Julian Assange - Why the Unquestioning Support? Let's have a serious discussion.

NOTE: I am neither condoning nor condemning Jullian Assange and WikiLeaks in this topic. The point of this topic is to plead for the ATS community to scrutinize Assange as they would any other person or topic that is discussed here.


"Deny Ignorance" seems to be fading here. Julian Assange has become the Jesus of the WikiLeaks religion, and as such he seems not to be subject to the same scrutiny that other subjects receive without question. But why is this? What is so special about Julian Assange that makes questioning him or his motives frowned upon here on ATS? Why is it that people who dare criticize him are labeled trolls or disfinfo agents?


Julian Assange

I think it's safe to say that world governments and the media aren't trusted here. We're talking tens of thousands of people whose opinions and versions of events are heavily scrutinized and debated endlessly. However, the moment Assange, just one single person. speaks or acts, an alarmingly large amount of people seem to take his words and motives at face value.

Julian Assange is human like everyone else. He is capable of lying. He is capable of having an agenda. He is capable of acting out of self-interest. We just don't know. We don't know if his motives are altruistic or sinister. We don't know whether he truly wants to get the truth to get out or if he just enjoys the attention. We don't know whether he is a concerned citizen of the world or a CIA/Israeli/etc.plant. We don't know if whether he actually needs the donation money or if he's trying to make a profit. What we DO know is that he has aided in the leaking classified information. However, this and his lifestyle on the move don't tell us anything about Assange as a person. We don't know who Assange really is, mostly due to his own efforts People are trusting him on faith alone, which goes completely against what ATS stands for.


Rape Accusations

This one really gets me. Assange is accused of rape, says it was consensual, and that seems to be enough for people. While I'm not going to offer my opinion on the matter, I do have to ask this: Why couldn't he have raped somebody? Most criminals claim innocence, but anyone who stops to think should know that just claiming innocence doesn't mean anything. Some people argue that he has too much to lose, that he's "too smart" to do such a thing. These arguments don't make much sense, because history has shown us that life events and future prospects do not prevent crime. Consider these two cases:

-When I was in high school, there was a popular kid (whom I'll call 'James' to protect his true identity) that
pretty much everyone knew or at least knew of. He was the star quarterback of the football team and, unlike many other high school athletes, James had true potential. He was practically guaranteed a sports scholarship to his dream college and, if he had continued to improve at football, had a realistic shot at the NFL. Everyone, including the teachers, liked him. James is currently in prison for raping two women.

-Dennis Rader is a college graduate with a BA in Administration of Justice. He married in 1971 and had two children. He held numerous jobs over the years including installing alarm systems for ADT and acting as a census field operations supervisor. Dennis was a cub scout leader and a 30-year member of Christ Lutheran Church, of which he was elected president. He was very well respected by his community. However, Dennis Rader is better known by another name: The BTK Killer. Rader stalked and murdered ten women and was planning to kill again when he was finally caught a few years ago.


The point is that we CANNOT take Julian Assange at face value because a person's public appearance is not indicative of his or her private life. Assange is subject to the same personal failings as anyone else. Maybe he raped those women, maybe it's a smear campaign. However, refusing to acknowledge that there is even a small chance that he is guilty just because he is Julian Assange is not what ATS is about. I'm not asking that everyone start believing the accusations - just that people consider both sides of the story. "I didn't do it" wouldn't fly in any other situation, so why should it be accepted in his case?

Closing Remarks and Questions

We don't know Assange and we don't know his motives. Trusting him just because he runs WikiLeaks is an act of faith alone because there is not enough information about him out there to make sound judgment. This faith in Assange, the unquestioning acceptance of him as an altruistic bastion of truth, cannot be accepted without serious, reasoned debate and analysis of every piece of information we can acquire about him. On a website that relishes discussions concerning deception on the part of tens of thousands of people throughout the world, trusting this one person so easily is jarringly out of place. People who are otherwise slow to trust anyone else seem to have a blind spot for Assange. If we're ever to make any progress towards finding out what he and WikiLeaks really are, this blind spot needs to go. Julian Assange NEEDS to be scrutinized as we scrutinize government and media officials.

So as I wrap this post up, I have a question for you. Please seriously consider it and answer them honestly so we can get an idea of why Assange is either trusted or distrusted here on ATS.


1. What is it about Julian Assange that makes you trust or distrust him? Please be specific and provide evidence/examples where possible.

2. If you trust Assange, what would it take for you to lose that trust? If you distrust Assange, what would it take for you to trust him?

3. Think about your answer #2 and replace Assange with a teacher you've had, your favorite actor/actress, and President Obama. How do the standards with which you're considering Assange different in regard to these three other people?


It's your turn, ATS. Let's turn this into a serious discussion and prove to ourselves and the outside world that we can consider world events on an intellectual level. Peace.

reply to post by Tsuki-no-Hikari


I think I would have to know him personally to answer your question..
There;s no way I can just trust what I'm told by the MSM..
But I haven't heard anything yet to make me disstrust him..

Assange should have been replaced at day one of the rape-charges. He would have benefited from note being prejudged in and by media.

The whole of Wikileaks is based upon one mini dvd-r with documents from one single source. If Assange go down as a martyr, Wikileaks can get away with not having to follow up with providing new leaks.

On the other hand, whatever happens to him, the disk-image is out there, and the decryption password will probably only be published if he is taken down... -and that would be a great excuse and method to get the compete leaks published, uncensored!

Excellent question If I say so myself. To me the unquestioing support is caused by the view of most people that the US has kept to many secrets for to long, and have consistently compromised our moral standing at the end of the day.

Julian Assange is "david" to the US as Goliath. Assange managed to do what even the Soviet Union could not do, which is to compromise US National Security and air the dirty laundry for the world to see.

As far as the rape claims go, people are too quick to see conspiracies in everything. Instead of giving the benefiet of the doubt to these 2 ladies, they are immidately labeled prostitutes, whores, money grubbers, gold diggers etc etc. To add insult to injury the reason for labeling them as such is because the same people who see conspiracies in everything automatically assume the US is beind the charges, and somehow pressured the ladies and the Swedish Government to act on it.

Any type of information that comes up against Assange is immidiately dismissed because people are going to have a hard time accepting their God might be a mere mortal after all.

It is less about the stated goal of Wikileaks, to expose information to end the war, and more about people who feel they have a right to know everything our Government does when it comes to back room deals, classified information, etc.

Essentially it boils down to a group of individuals who want to be in the know, asserting they have that right (although I still have yet to see any valid reasons for their arguments but heres hoping someone can explain it).

This is nothing more than a bash America once again routine. If it were anything but, these exact same groups screaming at the top of their lungs against the US would also be screaming at the top of their lungs over Britiain, France, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, Turkey etc etc and the manner in which they conduct their affairs.

Since they don't, and knowing full well some of these other countries have done things worse than the US has done, speaks volumes in terms of the ulterior motives.

Julian Assange is to his side of the street and his followers as George W. Bush is to his side of the street and his followers.

For Julian Assange to lecture the United States on acting in a responsible manner is nothing but a hypocritical laugh riot when compared to his owns actions of releasing these documents without screening them first, redacting personal information, or even caring about the end result once the info is out there.

The Diplomati Cables that have been relased are intresting in the fact it appears to be placing many countries into the limelight in a worse manner than the fact they came from the US. To this end, you start to see comments along the lines of "I dont beleive the authoenticity of the Diplomatic cables", the CIA released the Diplo cables etc etc.

The reason for this?

The Diplomatic cables affect countries other than the US, and since they dont place the US in the bad light others were hoping, then they must be fake.

People who support Assange apparently do not grasp the concept that the word is a dangerous place. Nor do I think they understand what Assanges actions are going to do on a long term basis.

The feeling of being in the loop to these people, selfish as it is, is paramount to them, and all other consequences be damned.

I believe that Assange is simply a very small cogwheel in a very big engine, over which he has no control.
Mr Assange has now served his purpose, or, has overstepped his mark, or has forgotten his role and so must be silenced before he ruins whatever, for whoever.

If he doesnt have an accident then he will be shown to be just another crazy, who people will forget after a few months.
From time to time he will try a new "WIKILEAKS HAS NEW PAPERS", but it will interest nobody.

Its because the anagram of his name:

Julian assange: angel jas in usa.

JAS is an acronym to Just A Second.


Now, seriously, i think its because people need some idols/heros to show them what to do. At least people belives him. Works like a modern robin hood imo.

I like the guy, but i dont trust him 100%

My opinion of him may be a tad bit biased, but that is what you asked for, right?
I do not, 100% in any form, trust the MSM, or the true agenda of any government.
Taking this into consideration when relating to him and his rape charges, with also contributing the fact that pretty much every government is/will be gunning for him...it seems too convenient that he is wanted for questioning. Not to mention the fact, (please correct me if I'm mistaken) it wasnt until this week that Interpol made him 'WANTED'. Granted, he is wanted as a witness, but none-the-less he is wanted. To me that coincides a little to perfectly as the announcement of the cables being released. He has been hiding underground for a while now, and rightfully for a reason.
Before passing judgment, I will my envision myself in his shoes and see how I would react.
Wanted by many governments, (didn't Canada say today/yesterday that he should be 'assassinated'), that more than have the ability to just make him disappear against his will. They dont know where he is and need to draw him out, what better way than to destroy his image in this 'accused is guilty unless proven otherwise' mentality that most of the world have, by stating he is being investigated for what is probably the second worst crime imaginable (next to child molestation) to most.
If I was in his shoes, Im not showing my face either and let my lawyers figure out if I need be showing my face for trial. And not until. Life isn't a movie, its real...and corruption does exist.
To summarize....its all too convenient.

Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
NOTE: I am neither condoning nor condemning Jullian Assange and WikiLeaks in this topic. The point of this topic is to plead for the ATS community to scrutinize Assange as they would any other person or topic that is discussed here.


"Deny Ignorance" seems to be fading here. Julian Assange has become the Jesus of the WikiLeaks religion, and as such he seems not to be subject to the same scrutiny that other subjects receive without question. But why is this? What is so special about Julian Assange that makes questioning him or his motives frowned upon here on ATS? Why is it that people who dare criticize him are labeled trolls or disfinfo agents?


Julian Assange

I think it's safe to say that world governments and the media aren't trusted here. We're talking tens of thousands of people whose opinions and versions of events are heavily scrutinized and debated endlessly. However, the moment Assange, just one single person. speaks or acts, an alarmingly large amount of people seem to take his words and motives at face value.

Julian Assange is human like everyone else. He is capable of lying. He is capable of having an agenda. He is capable of acting out of self-interest. We just don't know. We don't know if his motives are altruistic or sinister. We don't know whether he truly wants to get the truth to get out or if he just enjoys the attention. We don't know whether he is a concerned citizen of the world or a CIA/Israeli/etc.plant. We don't know if whether he actually needs the donation money or if he's trying to make a profit. What we DO know is that he has aided in the leaking classified information. However, this and his lifestyle on the move don't tell us anything about Assange as a person. We don't know who Assange really is, mostly due to his own efforts People are trusting him on faith alone, which goes completely against what ATS stands for.


Rape Accusations

This one really gets me. Assange is accused of rape, says it was consensual, and that seems to be enough for people. While I'm not going to offer my opinion on the matter, I do have to ask this: Why couldn't he have raped somebody? Most criminals claim innocence, but anyone who stops to think should know that just claiming innocence doesn't mean anything. Some people argue that he has too much to lose, that he's "too smart" to do such a thing. These arguments don't make much sense, because history has shown us that life events and future prospects do not prevent crime. Consider these two cases:

-When I was in high school, there was a popular kid (whom I'll call 'James' to protect his true identity) that
pretty much everyone knew or at least knew of. He was the star quarterback of the football team and, unlike many other high school athletes, James had true potential. He was practically guaranteed a sports scholarship to his dream college and, if he had continued to improve at football, had a realistic shot at the NFL. Everyone, including the teachers, liked him. James is currently in prison for raping two women.

-Dennis Rader is a college graduate with a BA in Administration of Justice. He married in 1971 and had two children. He held numerous jobs over the years including installing alarm systems for ADT and acting as a census field operations supervisor. Dennis was a cub scout leader and a 30-year member of Christ Lutheran Church, of which he was elected president. He was very well respected by his community. However, Dennis Rader is better known by another name: The BTK Killer. Rader stalked and murdered ten women and was planning to kill again when he was finally caught a few years ago.


The point is that we CANNOT take Julian Assange at face value because a person's public appearance is not indicative of his or her private life. Assange is subject to the same personal failings as anyone else. Maybe he raped those women, maybe it's a smear campaign. However, refusing to acknowledge that there is even a small chance that he is guilty just because he is Julian Assange is not what ATS is about. I'm not asking that everyone start believing the accusations - just that people consider both sides of the story. "I didn't do it" wouldn't fly in any other situation, so why should it be accepted in his case?

Thats the wrong person to scrutinize.
He is not the creator of the information, he is not the spys or diplomats... he is not even the disseminator. He is merely the conduit. Focusing on him is focusing on the wrong things. Its like focusing on who makes ATS rather than the content.

Don't shoot the messenger. To do so falls into the governments trap.

I have watched several of his interviews and he is a perecptive thinker that is more than willing to stand up for what he beliefs in....and this day of age that is an admiral quality in itself...who else is putting there life on the line for what they beleif in....
Personaly i a frim beleiver in free speach and truth, these are of paramount importance. There placement in our society is long overdue...

kx