WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to his homeland Australia aboard a charter jet on Wednesday, hours after pleading guilty to obtaining and publishing U.S. military secrets in a deal with Justice Department prosecutors that concludes a drawn-out legal saga.

The criminal case of international intrigue, which had played out for years, came to a surprise end in a most unusual setting with Assange, 52, entering his plea in a U.S. district court in Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands. The American commonwealth in the Pacific is relatively close to Assange’s native Australia and accommodated his desire to avoid entering the continental United States.

Assange was accused of receiving and publishing hundreds of thousands of war logs and diplomatic cables that included details of U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. His activities drew an outpouring of support from press freedom advocates, who heralded his role in bringing to light military conduct that might otherwise have been concealed from view and warned of a chilling effect on journalists. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.

Assange raised his right fist as he emerged for the plane and his supporters at the Canberra airport cheered from a distance. Dressed in the same suit and tie he wore during his earlier court appearance, he embraced his wife Stella Assange and father John Shipton who were waiting on the tarmac.

  • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m sorry if this is a bit too unrelated but would you say the same about Snowden?

    I’m not as well informed on Assange but I tend to find the “espionage” criticism lacking, personally, since it seems to mainly favor the generally terrible foreign policy actions of the US empire and not so much the people of the US who are for the most part against those actions but have little recourse what with the 2 party system and having a plutocratic system of government

      • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oh weird, that was not the impression I got from the many comments you made criticizing them for their brave actions.

        I would tend to blame any negative fallout on the US government, personally. If they weren’t committing atrocities regular people wouldn’t have had to take the huge risk/be put at risk.

        It’s like getting upset at a victim of police brutality for not working with the police

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Their actions were brave until they became clouded by fame. Then both of them made it about leverage and made crucial mistakes that lead to threatened lives. I supported them in the past, prior to their dangerous missteps. I no longer comment in support of either of them.

          A good example of responsible whistleblowing would be from the recent resignations from the Department of Defense. They gave very detailed accounts of information suppression while they were tasked with collecting information on civilian casualties in Gaza. None of the information they disclosed exposed confidential informants or put lives at risk.

          It’s not just possible to be a responsible whistleblower, it’s imperative.

          • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re saying they should’ve just resigned? How would we have learned about PRISM without evidence?

            I don’t know what you’re referring to about info suppression. Did we learn anything or just that we don’t know everything? How is that more helpful? Or, for who is it more helpful?

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              No, I’m saying they shouldn’t have left the names unredacted in their leaks. That put people in danger.

              Assange was a journalist. He wasn’t a government official.

              • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Do you think they could’ve done that and chose not to?

                It seems like you’re saying they shouldn’t have done what they did because it wasn’t executed perfectly which feels awfully like what MLK was criticizing in his letter from a Birmingham jail, people that support things in theory but never in reality and that always seem to solely criticize the actions/methods of those fighting for justice

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Absolutely. Assange especially. He is fully aware of the redaction standards in journalism.

                  They both started out as legitimate whistleblowers, disclosing government corruption responsibly. Once they became famous/infamous, they both went down the slippery slope of power corruption and risked people’s lives for clicks. I have no respect for it.