Do you think that just because Julian Assange worked with Shamir that he shared all or even any of his views? It seems that Julian cared more for Shamir's efficiency than for the intellectual soundness and validity of his positions.Assange's association with Shamir is a matter of record. People have left Wikileaks because Assange associated with Shamir. Even people on Assange's side have attacked him for working with Shamir and hiring his son.
And what does this have to do with Assange? This is pure guilt by association. Shamir may be a terrible person, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Assange is, or that Shamir did any of that with Assange's approval.Shamir sent Wikileaks-gathered cables to fucking Belarus, the nastiest and most repressive country in Europe, so that the people found talking to Americans could be tortured and murdered.
Which is why it has leaks on a great many non-Western countries, apparently.A privacy-advocacy organization acting legitimately would never do this kind of shit. Wikileaks does it because it's not a privacy-advocacy organization, it's a hostile front for foreign intelligence services whose goal is to weaken the free world.
As an aside, I dislike the bloated, melodramatic tone of that entire paragraph you just made.
It doesn't matter, because these were still opinion pieces, not actual news.And those Guardian pieces I linked were from the early '10s, when Assange was a darling of the Left. They had nothing to do with Trump or Clinton.
And considering that you can tell the slant of a news site from the slant of its opinion pieces, I'm going to off on a limb here and say that Assange was never really that hot in, at the very least, the left-wing media in the UK.
But that's just me here. So let's see what our Kiwi News Expert @It's HK-47 Has to say about it.