not being true, as this very article reports.
And you know the truth?
Is anyone so naive as to think Putin does anything without payment?
But Assange like every other defector sees the error he has made & now wants President Trump to let him back in the USA.
But Assange like every other defector sees the error he has made & now wants President Trump to let him back in the USA.
23
Assange is an Australian!
3
Speaking of payment, how about the half-million that Bill Clinton got paid for a speech over there? Or how about the sweet deal on US uranium that HRC helped to implement while Secretary of State, giving 20% of our uranium to a country with ties to Russia? Sure-- the Times itself has printed this briefly and in passing, but without the sensationalism that you throw at Julian Assange or others who aren't part of your plans for the rest of us.
1
Eeehm Assange is Australian not American. Are you implying that the US has global jurisdiction?
1
The US constitution states that the public is to be protected from unreasonable searches by the government. As a public institution, today’s government hides its dealings from the people it represents. Instead, the government listens to our communications without authorization and people who report government corruption are labeled traitors and must flee the country. Is it any wonder that our public institutions have become entirely dysfunctional.
75
Yes, but the question here is. Why only western governments get revealed doing this and not the russian?
I wonder whether those who say the Russians hacked the DNC server and turned over the information to Wikileaks are aware that that is just speculation. There's no evidence of that, nor any evidence that anyone else was responsible. No matter how many times that allegation gets repeated, it's just speculation. Let's keep that in mind.
98
What isn't speculation is that the Russian government employs hundreds of trolls to place pro-Putin posts in online forums around the world.
Forensic investigations suggest that it is more than just idle speculation.
The trail reported looked pretty solid to me
Could it be that Assange and Wikileaks are being used by Russia? Sure seems that way to me.
72
You call this article journalism? Are you trying to appeal to the latent American patriot in the Australian citizen? What gives?
The countries do their business secretly and the leakers do it publicly but in the end it's the same manipulative game of leverage. One day Assange will open the lid where he sleeps and find the wooden stake of US justice waiting if Putin doesn't, well, you know.
22
Who can trust that what he leaks is real? How do we know that it has not been edited, abridged, excerpted, modified? And we are to condem Hillary on information that a court of law would not admit because there is no clear chain of possession? Julian Assange is not a hero. He is not forthright or truthful. He is risking the election of a demagogue.
Why do we tolerate the theft and dissemination of private information of Presidential candidates now, when in 1972 it resulted in the impeachment of Nixon? We need to think very carefully about who is steering the truth and why.
Why do we tolerate the theft and dissemination of private information of Presidential candidates now, when in 1972 it resulted in the impeachment of Nixon? We need to think very carefully about who is steering the truth and why.
237
Good point about Nixon. The answer is that we live in an era of immaturity and shaming where all behaviour must meet an absolutist status. So if anyone dared to bring up the issue of protecting political parties' privacy so democracy can function or of diplomats' privacy to allow for foreign relations, the response would be to pillory that persona as anti-democratic or a Neo-Con or who knows what.
On the other hand, it is absurd to assume the leaks are fake, redacted or altered in any way. If they were, and in a way that reflected badly on any party, that party - US government, foreign government - would find a way, directly or through leaks, to correct the record and thereby cast doubt on Wikileak's as a whole.
Frankly, that your comment, which has no substantial basis, is a NYT's pick reinforces my view that this article is a propaganda piece.
On the other hand, it is absurd to assume the leaks are fake, redacted or altered in any way. If they were, and in a way that reflected badly on any party, that party - US government, foreign government - would find a way, directly or through leaks, to correct the record and thereby cast doubt on Wikileak's as a whole.
Frankly, that your comment, which has no substantial basis, is a NYT's pick reinforces my view that this article is a propaganda piece.
You are reading a website where the truth is chopped up, parts selected, a healthy dose of bias added, and it all fit in to the overwhelming desire to elect Hillary Clinton, without which this website is cast loose from the centers of power.
Believe me, there is far, far more truth in Wikileaks than in the webpages of the NYt.
Believe me, there is far, far more truth in Wikileaks than in the webpages of the NYt.
3
"Why do we tolerate the theft and dissemination of private information of Presidential candidates now, when in 1972 it resulted in the impeachment of Nixon? We need to think very carefully about who is steering the truth and why."
In 1972, the theft and dissemination of private information was carried out by a presidential candidate, Richard Nixon, to benefit Richard Nixon.
By contrast, Julian Assange has disseminated stolen information about matters of genuine public interest - and US media outlets including the NYT also disseminated that information as matters of genuine public interest. If the leaked information doesn't pass the strict evidentiary standards of a court of law, at any rate the leaks had enough veracity for the NYT to publish them.
(In fact, just about any article you read in any media outlet contains hearsay, and many contain unauthenticated information as a matter of law. The media doesn't use the extremely stringent evidentiary standards of a court of law, which issues legal judgments - nor should it. That's as true for the NYT as it is for WikiLeaks.)
Any speculation about who Assange intends his leaks to benefit is still mere speculation. Even American officials, who hate Assange, are unwilling to claim that he has direct ties to Putin.
If you can't see the difference between Richard Nixon and Julian Assange, you might think very carefully about who is steering your version of the truth, and why.
In 1972, the theft and dissemination of private information was carried out by a presidential candidate, Richard Nixon, to benefit Richard Nixon.
By contrast, Julian Assange has disseminated stolen information about matters of genuine public interest - and US media outlets including the NYT also disseminated that information as matters of genuine public interest. If the leaked information doesn't pass the strict evidentiary standards of a court of law, at any rate the leaks had enough veracity for the NYT to publish them.
(In fact, just about any article you read in any media outlet contains hearsay, and many contain unauthenticated information as a matter of law. The media doesn't use the extremely stringent evidentiary standards of a court of law, which issues legal judgments - nor should it. That's as true for the NYT as it is for WikiLeaks.)
Any speculation about who Assange intends his leaks to benefit is still mere speculation. Even American officials, who hate Assange, are unwilling to claim that he has direct ties to Putin.
If you can't see the difference between Richard Nixon and Julian Assange, you might think very carefully about who is steering your version of the truth, and why.
It all started with Napster. A philosophy that stolen data is somehow everyone's right to see, redistribute and profit from, is now engrained into the mindset of a generation. What is the result? The most free and open societies in human history are the ones being continuously damaged. All of world's most ruthless regimes simply hide behind a firewall of misinformation and state sponsored attacks. Wikileaks and its suppliers are a disease that must be wiped out. Our children must also be far better educated about the differences between freedom and theft, democracy and anarchy.
313
Moderator - I just recommended this comment which shows as 6 minutes old. It had no recommends and when I pressed recommend it went from 0 to 25. Now playing with that now, are we?
1
Maybe you should start again. This argument has absolutely no logic.
It started with Napster? You are off by centuries. I strongly suggest you learn about the history of the printing press and moveable type. You just can't see the impact on information control that had because you were born into it. You even think that it's a great thing.
That's what many of the younglings known as "digital natives" think about the impact of electronic distribution of information.
That's what many of the younglings known as "digital natives" think about the impact of electronic distribution of information.
The photo of Assange leading this article says it all: carefully tousled romantic hair the perfect premature gray; meticulous facial scruff; collar “casually” open, chic (but not too chic) tie just so and those up-to-the-minute lapels. He's worse than Bono pretending to be Ghandi and MLK. The Ecuadorian embassy in London must have some swell accommodations. I wonder how much his stylist makes?
28
The photo was chosen to say it all, actually. Such a photograph was run because the times is angry at Assange for the DNC leaks, which damaged Hillary's campaign. I cannot imagine the circumstances under which this website would show Hillary in a similar photo. Maybe if she elevated Sam Alito to Chief Justice and chose Ted Cruz to fill his seat as associate justice. Some such treason anyway.
Now I get it: Clinton's agents broke into the embassy and did Assange's hair, forced him into a stylish, exquisitely tailored outfit and posed him at the window, coercing him to emote Romantically Hot Persecuted Hero for Justice while they held a gun to his head. Nothing is beyond Hillary Clinton. I bet her minions used time travel or implanted false memories in Assange's brain which is why he hasn't said anything about it.
Remember, I am all for McCarthyism and I am even now collecting names and I will be naming names wherever I happen to be.
Fred
Anne
Rosemary
Alisha
Robert...
Watch me name names.
Fred
Anne
Rosemary
Alisha
Robert...
Watch me name names.
25
Do I smell hypocrisy here?
A couple of years back, when Wikileaks leaked thousands of documents relating to various US Middle East wars (among other matters), Assange made those disclosures to a small number of leading newspapers, with the expectation that each of them would review and then publish the leaked documents -- which all of them did. The New York Times was one of those newspapers. Has it changed its mind?
A couple of years back, when Wikileaks leaked thousands of documents relating to various US Middle East wars (among other matters), Assange made those disclosures to a small number of leading newspapers, with the expectation that each of them would review and then publish the leaked documents -- which all of them did. The New York Times was one of those newspapers. Has it changed its mind?
103
The question is intent. Assange has stated his wish to do damage to HRC's election with the timing of the releases. That raises questions as to what and how he chooses and edits what he is releasing. He has made it personal and any newspaper should not support that.
1
Yes MyThreeCents, its editor and publisher are now in the back pockets of the Clintons so watch for more.
1
"Has it changed its mind?"
Yes it has. And I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the fact that their preferred presidential candidate has become a target of Wikileaks, rather than the Bush administration.
Yes it has. And I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the fact that their preferred presidential candidate has become a target of Wikileaks, rather than the Bush administration.
1
That is neat. So according to NYT Russia benefits from revealing the truth. Then by simple logic US/West benefit from concealing the truth. Who is good and who is evil then, one may wonder?
117
Weak logic. If Wikileaks published the same amount and type of information on Russia and it turned out to make Russia look good, then this would be a fair point. But they don't.
I doubt that Russia has nothing to hide. Why not focus the same energy on obtaining leaks from autocratic countries than from the democracies, where information is so much easier to find?
I doubt that Russia has nothing to hide. Why not focus the same energy on obtaining leaks from autocratic countries than from the democracies, where information is so much easier to find?
1
Uh, read the article again. He is selective in the "truth" he reveals in order to benefit himself. Who do you think is paying him?
I do not think we really know what is published is the truth.
Edward Snowden leaks also benefit Russia (in fact, he's living there now come to think of it) -- not to mention benefiting more than a few terrorist groups who wish to kill as many Americans as possible. Yet Snowden is portrayed as a great hero by Leftists to the point of being lionized in an upcoming film by hard Leftist loon Oliver Stone. What's the difference? Or is it simply that if Trump benefits, it's an egregious sin; but if a few CIA agents end up being killed, that's okay by more than a few so-called "progressives"?
32
Similar things were said about Daniel Ellsberg.
There are a batch of people supporting Assange here, and while some of them are just Trump supporters and impossible to reason with, some others may simply not grasp the full picture.
Assange is deliberately only leaking information which hurts Mrs. Clinton and the DNC, and thus helps Trump and Putin. This is not just release of information, this is propaganda supporting Trump, who is terrifying to those who believe in liberty, democracy, equality, and so on. Assange is another example of foreign government interference in our election.
Further, he has just threatened to release a "pristine" set of cyberspying codes, by which I figure they're unbroken by enemy governments. This is an attack on our national security, and I don't know if Trumpheads have realized this, but we do have actual enemies in the world. Breaking our code system in any way harms our interests, foreign and domestic, and aids our enemies.
This guy is not doing this for love of truth, justice, and the American way. He is doing this to support a racist, ignorant fool, to aid Putin, and to aid all our enemies at once. Wise up.
Assange is deliberately only leaking information which hurts Mrs. Clinton and the DNC, and thus helps Trump and Putin. This is not just release of information, this is propaganda supporting Trump, who is terrifying to those who believe in liberty, democracy, equality, and so on. Assange is another example of foreign government interference in our election.
Further, he has just threatened to release a "pristine" set of cyberspying codes, by which I figure they're unbroken by enemy governments. This is an attack on our national security, and I don't know if Trumpheads have realized this, but we do have actual enemies in the world. Breaking our code system in any way harms our interests, foreign and domestic, and aids our enemies.
This guy is not doing this for love of truth, justice, and the American way. He is doing this to support a racist, ignorant fool, to aid Putin, and to aid all our enemies at once. Wise up.
181
Well said. And if he did have damaging info on Clinton, why wait until it is too late for Democrats to field another candidate? If he really believed in transparency and the well being of open societies he should release the information he claims to have as early as possible.
I don't see any option but to conclude that he has another agenda. He just wants to blow up the system by Trump getting into office, or he is a Kremlin tool, or something... But he is clearly not acting true to the principles he claims to have, he's just another self-righteous hypocrite. At least Snowden seems to have had an honest whistleblower's motive and some regard for anyone but himself.
I don't see any option but to conclude that he has another agenda. He just wants to blow up the system by Trump getting into office, or he is a Kremlin tool, or something... But he is clearly not acting true to the principles he claims to have, he's just another self-righteous hypocrite. At least Snowden seems to have had an honest whistleblower's motive and some regard for anyone but himself.
1
In the case of the US 2016 presidential primary, there was nothing much to dig up on the Sanders campaign. His campaign was the target of the dirty tricks! In the case of the Clinton Foundation and HRC at head of the State Department, we need to know-- well actually, we knew enough before her "victory"-- to prevent the election of someone who may put the country at risk for bad
decisions as well as unethical behavior.
decisions as well as unethical behavior.
2
"but we do have actual enemies in the world"
Yes, the Clinton cartel is the most dangerous enemy our republic faces.
Yes, the Clinton cartel is the most dangerous enemy our republic faces.
2
The very fact that Assange chooses what to release and when is problematic. Yes he is being antiAmerican in releasing "secrets" (yes some of what he has released is seriously dangerous to Americans who are doing their job protecting us.) Yes he has an axe to grind with the Clintons; and yes releasing this information now and "before November" is a sordid attempt to influence the American elections. I see no reason to think he is a pawn of Russia, but he is playing into Putins hand by doing so.
51
Not to mention that he is not an American citizen and has no legal obligation to protect US data. What he has exposed is the illegal activities of our government. Should we really be engaged in this kind of thing.
Julian Assange is a hypocrite and a fraud. He claims to support global transparency, yet he refuses to publish the trove of documents exposing the corruption of the Putin regime. Assange claims to support journalistic freedom, yet he hosted a program on Putin's propaganda channel at the same time that the Kremlin was shuttering independent media outlets and assassinating muckraking journalists. Even Assange's residence in the Ecuadorian embassy is ironic given that Ecuador has implemented some of the Western Hemisphere's most restrictive laws against independent journalism.
Assange filters reality through his petty grievances, misogyny, and paranoia to determine what the public sees. Visitors to Wikileaks are not getting the unvarnished truth. Assange curates, censors, and suppresses the material to suit his own self-interests. In that way, he is not unlike the man in the Kremlin who has demonstrated adeptness at information manipulation to destroy enemies and solidify his hold on power.
Assange filters reality through his petty grievances, misogyny, and paranoia to determine what the public sees. Visitors to Wikileaks are not getting the unvarnished truth. Assange curates, censors, and suppresses the material to suit his own self-interests. In that way, he is not unlike the man in the Kremlin who has demonstrated adeptness at information manipulation to destroy enemies and solidify his hold on power.
704
The facts are not correct. The emotion is clear.
Do not read Wikileaks reply! It might upset your world.
Agree, except for the term "muckraking," which is a pejorative, which is likely not what you intended? The Kremlin is undoubtedly assassinating investigative journalists.
Start with the assumption (as I do) that every e-mail you write can easily be read in any number of ways by any number of organizations. Has NSA ceased collecting every octet passing through the internet backbone? Not since last I checked: http://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/
A good rule of thumb, therefore, should be: honesty is the best policy. If you want to do something dishonest -- say, to help one Democrat against another when you are supposed to be impartial -- you should probably confine your conspiring to whispers in a car playing Kashmir with the volume turned up to 11.
A good rule of thumb, therefore, should be: honesty is the best policy. If you want to do something dishonest -- say, to help one Democrat against another when you are supposed to be impartial -- you should probably confine your conspiring to whispers in a car playing Kashmir with the volume turned up to 11.
29
Possibly Assange doesn't release Russian secrets because those secrets are harder to get. Maybe Russian politicians don't conduct their official business on a private email server located in their home.
88
Yet Hillary Clinton's server is not the one that was hacked. It was the DCCC of congressional Democrats (government) that the Russians targeted as well as the DNC. The Russians also hacked two voter databases, so the FBI has issued a warning to different states' elections officials. This is an obvious attempt to attack an American election. Just because you hate Hillary is no reason to turn a blind eye to an attack on a Western democracy.
None of the secrets Assange released came from the "private email server located in [HRC]'s home".
Secrets exposed by WikiLeaks were not from a private email server.
Wikileaks leaks hurt anyone who keeps secrets. Sometimes that is a government that has a justifiable need for secrecy, even a justifiable need to tell lies.
At other times, however, that is Hillary Clinton or the Democratic National Committee, in which case there is no justifiable need for secrecy, much less a justifiable need to tell lies. In those cases, we are all well served when the truth is revealed by Wikileaks.
At other times, however, that is Hillary Clinton or the Democratic National Committee, in which case there is no justifiable need for secrecy, much less a justifiable need to tell lies. In those cases, we are all well served when the truth is revealed by Wikileaks.
75
The problem is that Wikileaks does not seem to make that distinction and the personal leanings of Julian Assange are constantly in play.
5
That's pure nonsense. Of course the DNC has a need for secrecy. It was the plundering of political secrets that got Nixcon impeached, and no one suggested that a major political party didn't have a right to or interest in keeping its strategies and plans secret then.
1
No, the point is that WikiLeaks only hurts people who live in democracies and keep secrets. They either are incapable of or unwilling to publish hacked data from on-democraic countries.
1
Reading the comments here is fascinating. The same people who are crying out that Assange and Wikileaks are evil and despicable were probably singing his praises six months ago.
Of course Wikileaks is run by the Russian intelligence services. Assange was also the person that advised Snowden to go to Moscow. He wasn't 'caught in transit' like he's claimed. Have you even noticed that none of Snowden's reveals have ever hurt the Russians or the Chinese?
Of course Wikileaks is run by the Russian intelligence services. Assange was also the person that advised Snowden to go to Moscow. He wasn't 'caught in transit' like he's claimed. Have you even noticed that none of Snowden's reveals have ever hurt the Russians or the Chinese?
35
Snowden did not work for Russia or China, and they don't keep email servers in their bedroom closets.
Snowden works for the Russians now. They don't let him stay there out of the goodness of their own hearts.
The post-911 era will surely be looked back on as the Second McCarthy Era.
59
Never forget.
The real intended victim of these hackers is not Government but you and me -the average and forgotten man who no longer can be sure of his or her privacy.
18
the NSA doesn't bother you, Gregory?
Say what he wants but he's still looking out the window of and and sleeping in a closet in self imposed exile. If he is such a big shot, walk out the door and let's see what happens.
22
I would love to see the end of wikileaks and a better leak agent created. The organization has become a world security risk and deserves to be shut down. Assange's agents should be detained as well.
14
people who leak western secrets can flee to russia for asylum. people who leak russian secrets are shot. this explains a large part of the report's findings.
muddle comments here muddle the difference between the impartial sanitizing effect of sunlight on all misdeeds, and the partial use of sunlight to settle scores (assange vs. clinton) or to magnify espionage damage (snowden vs. USA).
supporters of snowden will someday be disappointed to learn how his espionage helped russia and china -- and how the public relations management of his exploit (including the drawn out, drip by drip release of details by careerist journalists and foreign press) magnified the damage those stolen secrets caused to our political, diplomatic and business relationships.
it's classic russian practice, this spreading of misinformation along with damaging disclosures, and everyone should understand that the NSA disclosures have been more damaging in the same proportion that snowden is viewed as a lone crusader rather than a superbly managed spy.
muddle comments here muddle the difference between the impartial sanitizing effect of sunlight on all misdeeds, and the partial use of sunlight to settle scores (assange vs. clinton) or to magnify espionage damage (snowden vs. USA).
supporters of snowden will someday be disappointed to learn how his espionage helped russia and china -- and how the public relations management of his exploit (including the drawn out, drip by drip release of details by careerist journalists and foreign press) magnified the damage those stolen secrets caused to our political, diplomatic and business relationships.
it's classic russian practice, this spreading of misinformation along with damaging disclosures, and everyone should understand that the NSA disclosures have been more damaging in the same proportion that snowden is viewed as a lone crusader rather than a superbly managed spy.
22
I believe that most people approve of transparence, certainly those outside of government, anyway. I believe that Snowden and Manning are scapegoats, that they should be pardoned, because what they did was tell the truth - the truth that the American people deserve of their government. President Obama did promise transparency, but he has not delivered on that promise. Bill Clinton got into trouble for apologizing to the blacks who were infected with syphilis during the Tuskegee Experiments. It took about 50 years for anyone to even acknowledge that we - the American people in the form of our government - allowed such a terrible abuse. People in fear will approve waterboarding for the "other" with the condition that it does not happen to them.
Julian Assange allows credit card numbers and passwords to be released - who benefits from that? I wish that he had the courage of his convictions that Chelsea Manning has. He seems a petty little man who believes himself above the rules. He claims to be righteous, but he appears to be more self-righteous.
We deserved to know about the NSA programs spying on US citizens - they should never have been allowed. We expect espionage on foreign citizens, all countries do that. Only tyrants and despots spy on their own. We deserve better from our leaders.
Julian Assange allows credit card numbers and passwords to be released - who benefits from that? I wish that he had the courage of his convictions that Chelsea Manning has. He seems a petty little man who believes himself above the rules. He claims to be righteous, but he appears to be more self-righteous.
We deserved to know about the NSA programs spying on US citizens - they should never have been allowed. We expect espionage on foreign citizens, all countries do that. Only tyrants and despots spy on their own. We deserve better from our leaders.
46
Here's what The Times won't say: Sweden has not filed any sexual assault charges against Assange. The investigation is still in in its preliminary stages..after 5 years. What might that tell you? That they don't have evidence to go ahead with the case.
This latest Russia-related smear is just another tactic to discredit him and Wikileaks ahead of what may be damaging Hillary related truths
...
http://www.firstpost.com/world/sweden-never-filed-any-charges-against-as...
This latest Russia-related smear is just another tactic to discredit him and Wikileaks ahead of what may be damaging Hillary related truths
...
http://www.firstpost.com/world/sweden-never-filed-any-charges-against-as...
113
Dean, The reason Assange has imprisoned himself in the embassy is to avoid being interrogated in the matter and that is why they have not filed charges. They don;t have his side of the story and he refuses to give it like a normal person would because he knows he is guilty.
The issue in question was the suspicious way the condom broke multiple times with multiple women and he refused to stop. I believe the two women were gossiping and then noticed that he did the same thing just prior to the condom breaking and then realized it wasn't an accident in a moment of high passion but an intentional planned out act which makes it rape since they asked him to stop when it broke.
The issue in question was the suspicious way the condom broke multiple times with multiple women and he refused to stop. I believe the two women were gossiping and then noticed that he did the same thing just prior to the condom breaking and then realized it wasn't an accident in a moment of high passion but an intentional planned out act which makes it rape since they asked him to stop when it broke.
22
What it tells me is that Assange has been holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy, has refused to honor the laws of the United Kingdom of which he was a guest, and expects the government of Sweden to treat him like a special snowflake different from anyone else facing allegations under Swedish law. Law that requires an interview before charges can be filed.
Of course, to believe Mr Assange, that it is not about the accusations, one must also believe that the two women he initiated sex with while they were sleeping, are agents of the United States and not just people who might be troubled by the lack of consent that a sleeping person can give. Women who might also not have gone to authorities without Mr Assange having delved into this practice on multiple occasions, because it would be virtually impossible to prove versus his denial.
I love whistleblowing, and really don't have a problem with the information of governments becoming common knowledge, but facts are a pernicious thing even when Mr Assange is involved.
Of course, to believe Mr Assange, that it is not about the accusations, one must also believe that the two women he initiated sex with while they were sleeping, are agents of the United States and not just people who might be troubled by the lack of consent that a sleeping person can give. Women who might also not have gone to authorities without Mr Assange having delved into this practice on multiple occasions, because it would be virtually impossible to prove versus his denial.
I love whistleblowing, and really don't have a problem with the information of governments becoming common knowledge, but facts are a pernicious thing even when Mr Assange is involved.
20
A smear would be a untrue facts. The article here looks pretty factual and does do great damage to Assange's credibility and character as have recent revelations that Wikileaks needlessly leaks private information about people of no real interest. Rape victims names. Gay peeople's name in countries where this is illegal. The name of woman who have had abortaion. Also some "leaked" information has been revealed to be forged. Sweden has not cleared him either. The woman bringing charges has not re-canted.
He is a villain.
He is a villain.
Assange, and Snowden as well; another pair to add to the list of Lenin's useful idiots. All wrapped up and filled with themselves in their self-proclaimed wonderfulness, self-importance and, self-inflated egos.
49
Len, many of the posters here make an attempt at saying something.
How come Wikileaks never releases embarrassing leaks from Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, or the long list of horrible regimes on the planet?? Fair is fair, how "no more secrets" for all the planets governments. Looks like WikiLeaks is just an opportunist.
28
Wikileaks actually has published documents about what most people would agree are terrible regimes. Among these governments are the Syrian government of Bashar Al Assad. The article doesn't mention that, because Syria and Russia are allies. Wikileaks' first published leak was about an Islamist who later joined Al Shabab. They also published internal emails of the Saudi regime, which most people would agree is quite repressive. There is one fairly obvious reason China isn't represented: the great firewall. North Korea doesn't have much of an Internet presence, and the regime would likely commit some unthinkable atrocities if they even suspected someone stole their secret sauce. As for Russia, who knows? These authors have built a weak circumstantial case.
Is this really the newspaper that helped publish the Pentagon Papers? Or still the same one that was also part of the CIA's Operation Mockingbird and weaponization of the term "conspiracy theory" in the wake of the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK? This article almost seems as if it were written by the CIA and NSA and then distributed to media assets. Or perhaps they held a briefing with suggested talking points for national security journalists, offering them more access, a la Judith Miller and her WMD reporting.
159
C'mon Mme. Becker & Mssrs. Erlanger & Schmitt, are you trying to conflate Julian Assange & Vladimir Putin ?
From my perspective, there's an awful lot of besmirching & insinuating going on in this article.
I am looking forward to an executive pardon prior to November for Julian Assange & Edward Snowden.
The United States does not behave well when it's embarrassed.
From my perspective, there's an awful lot of besmirching & insinuating going on in this article.
I am looking forward to an executive pardon prior to November for Julian Assange & Edward Snowden.
The United States does not behave well when it's embarrassed.
57
I don't think there will be ANY executive order to pardon Mr. Snowdon. The jaws of American Justice will be after Julian Assange and Edward Snowden forever.
11
So, Mr. Assange is not perfect. But the NYT is jittery over pending releases that may deep-six you know who. So this is all part of the damage-control before the fact. Discredit the source at all costs. It's all Vlad the Impaler, er,Putin's machinations. That's the ticket.. Keep saying that.
109
Thanks you, richys, for the actual truth of the matter!
He's a punk who should be extradited and go on trial for espionage against our country. Why would he do that anyway? What's in it for him and the other punk? Loose lips sink ships.
15
WWII is over by the way.
1
Can you truly blame Julian Assange for not criticizing Russia? It's one of the few countries where he might benefit from amnesty. Wikileaks is merely a forum that releases information that should be public. For example, WikiLeaks released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb - INCLUDING two Reuters journalists. If the video wasn't released, how else would those responsible be held accountable?
Assange's "vision of Amerca as a super bully" is unsurprisingly held by most of the planet, including many of the US allies. And Is it really a fallacy to state that the US "has achieved imperial power by proclaiming allegiance to principles of human rights while deploying its military-intelligence apparatus in “pincer” formation to “push” countries into doing its bidding, and punishing people like him who dare to speak the truth". For example, the US controls the IMF by veto power and the board of directors, and any country in dire need of loans must privatize all state assets prior to receiving a loan, for which only US investment firms has the capital to acquire. The IMF acts like a bankruptcy firm liquidating state assets to mainly US investment companies at the detriment of the local population. In addition, any potential whistleblowers are either imprisoned, forced to flee or perhaps killed even before their information is made public.
The world needs WikiLeaks to protect it from America.
Assange's "vision of Amerca as a super bully" is unsurprisingly held by most of the planet, including many of the US allies. And Is it really a fallacy to state that the US "has achieved imperial power by proclaiming allegiance to principles of human rights while deploying its military-intelligence apparatus in “pincer” formation to “push” countries into doing its bidding, and punishing people like him who dare to speak the truth". For example, the US controls the IMF by veto power and the board of directors, and any country in dire need of loans must privatize all state assets prior to receiving a loan, for which only US investment firms has the capital to acquire. The IMF acts like a bankruptcy firm liquidating state assets to mainly US investment companies at the detriment of the local population. In addition, any potential whistleblowers are either imprisoned, forced to flee or perhaps killed even before their information is made public.
The world needs WikiLeaks to protect it from America.
45
Great comment.
Re without Wikileaks how would we have known about the military video of the attack on Iraqi citizens- that used to be the job of newspapers like the NYT. That is before they stopped being reporters and became purveyors of information from other media sources massaged and manipulated into whatever narrative they wished the public to adopt.
Re without Wikileaks how would we have known about the military video of the attack on Iraqi citizens- that used to be the job of newspapers like the NYT. That is before they stopped being reporters and became purveyors of information from other media sources massaged and manipulated into whatever narrative they wished the public to adopt.
1
This narrative you are referring to is especially evident when the NYT published Judith Miller's Op-Ed about Weapons of Mass Destruction. The timing of her article was especially critical and suspicious. Her 2002 article was published in the NYT right before congress was supposed to convene in order to get Congressional Resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. At the time, it was a Democratic congress that was hostile to the idea of another war. Judith Miller's source was on a supposedly high-ranking Iraqi government official. The allegation of WMD was enough to get Congressional approval (Hillary voted yes, while Bernie voted no). Judith Miller's source turned out to be a 'no one' in the Iraqi government, but the damage was done and the war was started.
Suspicisouly, Judith Miller works also for the Atlantic council, a think tank, who are also linked to the Clintons. Think tanks are merely organizations created to circumvent transparency lobby laws. As the Clinton Foundation, The Atlantic Council funding is not limited to only US citizens, but rather receives funding by many foreign nationals.
I used to believe that newspapers were merely used as a tool by the government to push a certain narrative. However, the Wikileaks leak regarding Clinton's lawyer communicating with the DNC, it seems perhaps a coordination with News organizations are also possible.
Suspicisouly, Judith Miller works also for the Atlantic council, a think tank, who are also linked to the Clintons. Think tanks are merely organizations created to circumvent transparency lobby laws. As the Clinton Foundation, The Atlantic Council funding is not limited to only US citizens, but rather receives funding by many foreign nationals.
I used to believe that newspapers were merely used as a tool by the government to push a certain narrative. However, the Wikileaks leak regarding Clinton's lawyer communicating with the DNC, it seems perhaps a coordination with News organizations are also possible.
Very few question Assange's description of the US. What some of us find distasteful is Assange himself. He has done NOTHING other than post materials gathered by others to the web. He has not truly put himself on the line the way Manning or Snowden did. He just picks and chooses what goes on Wikileaks; it's not the full-blown repository of sensitive information from across the globe. He has no courage just a lot of ego.
Would the New York Times be doing this hit piece if the leak were about the Republican Party? It seems that Russia baiting is the new red baiting. Only its the pro Hillary, pro Democratic Party NYT doing it and not the Republicans.
83
Thank you for saying this so plainly. Russia-baiting IS the new Red-baiting.
The New York Times is disgraceful on this subject. And all in the service of Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Not a single named authoritative source has confirmed media-generated rumors about Russia hacking the Democratic National Committee which was rigged for Hillary Clinton over Bernie
Sanders by chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Embarrassing, but not for
Russia. It seems to me that Putin is pretty restrained in the face of all the
American high dudgeon posturing and finger-pointing. Maybe, as an old KGB hand, he is just amused at the transparent lying and distortion of facts that are being put out over here, by officialdom and by the New York Times.
The New York Times is disgraceful on this subject. And all in the service of Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Not a single named authoritative source has confirmed media-generated rumors about Russia hacking the Democratic National Committee which was rigged for Hillary Clinton over Bernie
Sanders by chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Embarrassing, but not for
Russia. It seems to me that Putin is pretty restrained in the face of all the
American high dudgeon posturing and finger-pointing. Maybe, as an old KGB hand, he is just amused at the transparent lying and distortion of facts that are being put out over here, by officialdom and by the New York Times.
1
@JP
Where ARE those leaks of the Republican party? Hmmm. So strange that you're complaining about the attention being on the Democrats. Not even curious why no Republican leaks? NYTimes doesn't report The Thing That Isn't Happening, so they must be biased because they are reporting The Thing That IS Happening.
Where ARE those leaks of the Republican party? Hmmm. So strange that you're complaining about the attention being on the Democrats. Not even curious why no Republican leaks? NYTimes doesn't report The Thing That Isn't Happening, so they must be biased because they are reporting The Thing That IS Happening.
Yes, and good to remember she called Putin another Hitler. Not that there isn't some thruth to that statement, but it's not a good way to achieve rapprochement with the one country in the world that could send us, Hillary included, into outer space by the molecule.
1
Everyone -- EVERYONE -- has an agenda. And it's based on their wants and their fears. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
What I'd love to see is a world where there are NO secrets, of any kind. NO Assange or anyone else to decide what to pursue, what to release, what to hype, what to hide. EVERYTHING to be be known about EVERYONE and EVERY situation would be revealed in its plain, unvarnished, objective truth.
At a minimum, that would expose the hypocrisy and smug self-righteousness which seems to infect so much of our national discourse.
'Course, then again, we'd probably then somehow be able to justify MY hypocrisy and MY smug self righteousness as ... well, the right and righteous path to pursue.
God, we humans seem to be ... well infected by self-righteousness and smugness.
What I'd love to see is a world where there are NO secrets, of any kind. NO Assange or anyone else to decide what to pursue, what to release, what to hype, what to hide. EVERYTHING to be be known about EVERYONE and EVERY situation would be revealed in its plain, unvarnished, objective truth.
At a minimum, that would expose the hypocrisy and smug self-righteousness which seems to infect so much of our national discourse.
'Course, then again, we'd probably then somehow be able to justify MY hypocrisy and MY smug self righteousness as ... well, the right and righteous path to pursue.
God, we humans seem to be ... well infected by self-righteousness and smugness.
6
We have serious flaws in our political system and Assange exposes them. The Russians then use this to their advantage by pointing out the American system is flawed and this is WikiLeaks fault? One has to wonder if a certain candidate who features so heavily in these leaks weren't in bed with the NYT would this article even exist?
83
One wonders why Mr. Assange has not released anything on Mr. Trump?
Weak sauce. I have no time for Assange at this point, for various reasons (I think willy nilly releasing documents that can endanger people named in them that suffer from government repression is wrong), but this "cui bono" stuff is just very weak. What it comes down to is that Wikileaks releases often embarrass powerful western institutions. Russian propaganda plays up this embarrassment. The end. Constructing-but-not-quite-aleging something sinister out of this is on the same level as Russian allegations that exposing the massive state-sponsored doping in their athletics is a Western plot.
35
Wait! I thought the Times reported that Russia was probably responsible for the hacking and pursuant disclosures.
7
It's just the the death throes of the human race. Pay no attention to the drama and live your life as peacefully as possible. The end is near and we may elect a modern day Nero to play his fiddle. Drill baby drill.
7
Even the NYTimes cannot say that what Assange has exposed isn't the truth. Why would we not want to know the truth about our own government? There's never been a question about the authenticity of what he has exposed. It is the truth. So while people can rail against Assange and call him an "odious little man" they can't change the fact that the truth is the truth, no matter how many names they call him. It may be offensive that it shows the cheat the DNC has been or that Clinton has many more emails than she said..or may even show directly she has lied or worse. I wait with great anticipation for the rest of the story to be revealed when the proper work has been done by Wikileaks. Why would we not WANT to know the truth so that we can make better decisions and votes to make our democracy stronger? Perhaps the truth is that there are some who clearly DON"T want that.
109
But what if it isn't the truth? How do we know what's true or not? How do we know the releases are not selective or simply manufactured? Stolen information can be doctored too. I don't believe everything I read just because some hacker steals and distributes it. Julian Assange has revealed his political motivation and has thus lost all credibility.
1
Why not release the material all at once then? Would that not be the most transparent way to do so?
1
All of this barking about "the Truth!"-- you need The Truth. What is this truth you need "so that we can make better decisions and votes to make our democracy stronger?"
You want to know every word that Hillary Clinton has shared with colleagues in the course of her career, or you can't trust yourself to make a decision? You must judge every single thing ever spoken or you are incomplete? 33,000 eMails, multiple investigations, FBI interrogation all thanks to Republicans who are intent on Bringing Her Down, yet nothing found. Is there anyone on this planet who could pass that test?
Curiously missing from your truth-seeking is a need for the truth from the other side. No fist-slamming about that. You don't need to see Trumps taxes? You don't need to know why he's so warm about Putin? Do you even know all the proven information about him that has been printed?
So your truth doesn't seem to be about being open to both sides, and more like you are seeking a "smoking gun"-- so you're actually looking for something which you haven't found yet. I have a feeling a smoking chili pepper will do in the absence of said smoking gun.
You want to know every word that Hillary Clinton has shared with colleagues in the course of her career, or you can't trust yourself to make a decision? You must judge every single thing ever spoken or you are incomplete? 33,000 eMails, multiple investigations, FBI interrogation all thanks to Republicans who are intent on Bringing Her Down, yet nothing found. Is there anyone on this planet who could pass that test?
Curiously missing from your truth-seeking is a need for the truth from the other side. No fist-slamming about that. You don't need to see Trumps taxes? You don't need to know why he's so warm about Putin? Do you even know all the proven information about him that has been printed?
So your truth doesn't seem to be about being open to both sides, and more like you are seeking a "smoking gun"-- so you're actually looking for something which you haven't found yet. I have a feeling a smoking chili pepper will do in the absence of said smoking gun.
1
As a voter, what needs equal scrutiny is the content provided by Wikileaks. We can't just deflect to a redscare scenario with the DNC is exposed to corruption.
Furthermore, Wikileaks doesn't create the content or steal it from govts. They are a space for whistleblowers to send info to to expose corruption and horrific practices govts do to their own citizens or to people living in other countries.
Unfortunately, "liberal" media seems to divert from critically examining information when it goes against their interests and persons they support. Yet, they kick off a "fire storm" for those they are against. If liberal media won't do their job then WikiLeaks is at the forefront for exposing corruption, like the DNC primaries.
Furthermore, Wikileaks doesn't create the content or steal it from govts. They are a space for whistleblowers to send info to to expose corruption and horrific practices govts do to their own citizens or to people living in other countries.
Unfortunately, "liberal" media seems to divert from critically examining information when it goes against their interests and persons they support. Yet, they kick off a "fire storm" for those they are against. If liberal media won't do their job then WikiLeaks is at the forefront for exposing corruption, like the DNC primaries.
36
Really! How convenient that the US finds someone else to distract from their atrocious behaviour. I suppose it's because the only ones you can trust are the likes of Bush, Cheney and Obama.
19
There are no innocents or anyone on higher moral ground here, there or anywhere. International relations are the province of relativity and pragmatism, a quest for maintenance and expansion of economic and political influence and control over resources.
Revelations are helpful to some and disruptive to others, and over time more likely to be chosen, edited and taken out of context when it's convenient to do so.
The longer the standoff, the more likely that calculation, bias and manipulation come into play.
Revelations are helpful to some and disruptive to others, and over time more likely to be chosen, edited and taken out of context when it's convenient to do so.
The longer the standoff, the more likely that calculation, bias and manipulation come into play.
8
I guess a new round of emails that can be damaging to the current Administration as well as Hillary Clinton will soon becoming out for the NY Times is doing their part on early damage control.
Oddly Josh Ernst's letter today in the NY Times is attempting a different angle at damage control by touting how transparent the Obama Administration has been by stating due to the creation of Data.gov :
"unprecedented steps that the Obama administration has taken to fulfill the president’s promise to lead the most transparent White House in history."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/opinion/give-obama-credit-for-governme...
Well for one, to compare this achievement to nothing that existed before in history is not that note worthy since the same computer technologies of the past 8 years were not available to past administrations. Only the GW Bush administration would have slightly comparable computer technologies, however the "Dot.com " bubble error was about to burst in when Bush took office, leading to a down turn in IT investment.
Oddly Josh Ernst's letter today in the NY Times is attempting a different angle at damage control by touting how transparent the Obama Administration has been by stating due to the creation of Data.gov :
"unprecedented steps that the Obama administration has taken to fulfill the president’s promise to lead the most transparent White House in history."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/opinion/give-obama-credit-for-governme...
Well for one, to compare this achievement to nothing that existed before in history is not that note worthy since the same computer technologies of the past 8 years were not available to past administrations. Only the GW Bush administration would have slightly comparable computer technologies, however the "Dot.com " bubble error was about to burst in when Bush took office, leading to a down turn in IT investment.
11
It amazes me to see the number of correspondents why extol the virtues of openness and transparency from behind aliases. Any hypocrisy there?
13
"Any hypocrisy there/' No some have jobs to consider especially people who live in small, very conservative towns and cities. I once used my real name but after somebody stated they would like to break my arm, how that got passed by the censors, I'll never know, but change my name i did. I live alone and i am in my senior years.
7
It looks like Russia is now the number one bad guy and Julian Assange is the Emanuel Goldstein of the neoliberal war mongers led by General Clinton in the Orwellian plot. Given the steady diet of anti-Russian articles I see on these pages and The elevation of Julian Assange to the level of brilliant international master criminal, I must conclude that the new administration will be eager for a nuclear showdown with the evil empire.
28
Once supported him but now think he is working for Trump. No sympathy for his plight anymore.
11
And both Assange and Trump may be working for Russian - unwittingly or not.
7
But Hillary too... we are truly lost!