On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:40 AM John Sundman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have changed my opinion on Assange and Wikileaks. I used to think > Assange was a noble guy performing a useful function; I suspected that the > charges brought against him were part of an entrapment operation run by > U.S. backed intelligence services. > I too have changed my mind about Assange. And this change of mind preceded the 2016 elections by quite some time. Wikileaks itself: I am ambivalent. As a platform for propagating some of this information, I am fine with. But as an entity sometimes actively seeking leaks (See the recent news on Trump Junior's direct tweet exchange with Wikileaks) I am less behind. > Which raises the questions of Snowden and Manning, and of the journalist > Glenn Greenwald. > > I continue to believe that both Snowden and Manning acted with patriotic > motives. They both reported horrendous, illegal actions and activities of > United States agencies that would still be unknown had they not brought > them to light. I think the Republic was well served by their disclosures — > even though they are, of course, associated with WikiLeaks ( I won’t go > into the complicated history of Snowden/Wikileaks or Manning/WikiLeaks). > Snowden, I am still fully behind. Manning, I am more ambivalent about. > I don’t know what to make of Glenn Greenwald. > I don't always agree with Greenwald's positions, but I do like having him as a voice in the conversation. He is asking important questions about the Democrats that are often swept under the carpet when faces with the catastrophe that is Trump. Thaths
