Note that Assange clearly posits himself as a member of the media, a claim that has been the subject of much debate since WikiLeaks first began leaking. Earlier in the op-ed, Assange elaborates on his idea of WikiLeaks as a vital part of a vital media—claims he was making less surely just months ago, but which now might prove advantageous in attracting support.
WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?
Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.
He signs off as WikiLeaks’s editor-in-chief.
I do not know and did not study Swedish law, having been qualified in England and in the Caribbean, but let's use reasonable sense:-
The Swedish law reads: " He who lays hands on or by means of shooting from a firearm, throwing of stones, noise or in any other way harasses another person will be sentenced for harassment to fines or imprisonment for up to one year."
Q. Mr. Assange - you are accused of harassment – what do you have to say in response to the charge?
A. I had no weapon and did not harass anyone.
Q. I put it to you that you are being less than frank with this honourable court.
A. I reject your suggestion Sir.
Q. You did have a dangerous weapon in use at the material time Mr. Assange.
A. No Sir!
Q. But there is no dispute that you had sex with these two women – how could you in all honesty deny that there was an attack. Mr. Assange I urge you at this point to take responsibility for the misuse of your harassing rod – what do you say to that?
A. It was not a harassing one Sir – it was very friendly and fully accommodated one by both ladies Sir – and that is the truth! Actually, by reference to the law – I laid a hand on it, they both did too – I worked them both over without any harassment – and all in all relative to the charge – I did shoot my “firearm” at the end in the most pleasurable way Sir. BUT, IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES - NOT GUILTY AS CHARGED!
THE SYSTEM SHOULD BE TOLD TO GO FUCK ITSELF ON THIS ONE!
CB www.globaljusticeonline.com
P.S. Did the people elect the officials - or – are we all blindly subservient to them wot hold the power? You decide for yourself. You decide -many lie, steal trillions, fabricate reasons to start wars – and you think that the Wikileaks information is dangerous and that it is not your right to know? Consider yourself a freethinker? – maybe not.
#1 Posted by Courtenay Barnett, CJR on Wed 8 Dec 2010 at 08:48 PM
I'd like to hear a remotely convincing argument as to why Wikileaks is NOT media. How can it not be? It's breaking news to the public, which appears in newspapers and on the Web. If Assange and Co were stealing secrets and passing them to another government, there might be a case for those who want to paint them as something other than media. But they're not doing that - they're doing the job of media. Only better.
So what about them is not media? The fact that they don't charge?
#2 Posted by OD, CJR on Fri 10 Dec 2010 at 07:03 PM