Julian Assange walks out of CNN interviews

Another thing I just noticed on the journalist facebook page. And it is chilling somehow.

Like 45 min ago she did update with some explanations. Then came one more negative comment against her, but this one disappeared like 5 minutes ago and now her own explanation is back on top on her wall.

I let you guys imagine what it means... I have my own idea...

I think they were legitimate questions and i'm sure she was going to get to the leaks, no dobut. Assange should have at least sticked around a bit longer instead of walking off like that, i wonder if he has a temper.

She is right to "tax his person", because he could be a RAPIST HIMSELF. She is being a JOURNALIST and asking questions, so she shouldn't do her job? Him running out of the interview shows he is being a coward and when ANYONE questions Assange they are just smearing him? When people ask questions about RAPE in Iraq then it's ok to ask questions, but when it hits home to Assange it's just a smear campaign? Get real.

This to me actually lends credibility to Wikileaks. If they were a government front, this wouldn't happen. You can't have it both ways. It's clear that this woman was told to sacrifice this once in a lifetime chance, career making interview just to smear Wikileaks and Assange. If this leak was to drum up support for the government and war with Iran as some people have posed that's where it would have gone. This is pretty strong evidence to me that the U.S. isn't digging what WL is doing.

reply to post by thecinic


She was doing her job, may not be the best journalist but still. Of course most people on this site think that this was a set up to make him look bad, i think not. He doesn't have an excuse for walking out like that unless the allegations against him are true and he doesn't want to talk about it, which he clearly didn't.

reply to post by MareBellator


Well it must be already tough to be the victim of a smear campaign, especially something about abusing women. So put yourself in his shoes, he's here to talk something big and instead of that we get the trashy non-journalism instead.

Most probably at Wikileaks they had already predicted this kind of question could arise and had already decided that if it was the case then walk out... I have the feeling they knew it could be coming, if not from CNN, maybe somehow later from somewhere else.

That's how am feeling about it. I can't understand, with the release of war crimes, tortures, extremely high civilian death toll that a journalist could compromise his/her integrity by commiting such an off-topic ad hominem attack.
I mean it's kind like in the middle of 9/11 as it is happening and then you see a journalist making a joke in the middle "Hey look at the fireman covered in dust, he looks like a snowman ha ha !".

It was at least stupid, at worst a deliberate continuation of the smear campaign to minimize the file release impact.

reply to post by fortunofiasco


You're just as bad as she is. If everyone is so keen on lying, the truth will never see the light of day. But then again.. its not the truth others wish to share but an understanding of what they want others to believe.

You stated "with a written article by the same woman"

The link you provided says the woman contributed. Huge differance as anyone can write that info and state what ever they wish with tid bits of what others say.

She reminds me of a child, when they're asked not to touch something...

...and they look at you as if to say "I'm gonna touch it, just keep asking me not too"...

... And then BOOM they touch it.

The same way he was saying to keep on topic or he would walk out, she was like "I'm gonna talk about something irrelevant" until BOOM he walks out.

Originally posted by thecinic
She is right to "tax his person", because he could be a RAPIST HIMSELF. She is being a JOURNALIST and asking questions, so she shouldn't do her job?

edit on 24-10-2010 by thecinic because: (no reason given)

Are you joking? I think you are joking. If she was a real journalist she wouldn't be asking about his alleged crime (that has been brought up, dismissed, brought up, etc and is probably bunk) she would be asking about the leak. How can you not see that that is actual news and what she is bringing up is bulls**t? She had a chance to find out why he shared this information, what he hopes it will accomplish. She could have asked anything to the spokesperson for a group that is attempting to change the world.

Originally posted by Willbert
reply to post by fortunofiasco

 

You're just as bad as she is. If everyone is so keen on lying, the truth will never see the light of day. But then again.. its not the truth others wish to share but an understanding of what they want others to believe.

You stated "with a written article by the same woman"

The link you provided says the woman contributed. Huge differance as anyone can write that info and state what ever they wish with tid bits of what others say.

How about you got it backward ? The link does *not* say she contributed, the link says she's the *author*

The page says :

"WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange dismisses reports of internal strife From Atika Shubert, CNN Correspondent"

and then at the end

"CNN's Ashley Fantz contributed to this report."

You can check here : edition.cnn.com...

unless they edit it in the middle or since I posted it in the original post...

So please check your facts before you use personnal attacks against other forum posters :

Originally posted by Willbert
reply to post by fortunofiasco

 

You're just as bad as she is.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Originally posted by thecinic
She is right to "tax his person", because he could be a RAPIST HIMSELF. She is being a JOURNALIST and asking questions, so she shouldn't do her job?

edit on 24-10-2010 by thecinic because: (no reason given)

Are you joking? I think you are joking. If she was a real journalist she wouldn't be asking about his alleged crime (that has been brought up, dismissed, brought up, etc and is probably bunk) she would be asking about the leak. How can you not see that that is actual news and what she is bringing up is bulls**t? She had a chance to find out why he shared this information, what he hopes it will accomplish. She could have asked anything to the spokesperson for a group that is attempting to change the world.

So she is not a real journalist because she asked a question about an alleged crime? That is just like the alleged crimes that IRAQI'S were raped and tortoured I guesse none of it is true? Or do you just want to believe the parts you want?? Ask only the questions you want to ask?

NO questions asked about Assanges RAPE CHARGES, but ALL questions asked on Iraqi rape and tortoure charges??? Get real. Assange walking out of an interview discredits wikileaks and Assange if you want to believe it or not.

reply to post by fortunofiasco


As i've stated before, there is no way the interview would have ended without her asking him about the leaks, she was going to get to that. I agree that she should have stopped asking him personal questions about him and Wikileaks because it was making him uncomfortable, but thats no excuse to walk off like that.

Originally posted by MareBellator
reply to post by thecinic

 

She was doing her job, may not be the best journalist but still. Of course most people on this site think that this was a set up to make him look bad, i think not. He doesn't have an excuse for walking out like that unless the allegations against him are true and he doesn't want to talk about it, which he clearly didn't.

That doesn't make sense.
How does that make it true. He walked out because he was there to bring attention to and talk about the WL cause. They just released 400,000 secret docs and this woman tried to talk about his personal life. Julian Assange IS NOT Wikileaks, he's just their voice.

That was the most poorly set up interview I have ever seen with a CNN name on it.
She was completely unprepared, studders with her questions and the sound quality sucked,.
looks like it was in some cheap hotel.
LAME

Originally posted by MareBellator
reply to post by fortunofiasco

 

As i've stated before, there is no way the interview would have ended without her asking him about the leaks, she was going to get to that. I agree that she should have stopped asking him personal questions about him and Wikileaks because it was making him uncomfortable, but thats no excuse to walk off like that.

We can then agree to disagree on this.

EDIT : my bad I confused you with another poster, please accept my apologies MareBellator

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Originally posted by MareBellator
reply to post by thecinic

 

She was doing her job, may not be the best journalist but still. Of course most people on this site think that this was a set up to make him look bad, i think not. He doesn't have an excuse for walking out like that unless the allegations against him are true and he doesn't want to talk about it, which he clearly didn't.

That doesn't make sense.
How does that make it true. He walked out because he was there to bring attention to and talk about the WL cause. They just released 400,000 secret docs and this woman tried to talk about his personal life. Julian Assange IS NOT Wikileaks, he's just their voice.

True, you can't determine a person is guilty of something because they refuse to talk about allegations. That is ridiculous.

edit to add - if he is under investigation, the first thing his lawyer would have no doubt told him is to keep his mouth shut about the allegations. Anything he may say can be misconstrued to try and use against him. Under no circumstances should anyone guilty or innocent talk about charges made against them with other people while under investigation. Anyone should know that. I see nothing wrong with his refusing to answer the questions.

reply to post by thecinic

Ok lets say he rapes women and eats babies before sleep... how was Atika doing her job if they agreed to talk about "Wikileaks" and not Assange's hobby & diet, yet she kept asking about his personal life?

Intelligent people (if there is such a creature) do not want to hear about Assange's private life, this is not E! channel or Jerry Springer, its CNN. They want to hear about Wikileaks' recent disclosure - that was the subject.

How can you actually not see such blatantly obvious corruption of the CNN?

It's OK that you think Assange is guilty of rape but how is that more important than leaked cables?

Oh and ... Speedo? Lol... come on, lets not involve choice f sport equipment into the judgement as well.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


She could have stopped asking those questions under his requests, i just don't think walking off was is the best decision, even if the interview wasn't going well.

reply to post by MareBellator


No he walked out because they are ONLY allegations...if he is to be questioned on that subject it should be done in a COURTROOM. The whole point in the interview was regarding the documents. People deserve to know the truth about that, not about his personal life!

Its no wonder there are continual rumours surrounding this guy...just get to the point at hand and let others deal with other issues...simple

True, you can't determine a person is guilty of something because they refuse to talk about allegations. That is ridiculous.

Because if it was the case then the US govt would have then been guilty for good of 9/11 during the talk of the Iranian president at the UN :

www.youtube.com...

Do check around the 1:00 mark, when the iran president says 9/11 is an inside job : who's walking out here ?