Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by scient 2365 days ago
What moral act? Working for Russia and helping them push their agenda - willingly or out of ignorance? You are blind if you thing Assange and Wikileaks was some kind of a knight for truth.
2 comments

It is possible for multiple things to all be true. I see no contradiction between the following:

1. Assange helped reveal severe wrongdoings by various governments.

2. Assange engaged in unprotected sexual activity with two women that violated the scope of their consent, because they only consented to protected sex, and also because one woman was asleep in one case. This would have also been illegal in the UK.

3. No prosecution would have been attempted if Assange has not already made political enemies.

4. Russia made hay while the sun was shining by using Assange as a conduit to publish dirt they wanted published.

5. Assange definitely and unambiguously broke UK law by fleeing to the Ecuadorean embassy.

6. The fact that the UK would not allow Assange to depart the Ecuadorian embassy was condemned by the UN as indefinite detention without trial.

7. The current condition of Assange is really suspicious and makes the UK look bad.

(Which of these are actually true is for someone more qualified than I am, but they are all compatible.)

Hmm, maybe if our 'fourth estate' actually wasn't the govs bitch, Assange's org wouldn't have looked so moral. But here we are.
Your point and the publication of Snowden’s material by the mainstream media can’t both be true
For some reason I thought that Snowden went to a UK publisher because the US outlets were not interested. Once the Guardian agreed, were the outlets here expected to ignore it?
Snowden went to two US journalists, Glenn Greenwald, and Laura Poitras.
Greenwald and Poitras don't have glowing opinions of USA news media firms either.