NewsTop Stories
Calling Julian Assange a whistleblower or journalist is ‘dangerous’: CSU intelligence expert
Calling Julian Assange a journalist, or even a whistleblower, is reckless at best and dangerous at worst, according to a Charles Sturt University intelligence and security expert, who says doing so detracts from the important role those who truly deserve such labels play within society.
Please login below to view content or subscribe now.
What a disgraceful position to take on AProf Walsh’s part. Mr. Assange can be called a journalist and a wistleblower far more justifiably than most so-called” journalists” who are now gleefully piling up on him on the side of the state security apparatus. Because the information he and Wikileaks brought to public scrutiny are far more important and even critical for informed consent by the public – the main functional characteristic of a true democracy. In fact, the need for Wikileaks type journalism is now more urgent than ever before, given that mainstream media turned themselves into an extension of the national security state. When supposedly democratic governments, aided by media, shamelessly lie to their subjects, spy on them and illegally invade their privacy, even kill them without much critical scrutiny from offical journalists, we need more real journalists like Julian Assange. We also understand why those governments hate Mr. Assange so much and are prepared to go to any lengths to hunt him down and to imprison him for the rest of his life. That is why it is so shameful and disgraceful to take their side in this struggle for truth and transparency.
Are you serioulsly telling me that the innocent people murdered by the military, in this case USA, should not have been exposed by Assange? As to how he got the information, I do not know,but I would certainly not blame the messenger. Also I am not aware of any harm the release if such information has caused. I find this article biased.
I strongly disagree with most of the assertions in this article and wonder at its motivation.
For the sake of brevity, I’ll restrict my comments to just two points in this article.
“Assange released a lot of sensitive material from the Pentagon, which included names of people US intel agencies were using as sources or who were in some capacity working for the US military.”
The real question to ask addressing this point is: Why are Intelligence agencies so incompetent at protecting their informants and collaborators? Surely, the real leak-insight is to never cooperate with US intelligence.
The other tired old saw in this article is the one about ‘fair-and-balanced’ (wasn’t that a Fox News slogan?). How tedious reportage would become if every article on every issue took a ‘on-one-hand-but-then-on-the-other-hand’ line. Taking Assange to task over a failure of omission as you see it by not doing something that you think you might have done is absurd.
More oversight for the intelligence community? Surely, you’re joking?
We need a lot more individuals to stand up against the lies and the controlled mindset being referred to as Privacy – it is Government (for the people) and they should be transparent and honest, and rarely are.
Reading Julian Assange articles is something i will decide on and i will read what i like – that is my right and no Educational Bureaucratic view should every control. The future will decide how wrong he was – Russia was depicted and colluding with Trump, courts have confirmed this didn’t occur – media for months described this with lies and control.
He is not controlled media – that is what many respect.