Slashdot Mirror


Why WikiLeaks Is Worth Defending

SomePgmr writes "By now, anyone with even a passing interest in the WikiLeaks phenomenon is familiar with most of the elements of its fall from grace: the rift between founder Julian Assange and early supporters over his autocratic and/or erratic behavior, the Swedish rape allegations that led to his seeking sanctuary in Ecuador, a recent childish hoax the organization perpetrated, and so on. Critics paint a picture of an organization that exists only in name, with a leadership vacuum and an increasingly fractured group of adherents. Despite its many flaws, however, there is still something worthwhile in what WikiLeaks has done, and theoretically continues to do. The bottom line is that we need something like a 'stateless news organization,' and so far it is the best candidate we have."

2 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Millions by Archtech · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    >More importantly, comparing the USA today with Nazis during WW2 is like saying the Nazis weren't all that bad, and that the genocide of millions of people is comparable to modern Western civilization.

    "Millions" isn't enough to differentiate. South-East Asia 3-4 million; Iraq 1.5 million; already we are pushing that famous figure of 6 million, and that's without even mentioning a score of other nations that have seen their citizens killed by US aggression. (But as war wasn't declared, and few if any Americans were hurt, that's OK).

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  2. Re:Enemy of the state by macbeth66 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Assange has been accused of rape. Multiple allegations, actually. What does he do? He runs away. With all of the well known and rich friends he has, mount a defense. Even the guilty have been exonerated. Remember OJ Simpson? Open and shut case and he still walked.

    Stand your ground and fight for what is right. When you set yourself up as a beacon of truth, you can't slink off in the middle of the night. He had to know that there would be retribution. Prepare for it. He didn't. Therefore he is a fool or a rapist or both. In this case, either would make him a sack of shit.

    And from what I have read I tend to believe the female accusers.