I thought he was like one of the most important whistleblowers of our time exposing war crimes and shit. Some of you don’t wanna see him live another day, why is that?

    • xor@infosec.pub
      6·
      10 months ago

      he turned towards embracing more and more Russian influences.

      he had a show on RT… that was literally it…

      • Schaedelbach@feddit.de
        17·
        10 months ago

        Yes, literally a show on Russian state TV. He got a paycheck from the Russian government. I mean, is it that hard to grasp that this little fact makes the “he’s a russian asset” accusations at least understandable? And I am not saying he is one. I am not that informed about him and Wikileaks to have a strong opinion.

        • xor@infosec.pub
          2·
          10 months ago

          RT is not the russian government…
          so everything else you have to say is pointless propaganda
          claiming he’s definitely a russian asset because he had a tv show is like saying everyone that’s been on ABC is an american asset…
          it’s worse than just stupid

          • admiralteal@kbin.social
            18·
            10 months ago

            RT is literally state controlled. It has no independence. It operates in literally the same offices as RIA Novosti.

            You are out of your mind if you are trying to claim they are anything other than state TV by any meaningful definition.

            • xor@infosec.pub
              2·
              10 months ago

              they were state funded but not controlled back then, they’ve been slowly adding on censorship laws… not every human in russia is this super evil, red-scare, diabolical agent plotting against your freedom…
              they were, very recently, much freer and more democratic… putin has slowly been turning it back into a dictatorship
              see also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Union

              • admiralteal@kbin.social
                4·
                10 months ago

                You’re full of it. From the time they were founded, they operated in the same building as RIA Novosti. RT didn’t exist until AFTER the various independent journalists and their associations were ALREADY being rounded up and cast out of Russian society.

                They are now and have always been state-controlled. Stop apologizing for dictatorships.

                  • admiralteal@kbin.social
                    5·
                    10 months ago

                    RT was founded in 2005.

                    By 2008 they were parroting clearly-bullshit Russian talking points about Georgia in the 2008 war.

                    World Tomorrow aired in 2012.

                    You. Are. Full. Of. It.

                • xor@infosec.pub
                  1·
                  10 months ago

                  cool how they played all those advertisements for freeee…
                  cool how NBC is 100% controlled by their advertisers…
                  cool how funding =/= control

                  • magnetosphere@kbin.social
                    2·
                    10 months ago

                    You’re too used to people making attacks. That’s not what I was trying to do. I was asking questions. I don’t know how much of RTs funding comes from the state, and I don’t even know if they run commercials.

                    I don’t know how RT is funded, and I’ve never watched it.

          • NOT_RICK@lemmy.worldEnglish
            7·
            10 months ago

            Hard to imagine more miserable final for ‘world order challenger’ than employee of state-controlled ‘Russia Today’."

            -Alexander Lebedev

            Even Russian Oligarchs are laughing at how obvious it is.

            • xor@infosec.pub
              1·
              10 months ago

              uh huh… so after he’s already arrested and detained inside the ecuadorian embassy, he takes an opportunity to have a webcam interview show distributed on rt…

              after he’s already internationally famous and has a shitload of money… he’s “paid employee of rt” and that discredits everything he did for years before and after that…

              you sound a lot like a paid government employee

              (p.s. rt was a lot freer then and had some pretty good journalism about topics other than russia… but go ahead and keep repeating yourself like an idiot)

              • NOT_RICK@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                10 months ago

                1 I’ve seen no evidence Assange is wealthy 2 Sure seems like cozying up to Russia is a decent escape plan when you’re worried about being locked up in the west 3 I never said all his leaks are bs, I rather appreciated what he and Snowden did. I just think he’s a self aggrandizing hypocrite 4 I could easily paint you as a Russian shill but that’d be fucking stupid because I have no evidence beyond “wahhh this guy on the internet has a different read of a situation than meeee”. I’m not sure if you’re an idiot or not, but it seems pretty clear you’re a prick. Bye.

        • xor@infosec.pub
          2·
          10 months ago

          RT had a lot of independance, and putin’s dictatorial control hadn’t completely solidified yet.

          if you couldn’t imagine them taking an opportunity to be broadcast all across the globe, then you’re very miopic.

          it was an assange interview show… he interviewed people… it was a good show

          aaaand, you’re repeating the same rumor over and over.
          no, they didn’t show any bias in what they published. straight up lies

            • xor@infosec.pub
              1·
              10 months ago

              you definitely get it with RT having changed in the last decade…

              but on Bill Maher he said A: they only publish things they can verify, and B: russia would not be shy about just assassinating him, so unfortunately they’re very hesitant to piss them off.

              i need to find that clip and just reply with that…

    • m0darn@lemmy.ca
      5·
      10 months ago

      One of the things I struggle to understand (maybe I should read more about it) is how US law has jurisdiction to stifle speech outside of US territories.

      Like if Romania declared Borat a state secret, would every pirate on that swarm with a seed ratio above 0.00 be subject to extradition?

        • m0darn@lemmy.ca
          4·
          10 months ago

          The US (and Canada, where I live) has an extradition treaty with Romania.

          The US treaty does mention that

          …neither Party shall refuse extradition based on the citizenship of the person sought.

          But I haven’t read it in detail so that may or may not be relevant (the past I quoted is referring to a particular part of the treaty).

          My understand is that typically the threshold for extradition is mutual criminality which I suppose is my answer to how US law applies itself outside US territories (because leaking state secrets is a crime in most countries). So I withdraw my inquiry.

          If Romania declared Borat a state secret pirates could perhaps be extradited.

          But also note that I don’t think Assange can be charged with treason, because he isn’t American.

    • xdr@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
      5·
      10 months ago

      People claim “people were put at risk” but two things stand out.

      1. Since then has anyone died because of the leaks?
      2. What about the actual crime? Has anyone been procecuted ?

      I think the answer to both is negative so its just that letter of law applies to the mighty. This time once again has proved it

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      4·
      10 months ago

      And now I think you’re part of the disinformation campaign. Although people have accused him of leaking information that compromised it an operatives, there should not have been any documents that he leaked that contain such information, which means other people were misclassifying data, and yet we have no evidence that any of them were ever pursued with prosecution. So then the whole claim looks a lot like a big lie.

      And if the above argument is too shallow, we could look a little more deeply and ask who the agents are that add to be pulled out of their posts, and also whether foreign governments already knew that those people were agents, on account of the information being available from sources that were not top secret, that had presumably been compromised by some of the other major world spy agencies.

      I don’t see how leaking diplomatic cables could be seen as attacking the United States as a country. Certainly it could be seen as undercutting the State Department, because it revealed how anti-democratic the State Department actually is.