Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   "Hello, I am Julian Assange, anti-secrecy advocate. Ask Me Anything, but don't expect an answer. I need to keep my secrets, after all"   (yahoo.com ) divider line
    More: Fail, founder Julian Assange, virtual online press, attention-hungry Wikileaker craves, personal Gmail inboxes, credit card numbers, social security numbers, court martial proceedings, usual Reddit protocol  
•       •       •

983 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jan 2017 at 7:55 AM (5 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
6 days ago  
Julian Assange decided to hold an AMA on Reddit

I'll take "Two Things I Don't Give A Sh*t About" for $800, Alex.
 
6 days ago  
 Shut up and cash the checks, Jules
 
6 days ago  
Sorry, Julian, I can't hear you with Putin's dick in your mouth.
 
6 days ago  
Assange: "Because privacy is boring unless it's about me and some piece that I wanna bang..."
 
5 days ago  
How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


Has your opinion on this fine gentleman changed over the years?
 
5 days ago  

riot_kid: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Has your opinion on this fine gentleman changed over the years?


Yes
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


The stated goals of the project had some merit. Assange himself has ALWAYS had some issues, especially where privacy has been concerned. He's always been kind of an oily, greasy, somewhat creepy presence, and HOW his organization has been used over the years HAS changed a great deal.

The issue with Assange has ALWAYS been making it about himself. HE as the gatekeeper. HE as the face of a collective, and taking credit for that collective's work. And rather than just dump information, and letting folks sort out the meaning, he's ALWAYS looked to serve a narrative with his releases. And he's pretty much ALWAYS had an issue with privacy being a "privilege" that was past due to be eliminated.

Which, oddly enough, is EXACTLY the opposite of Snowden's motives. That Assange helped steer Snowden DEEP into the Russian's arms...that's not exactly a coincidence. And it was kind of a dick move then, and it's still kind of a dick move today.

You can see merit in some folks' actions, while fully recognizing their other flaws, and even crimes.

Putin prevented ethnic cleansing in Ossetia. Flat out. Full stop. He put tanks out on the field to STOP Georgia from running their own tanks all up and over the Ossetians. Putin gave the Ossetians the means to stop the Georgians from running air cavalry raids against them with RPGs and guided munitions. Because many of those Ossetians HAD dual citizenship with Georgia and Russia. And part of the separation deal was to give the Ossetians that protection to prevent EXACTLY what the Georgians were trying to do, because BEFORE Georgia joined the USSR, they had been trying to wipe out the Ossetians. In fact, the Ossetians were instrumental in bringing Georgia INTO the USSR, BECAUSE they were being massacred. The years in between didn't erase those tensions, and it only put things on hold. Georgia wouldn't let the Ossetians have their own homeland, and they wouldn't even let them bring it up for debate. So, Putin, quite literally, started off his support of "freedom fighters" in the Ukraine and other places with the basis of a solid "Hey, can we NOT ethnically cleanse motherf*ckers?" policy. Yes, it's grown into a whole different thing, but even still, I'll give the man his due, in that he STOPPED another Serbian style ethnic cleansing from happening right across Russia's borders. And used dual citizenship to justify his actions--which was granted to prevent EXACTLY the scenario that Georgia rolled in with.

You can recognize when someone does something half-way decent, even if they're sh*theels.

When I was growing up in Texas, there was a local businessman who quite literally was the most racist sack of sh*t that you've ever seen. He was a horrible in his speech, his personal actions, and he tried everything to KEEP black and brown folks from living in the wrong neighborhoods, and for damn sure to keep them from voting in the wrong parts of the county. He was NOT a good human. He also endowed a scholarship program for at risk black youth, to get them out of the sh*tty neighborhoods that he was adamant about keeping their families in. He hated him some darkies, and he wanted to get their best and brightest OUT and maybe to take their families with them. Or improve their sh*tty neighborhoods to keep them from rolling into those of good, God fearing white folks. Horrible human, did some measure of good, for maybe the wrong reasons, but in the end, he DID help some people.

Assange is in this game for all the wrong reasons. Now, more so than ever. But if he'd lived up to the core of what he stated the purpose of WikiLeaks was for, he could have done a fair amount of good. That he didn't...that he made himself the gatekeeper, and took it on himself to allow others to alter information for his paymasters' purposes...that's on him. But the stated goal wasn't terrible, but how it was executed certainly was.

This isn't a binary world. Almost EVERY side is full of shades of grey and clarity is often muddied by real life. Even monsters can love kittens. Even saints can rip a silent but deadly stinker in the confessional, and giggle about it afterward. It is a rare thing to be 100% wrong, always. Most folks run a gamut during their days, and Assange is no different. What you DO have to look at are their motivations, and Assange has shifted from personal aggrandizement, to straight up using his organization as an arm of the SVR-RF...
 
5 days ago  
I'm somewhat glad those questions weren't buried in a swath of down votes.   If there's anywhere I'd expect any ass kissing up to Assange it woulda been reddit.
 
5 days ago  
Julie is Putin's biatch. Also Julie knows Putin will have him taken out via polonium enema if if doesn't follow Putin's orders.
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


I think I'm one of the few progressives who thought he was a cock from the beginning.

/Manning too
//But at least she has the excuse of a mental breakdown
 
5 days ago  
Both sides are bad hate me now.
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: Assange is in this game for all the wrong reasons. Now, more so than ever. But if he'd lived up to the core of what he stated the purpose of WikiLeaks was for, he could have done a fair amount of good. That he didn't...that he made himself the gatekeeper, and took it on himself to allow others to alter information for his paymasters' purposes...that's on him. But the stated goal wasn't terrible, but how it was executed certainly was.


He was an asshole to start with, but after he screamed political persecution in the face of the sexual assault charges, it's clear he's looking for a comfortable cross to velcro himself onto (he wouldn't use nails, that might hurt).
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


\o

My opinion has changed over time, in light of new information learned. Is that wrong?
 
5 days ago  
"I'm just like Edward Snowden, except while Snowden acted to preserve democracy, I acted to undermine it while I was seeking asylum to avoid being charged with child rape. So in a way, we're alike.. except he's an American hero and I'm a pedophile."
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: That he didn't...that he made himself the gatekeeper, and took it on himself to allow others to alter information for his paymasters' purposes


Watch out, he's under your bed!
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


There was an article in Rolling Stones a few years back that showed what a dick he was to his own people
 
5 days ago  

meatofmystery: I'm somewhat glad those questions weren't buried in a swath of down votes.   If there's anywhere I'd expect any ass kissing up to Assange it woulda been reddit.


The upvote/downvote thing is actually one of the big things that keep me from participating there. I'd rather see a conversation evolve and advance, not be voted on and actively altered. Promoting the most "popular" opinions doesn't make them correct, and don't actually advance the conversation. It only makes cliques and popularity the focus, as opposed to ideas and conversations. What Reddit did was position itself to be quotable for media, and create a community based on popular opinions. It does get some folks invested, and obsessed, and that drives clicks, as do the dedicated threads for fairly niche subjects, but when posts can literally be voted off the island, all it takes is a few jackasses, and multiple accounts, to eliminate their worst detractors, to steer conversations, or derail them. And that focus on the popularity of the posts, as opposed to what is actually IN them...that changes how conversations develop.
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


Gotta admit it, I thought he was a good guy at one point; an idealist fighting for truth. Then I read about the sexual assault accusations (IIRC, someone linked a long article on it on Fark) and the more I read the clearer it was that he totally did it - all the crap he said about being the victim of a CIA smear campaign was just bullshiat to avoid prison time. After that, I wasn't surprised when he abandoned every principle he supposedly held to carry water for Putin.

...All the while, still playing the persecuted hero. What a farking scumbag.
 
5 days ago  

pkjun: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

I think I'm one of the few progressives who thought he was a cock from the beginning.

/Manning too
//But at least she has the excuse of a mental breakdown


Nope you are not alone. I've always maintained that not everybody has a right to see all the things. It's almost like I am very progressive on social issues, conservative on financial issues and full on libertarian when it comes to privacy.
 
5 days ago  

riot_kid: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Has your opinion on this fine gentleman changed over the years?


Can't say I've ever been a fan of Assange's personal brand of anarchy.  Which is essentially throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  My opinion has degraded further over the years.
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: The upvote/downvote thing is actually one of the big things that keep me from participating there. I'd rather see a conversation evolve and advance, not be voted on and actively altered. Promoting the most "popular" opinions doesn't make them correct, and don't actually advance the conversation.


The upvote/downvote system does work well for some things, though. It's great for actual information - subreddits like AskScience or ExplainLikeImFive are great ways to learn about non-controversial topics, as the best answer will usually be right there at the top of the thread.

That said It's utterly impossible to follow a conversation on Reddit and any controversial topic tends to immediately devolve into a vote war. That's why all the politics subreddits are such freakin' wastelands of idiots shouting over the top of each other.

/Yes, even moreso than the politics tab.
 
5 days ago  

riot_kid: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Has your opinion on this fine gentleman changed over the years?


Assange, no.  I always thought he was an asshole.  Wikileaks, yes.  It had some potential to be something helpful.
 
5 days ago  

Gunther: The upvote/downvote system does work well for some things, though. It's great for actual information - subreddits like AskScience or ExplainLikeImFive are great ways to learn about non-controversial topics, as the best answer will usually be right there at the top of the thread.


Sort by controversial and best tends to help.
 
5 days ago  

Thor's Mighty Wrench: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

\o

My opinion has changed over time, in light of new information learned. Is that wrong?


Flip-flopper!
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


   What does 'cool' have to do with anything? 'Likes' count for 5/8th of FA in the adult world. Save that expectation for your Facebook accounts.
  Whether Assange and Wikileaks provide an essential service to society matters. Attacking transparency organizations, by default throwing your support behind authoritarianism and pandemic surveillance, simply because they pointed a light where you didn't want is destructive and hypocritical. She lost. Get over it.
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


Not me. I've always thought the guy is an asshole and isn't interested in "truth" as much as he is in "agenda".
 
5 days ago  

neenerist: She lost.


*Flag*

Illegal use of Hillary.  15 yard penalty. Third down.
 
5 days ago  

neenerist: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

   What does 'cool' have to do with anything? 'Likes' count for 5/8th of FA in the adult world. Save that expectation for your Facebook accounts.
  Whether Assange and Wikileaks provide an essential service to society matters. Attacking transparency organizations, by default throwing your support behind authoritarianism and pandemic surveillance, simply because they pointed a light where you didn't want is destructive and hypocritical. She lost. Get over it.


F*ck you and anyone else white knighting this asshole. Hilary is irrelevant. You don't get to claim you're a transparency group and then tell me you have information I don't need to see
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


|o|

I bought into it, and I feel dirty.
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: Assange: "Because privacy is boring unless it's about me and some piece that I wanna bang rape..."


FTFM
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: Promoting the most "popular" opinions doesn't make them correct,


The people who run reddit still suffer from the delusion that people use the up/down votes how they're intended to be used. In reality, people use them as like/dislike.

I post over there and I'm not too bothered by the voting system.
 
5 days ago  

grumpfuff: F*ck you and anyone else white knighting this asshole. Hilary is irrelevant. You don't get to claim you're a transparency group and then tell me you have information I don't need to see.


Man, you really are a grump. :)
 
5 days ago  

hubiestubert: You can recognize when someone does something half-way decent, even if they're sh*theels.


I agree 💯 with this statement. Alan Grayson being a street fighter and calling out the Republicans for letting people die rather than have health coverage, while still being a wife-beating piece of scum, comes to mind.
 
5 days ago  
Thanks, Mr. Assange, for participating in today's AMA. I just have one question: what does Putin's dick taste like?
 
5 days ago  

neenerist: Attacking transparency organizations, by default throwing your support behind authoritarianism and pandemic surveillance, simply because they pointed a light where you didn't want is destructive and hypocritical.


Wouldn't that be what Assange wants me to do? Throwing support behind authoritarianism and surveillance is kind of Wikileaks' thing, after all.
 
5 days ago  
Wanting radical transparency in government while still respecting privacy for individuals is neither inconsistent nor hypocritical.
 
5 days ago  

Talondel: Wanting radical transparency in government while still respecting privacy for individuals is neither inconsistent nor hypocritical.


No, but claiming to support the free flow of information while saying you have information I don't need to see is.
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


WikiLeaks - Yes.  I was initially very supportive of their efforts.  Then Assange came along and I thought that his etra raison d'être was to be the lightening rod for the rest of the organization.  To be the public face and take the heat.  That would have been a noble cause, and for certain definitions of "cool", it could have been said that it was a cool thing to do.

Turns out, all he wanted was to bone some chicks.  Very sad.  I think he's the reason WikiLeaks is no longer relevant.
 
5 days ago  
So, when I said Assange and Wikileaks was politically motivated and had nothing to do with free information, I was correct?  Color me shocked.
 
5 days ago  

grumpfuff: Talondel: Wanting radical transparency in government while still respecting privacy for individuals is neither inconsistent nor hypocritical.

No, but claiming to support the free flow of information while saying you have information I don't need to see is.


It was interesting how his radical transparency only applied to Dems.  Must be some new kind of consistency, to be explained by string theorists in the distant future.
 
5 days ago  

FlashHarry: Thanks, Mr. Assange, for participating in today's AMA. I just have one question: what does Putin's dick taste like?


"Mostly Trump ass. Thanks for your question."
 
5 days ago  

cman: riot_kid: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Has your opinion on this fine gentleman changed over the years?

Yes


I thought he was a sleaze that was just barely redeemed by standing for something right.

Now he's just a sleaze, and I think he's actually a liar.
 
5 days ago  
Excuse me! Can we not lose sight of the fact that the DNC had a lot of bad emails that were hacked? I can't go into specifics about which emails were bad but there were a lot of them. That were hacked. And were bad. Very bad. Emails. Hillary had emails. Also bad.
 
5 days ago  

fusillade762: Julian Assange decided to hold an AMA on Reddit

I'll take "Two Things I Don't Give A Sh*t About" for $800, Alex. $5/month, Drew


ftfy
 
5 days ago  

cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?


Not me.  I've always thought he was trouble. . .and history has vindicated me on that one.
 
5 days ago  

Gunther: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Gotta admit it, I thought he was a good guy at one point; an idealist fighting for truth. Then I read about the sexual assault accusations (IIRC, someone linked a long article on it on Fark) and the more I read the clearer it was that he totally did it - all the crap he said about being the victim of a CIA smear campaign was just bullshiat to avoid prison time. After that, I wasn't surprised when he abandoned every principle he supposedly held to carry water for Putin.

...All the while, still playing the persecuted hero. What a farking scumbag.


shiat, even before then.  Remember the "chopper murdering reporters" video he trumpeted?   And how quickly it came out that he had edited the video?
 
5 days ago  

Satanic_Hamster: Gunther: cman: How many of you are willing to admit you thought Assange was cool years ago?

Gotta admit it, I thought he was a good guy at one point; an idealist fighting for truth. Then I read about the sexual assault accusations (IIRC, someone linked a long article on it on Fark) and the more I read the clearer it was that he totally did it - all the crap he said about being the victim of a CIA smear campaign was just bullshiat to avoid prison time. After that, I wasn't surprised when he abandoned every principle he supposedly held to carry water for Putin.

...All the while, still playing the persecuted hero. What a farking scumbag.

shiat, even before then.  Remember the "chopper murdering reporters" video he trumpeted?   And how quickly it came out that he had edited the video?


No, but it's late and I'm tired.  I was under the impression the raw footage didn't really change the story.  Care to enlighten me (whenever I wake up tomorrow)?
 
5 days ago  

TheBigJerk: No, but it's late and I'm tired.  I was under the impression the raw footage didn't really change the story.  Care to enlighten me (whenever I wake up tomorrow)?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,_2007_Baghdad_airstrike

The army described this as a group that gave resistance at the time, that doesn't seem to be happening. But there are armed men in the group, they did find a rocket propelled grenade among the group, the Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed, were not identified...You have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called 'collateral murder.' That's not leaking, that's a pure editorial.
According to Harnden "Assange admitted that he was seeking to manipulate and create 'maximum political impact'."[61][62][63][64][65] Dan Kennedy wrote in The Guardian "Even the comedian Stephen Colbert, in an interview with Assange, dropped his rightwing-blowhard persona momentarily to make a serious point, calling the edited version 'emotional manipulation'".[66]
Bill Keller of The New York Times wrote "But in its zeal to make the video a work of antiwar propaganda, WikiLeaks also released a version that didn't call attention to an Iraqi who was toting a rocket-propelled grenade and packaged the manipulated version under the tendentious rubric Collateral Murder."[4] The New York Times reported that "Critics contend that the shorter video was misleading because it did not make clear that the attacks took place amid clashes in the neighborhood and that one of the men was carrying a rocket-propelled grenade."[67]
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report