Even Assange apologists can't deny this is an important documentary
Quite possibly the most important of the year.
share[deleted]
Why didn't Assange answer Index on Censorship's questions about his dubious and possibly damning relationship with Belarus dictator Lukashenko? I don't see any apologists defending that one or even broaching the subject. Why not? You believe in transparency, don't you?
In my experience, I have rarely encountered right wingers asking deep questions that challenge their own interests. Gibney, who is on the record for expressing admiration for Daniel Ellsberg, does just that. He's for transparency, but against abuse of power, no matter who's doing it.
And, much as Assange cultists would like to deny it, many progressives who collaborated with Assange both within and outside of investigative journalism and/or WikiLeaks itself have raised the same issues!
Do you deny that? How many known progressives are you willing to reclassify as conservatives or dupes in order to avoid tackling serious questions about Assange and the future of WikiLeaks? Do all the criticisms of Assange amount to nothing more than a "faux-left wing" conspiracy?
But just to give yourself a little credibility, let's see if you can articulate any of the broad questions raised by this film about accountability journalism?
Go ahead. I'm all ears.
[deleted]
Bradley Manning was already pretty tortured mentally and soldiers don't have the same rights civilians do in the United States. If you hate the very concept of armies fine, but no army can survive in battle without strict discipline. It's pretty well established in American law that news media will not be prosecuted for revealing secrets but the person who gave them the information can be. It's unfair and maybe even unjust, but true.
In these modern times, anti-rape laws are far harsher than in the past, no doubt with good reason. The question today is not "Did she say no?" but "Did she say yes?" I don't know all the facts, but a prima facie case could be made. I doubt Sweden would be involved in any "right wing" conspiracy.
Finally, who says the left can't be as bad as the right when it comes to cover-ups and conspiracies, and dogged loyalty to its ideology. It all depends on whose ox is being gored.
[deleted]
People who indulge in paranoid fantasies, theorize about conspiracies that do not exist, and sling epithets like "morons" at thoughtful audience members and thoughtful filmmakers -- and then ignore (for months on end) the reasonable and polite responses to their (almost) laughable sputterings -- do great harm to the cause of information freedom.
It is a disservice to the greater good of any cause to hero-worship ANY individual or leader to the point that you cannot see his errors of judgment and behavior, and his simple humanity. You guys sound like the communists in the U.S. who were still defending Stalin long after the Politburo was bothering to try. For those deluded and stubborn individuals, Stalin came to represent the ideal of socialism.
Before anyone gets his knickers in a twist for the wrong reason, I am NOT comparing Assange to Stalin. I am comparing his idolaters to Stalinists.
I happen to believe in information freedom and fact-based reality. Please stop embarrassing me.
last 2 dvds: Kontroll (2003) & Hungry for Monsters (2004)
[deleted]
You are proving my point: You are not reading with an open mind.
In fact, I am a socialist.* I am not old enough to have protested the Vietnam war, but I did protest my country's warrantless and criminal invasion of Iraq. I don't believe Bradley/Chelsea Manning should be in prison for life. I believe his/her prolonged incarceration in solitary confinement was inhumane.
What is wrong with you? Please stop reading/watching/listening with a pre-calcified agenda. You might learn something new.
*edit: A socialist who believes in democratic elections, not dictatorships or blind obedience to a cult of personality.
last 2 dvds: Kontroll (2003) & Hungry for Monsters (2004)
[deleted]
The facts aren't right wing propaganda just because assange isn't painted as the saint you choose to believe in. Honestly you have no right to call other people right wing when you choose religion over reason, and that's all it is for some people at this point, he's a religious leader that can't be questioned and can do no wrong. You prefer a simple narrative that doesn't exist.
share[deleted]