• School_Lunch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    You have to ask? Who has Assange never released any information on even though they are known for corruption…

      • toasteecup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t be his handler, I clearly am! I handle him so good people don’t even know my name

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        “No, no, Mongostein. No this was Assange, and I moved on him very heavily in fact I took him out furniture shopping. He wanted to get some furniture. I said I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture. I moved on him like a bitch. I couldn’t get there and he was imprisoned. Then all-of-a-sudden I see him, he’s now got the big phony tits and everything. He’s totally changed his look.”

    • Blake [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Occam’s razor says you’re wrong. If we take the idea that Assange is a radical journalist who would publish any juicy evidence of state wrongdoing, regardless of source or target, then it doesn’t take much more thought as to why foreign states would leak military intelligence through Assange to reduce popular support for the activities of the defence apparatus of a rival power. It’s one additional step to add “and also he is directly controlled by the foreign state”. Why would they need to control him if he does what they want without them having to go to any special effort?

      And the west wouldn’t have much motivation to leak their Intel to wiki leaks, because wiki leaks is a western institution - they can just use their normal propaganda outlets in their own nations - and the population of foreign nations would be better targeted by some source in the target nation.

      This is just conspiratorial stuff. You need some better evidence - for example, that Julian Assange had good actionable Intel on a country but refused to disclose it without a good reason - to prove that he is acting for the express benefit of a particular state actor.