• BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, the whole “Wikileaks is a Russian asset” story is a farce used to unjustly discredit them, since they’ve published some extremely damning documents.

            • Bananigans@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              It might be because RT gave Assange his talk show on state run tv, RT claimed WikiLeaks as a partner, Assange dumped the 2016 emails after Trump’s “Russia if your listening” statement, or because after Assange claimed the hacker that provided WikiLeaks with those 2016 emails wasn’t Russian, he was.

              If you step back and squint, it kind of looks like he was working with Russia because of all the work with Russia.

            • TheFriar@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I mean, that’s not entirely true. Yeah, there has been a long history of US based organizations, particularly governmental ones, trying to stop Wikileaks, capture Snowden, and generally just punish whistleblowers so brutally is deters anyone else from doing it.

              But that doesn’t mean that as the years went on, the mission of Wikileaks changed as they seemed to adopt a particular goal that wasn’t just “shining a light on corruption.”

              So it’s not as simple as “it’s a Russian asset” and it’s not as simple as “they’re being smeared for spilling govt secrets.” It’s a mixture of the two, but not only, and not entirely.

              • SLfgb@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                You’re right, it does not mean the mission of WikiLeaks changed. It clearly hasn’t. They still have never had to retract a single document or story.

                  • SLfgb@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago
                    1. The Clinton emails were first released by the State Department under FOIA. (WikiLeaks were first to publish the different archives of the Podesta email leak and the DNC email leak.) Both WL and the Wall Street Journal each made the Clinton emails into a searchable database.
                    2. WikiLeaks has never had to retract a single document or story.
          • ealoe@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yes and no; technically they’re an independent entity but they’ve been used as useful idiots by Russian intelligence so many times at this point they’re effectively Russian