Wikileaks Founder Walks Off CNN Interview

By Pelliciari on October 25, 2010 in News 49

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange walks out of an interview with CNN reporter Atika Shubert after being asked personal questions.

Atika Shubert Interview, CNN, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks

Has Apple Killed the CD?

Two-Thirds of the West African Nation of Benin is Underwater

Haystack

I guess he only believes in transparency when it’s other people’s secrets.
Haystack

I guess he only believes in transparency when it’s other people’s secrets.
Haystack

I guess he only believes in transparency when it’s other people’s secrets.
- Peetwilson
  
  He is goddamn right for walking out… instead of the interview being about the information included in the latest “leaks” it becomes simply about him…?? We need to be talking about the WAR, NOT him.
  - Haystack
    
    I think we have a legitimate right to ask questions about an organization that is publishing our military secrets, and I find it hypocritical of him not to accept scrutiny for having done so. The more I see of him, the more I feel like he’s cut from the same mold as George W. Bush; neither seem to feel any obligation to account for decisions they make which impact American lives.
    - Hadrian999
      
      you have the right to ask, he has no obligation to answer.
      as a former serviceman I hope he keeps it up, everyone in this “democracy”
      needs to know whats really going on in this sham war.
      - Haystack
        
        His failure to answer just doesn’t inspire me with confidence in him as the arbiter of what information is safe to release and what is not. People do need to know the real state of the war. There is also information that needs to remain secret so that people don’t get killed. Is he qualified to make the distinction? Does he really care, or is he an egomaniac with a god complex?
        
        When he was asked about the possibility of the leaked info harming e.g., an informant, he gave this stale, legalistic response about how wikileaks would review their policies if a death could be proven to have resulted from one of their leaks. I’d expect to hear a statement like that from Monsanto, but not a conscience-driven anti-war activist who might be expected to feel anxiety over something which could potentially result in the loss of human life.
        
        The arrogant indifference he displays has led me to think the worst of him.
      - E.B. Wolf
        
        The policy of secrecy as extensive as these wars and the resulting surveillance state have no place in a free society. Regardless of the justifications given, no democracy can withstand such a concentration of power coupled with a total lack of public accountability.
      - Hadrian999
        
        the war is resulting in a catastrophic loss in life already these people
        who are at risk are killing people, destroying lives, you earn your pay killing it’s hard to
        feel sorry when they reap what they sow. when I was doing that job it’s what I expected.
      - Tunaghost
        
        It’s not just soldiers at risk from leaking sensitive information, though. Questioning how dude is a fair judge of what will or will not get people killed (frankly, I’m not sure how a case could be made that he is at all in a position to judge) is pretty damn important. We’re all just weighing the benefit of wikileaks against the possible danger to both US soldiers and their civilian support and civilians in general.
      - emperorreagan
        
        The US already has shown quite a bit of indifference to protecting not only its informants in Iraq & Afghanistan, but also people who were willing to openly help the US in support roles such as translators. The US government has also shown itself to be incapable of making the distinction between what should be secret and what should be public. The government has opted to hide information on the basis of hiding wrong doing/war crimes, corruption, and the futility of the wars rather than withhold information just to protect soldiers and/or informants. I would frankly trust this random dude before I would trust my government to determine what should be held back from the public.A particularly cynical anti-war activist also might note that the only way the wars are likely to end is public outcry over the deaths of American soldiers (or the formal bankruptcy of the US), so protecting anyone in the theater of operations doesn’t necessarily jive with the desire for the wars to end. Americans seem to be immune to the knowledge that we’re throwing money into a black hole with respect to defense and war spending, but American soldiers dying for nothing will sway public opinion.
      - Eatmuh
        
        No.
        
        1. The information he walked out on is not only personal but also part of an active court case. No one should speak under those circumstances, so it doesn’t inspire me with confidence that you have a objective viewpoint.
        
        2. So people don’t get killed… really… really.
        
        3. If they are going to keep doing what they’re doing then wikileaks needs to be very careful how they represent themselves and it is an important question, whether an event was a direct result of a leak, is it not? Just because punditry says it so doesn’t make it so.
        
        4. Well, you would expect everyone who heard what is stated in the leaks to feel anxiety about the loss of human life, THATS THE DAMN POINT! The fact that he is keeping calm means nothing, he has been privy to this information for long enough in advance to swallow it.
      - Tunaghost
        
        I’m not sure why you’re questioning whether or not sensitive information can get people killed. That’s not even debatable.
      - Andrew
        
        Methinks starting the war in the first place is what really costs lives, not revealing the truth about it.
      - Tunaghost
        
        I think you may be seriously underestimating how easily sensitive information can get people killed. Haystack is correct, there is a huge risk that the information he has revealed can and will be used to get people killed. That’s not really debatable. Obviously not all the information that is classified is done so because it is potentially dangerous (I’m sure we all agree that there’s a fair amount of ass-covering), but questioning how exactly he’s qualified to judge is not only reasonable but essential.
      - Andrew
        
        Considering that these documents relate to torture, rapes, and the killing of civilians, I don’t really care about most the criminals and accomplices who might get killed because of their release. I’m not a big supporter of government secrecy, nor of governments’ liars and killers. And I don’t trust Assange any less than I do the intelligence community.
    - E.B. Wolf
      
      If his reaction was in response to questions about the dangers of releasing the documents, I would say you’ve got a point. But the reporter was focused on Assange’s personal issues, not questions about the organization.
    - rtb61
      
      Typical gossip bull. Who gives a rats about Julian, this is about the documents. What’s next Julian forged 400,000 documents that’s the kind of crap gossip mongering interview are leading too.
      100,000 people die and the interviewer is worried about accusations without charges, pregnant women die onto the way to giving birth because panicked husbands don’t stop quickly enough at check points.
Peetwilson

He is goddamn right for walking out… instead of the interview being about the information included in the latest “leaks” it becomes simply about him…?? We need to be talking about the WAR, NOT him.
Haystack

I think we have a legitimate right to ask questions about an organization that is publishing our military secrets, and I find it hypocritical of him not to accept scrutiny for having done so. The more I see of him, the more I feel like he’s cut from the same mold as George W. Bush; neither seem to feel any obligation to account for decisions they make which impact American lives.
Haystack

I think we have a legitimate right to ask questions about an organization that is publishing our military secrets, and I find it hypocritical of him not to accept scrutiny for having done so. The more I see of him, the more I feel like he’s cut from the same mold as George W. Bush; neither seem to feel any obligation to account for decisions they make which impact American lives.
Hadrian999

you have the right to ask, he has no obligation to answer.
as a former serviceman I hope he keeps it up, everyone in this “democracy”
needs to know whats really going on in this sham war.
Haystack

His failure to answer just doesn’t inspire me with confidence in him as the arbiter of what information is safe to release and what is not. People do need to know the real state of the war. There is also information that needs to remain secret so that people don’t get killed. Is he qualified to make the distinction? Does he really care, or is he an egomaniac with a god complex?

When he was asked about the possibility of the leaked info harming e.g., an informant, he gave this stale, legalistic response about how wikileaks would review their policies if a death could be proven to have resulted from one of their leaks. I’d expect to hear a statement like that from Monsanto, but not a conscience-driven anti-war activist who might be expected to feel anxiety over something which could potentially result in the loss of human life.

The arrogant indifference he displays has led me to think the worst of him.
Haystack

His failure to answer just doesn’t inspire me with confidence in him as the arbiter of what information is safe to release and what is not. People do need to know the real state of the war. There is also information that needs to remain secret so that people don’t get killed. Is he qualified to make the distinction? Does he really care, or is he an egomaniac with a god complex?

When he was asked about the possibility of the leaked info harming e.g., an informant, he gave this stale, legalistic response about how wikileaks would review their policies if a death could be proven to have resulted from one of their leaks. I’d expect to hear a statement like that from Monsanto, but not a conscience-driven anti-war activist who might be expected to feel anxiety over something which could potentially result in the loss of human life.

The arrogant indifference he displays has led me to think the worst of him.
STRUMMINGBABE

This man is a Hero who I, Dustin Coady Grappe, support, a rock musician and welding student at college, that he is shedding light on the true costs of the wars overseas in the name of liberation and democracy, winning hearts and minds. He is bringing the true seriousness of the blood being shed for our country over there, and the man is a patriot and a hero and any man like that is a friend of mine. Took the time to log on to post comment. Go America!
- Virgendelasvacas
  
  You are really dumb. I’m going to go alert 4chan of your post here. Enjoy your 400 anchovy pizzas.
STRUMMINGBABE

This man is a Hero who I, Dustin Coady Grappe, support, a rock musician and welding student at college, that he is shedding light on the true costs of the wars overseas in the name of liberation and democracy, winning hearts and minds. He is bringing the true seriousness of the blood being shed for our country over there, and the man is a patriot and a hero and any man like that is a friend of mine. Took the time to log on to post comment. Go America!
STRUMMINGBABE

This man is a Hero who I, Dustin Coady Grappe, support, a rock musician and welding student at college, that he is shedding light on the true costs of the wars overseas in the name of liberation and democracy, winning hearts and minds. He is bringing the true seriousness of the blood being shed for our country over there, and the man is a patriot and a hero and any man like that is a friend of mine. Took the time to log on to post comment. Go America!
Silas D.

this information contained in the Wikileaks release is what’s important, the interviewer was attempting to derail the interview from the get-go. It’s really pathetic how easily people become misguided and concern themselves with petty issues. The REAL issue is WAR! Wikileaks has shed a huge amount of light on the realities of this and deserves credit where it’s due. It takes courage to do what this organization has done for the world, it also takes courage to know where to draw the line and walk. That is not cowardly, he stated to her very clearly that if she continued along the path that she was, he would walk. Very disrespectful on her part, mainstream media uses this tactic all the time to divert attention. If you can’t see this people, go back to your TELL-A-VISION for your daily dose of PROGRAMMING.
Silas D.

this information contained in the Wikileaks release is what’s important, the interviewer was attempting to derail the interview from the get-go. It’s really pathetic how easily people become misguided and concern themselves with petty issues. The REAL issue is WAR! Wikileaks has shed a huge amount of light on the realities of this and deserves credit where it’s due. It takes courage to do what this organization has done for the world, it also takes courage to know where to draw the line and walk. That is not cowardly, he stated to her very clearly that if she continued along the path that she was, he would walk. Very disrespectful on her part, mainstream media uses this tactic all the time to divert attention. If you can’t see this people, go back to your TELL-A-VISION for your daily dose of PROGRAMMING.
Silas D.

this information contained in the Wikileaks release is what’s important, the interviewer was attempting to derail the interview from the get-go. It’s really pathetic how easily people become misguided and concern themselves with petty issues. The REAL issue is WAR! Wikileaks has shed a huge amount of light on the realities of this and deserves credit where it’s due. It takes courage to do what this organization has done for the world, it also takes courage to know where to draw the line and walk. That is not cowardly, he stated to her very clearly that if she continued along the path that she was, he would walk. Very disrespectful on her part, mainstream media uses this tactic all the time to divert attention. If you can’t see this people, go back to your TELL-A-VISION for your daily dose of PROGRAMMING.
E.B. Wolf

If his reaction was in response to questions about the dangers of releasing the documents, I would say you’ve got a point. But the reporter was focused on Assange’s personal issues, not questions about the organization.
E.B. Wolf

If his reaction was in response to questions about the dangers of releasing the documents, I would say you’ve got a point. But the reporter was focused on Assange’s personal issues, not questions about the organization.
E.B. Wolf

The policy of secrecy as extensive as these wars and the resulting surveillance state have no place in a free society. Regardless of the justifications given, no democracy can withstand such a concentration of power coupled with a total lack of public accountability.
E.B. Wolf

The policy of secrecy as extensive as these wars and the resulting surveillance state have no place in a free society. Regardless of the justifications given, no democracy can withstand such a concentration of power coupled with a total lack of public accountability.
Hadrian999

the war is resulting in a catastrophic loss in life already these people
who are at risk are killing people, destroying lives, you earn your pay killing it’s hard to
feel sorry when they reap what they sow. when I was doing that job it’s what I expected.
emperorreagan

The US already has shown quite a bit of indifference to protecting not only its informants in Iraq & Afghanistan, but also people who were willing to openly help the US in support roles such as translators. The US government has also shown itself to be incapable of making the distinction between what should be secret and what should be public. The government has opted to hide information on the basis of hiding wrong doing/war crimes, corruption, and the futility of the wars rather than withhold information just to protect soldiers and/or informants. I would frankly trust this random dude before I would trust my government to determine what should be held back from the public.A particularly cynical anti-war activist also might note that the only way the wars are likely to end is public outcry over the deaths of American soldiers (or the formal bankruptcy of the US), so protecting anyone in the theater of operations doesn’t necessarily jive with the desire for the wars to end. Americans seem to be immune to the knowledge that we’re throwing money into a black hole with respect to defense and war spending, but American soldiers dying for nothing will sway public opinion.
Eatmuh

No.

1. The information he walked out on is not only personal but also part of an active court case. No one should speak under those circumstances, so it doesn’t inspire me with confidence that you have a objective viewpoint.

2. So people don’t get killed… really… really.

3. If they are going to keep doing what they’re doing then wikileaks needs to be very careful how they represent themselves and it is an important question, whether an event was a direct result of a leak, is it not? Just because punditry says it so doesn’t make it so.

4. Well, you would expect everyone who heard what is stated in the leaks to feel anxiety about the loss of human life, THATS THE DAMN POINT! The fact that he is keeping calm means nothing, he has been privy to this information for long enough in advance to swallow it.
Eatmuh

No.

1. The information he walked out on is not only personal but also part of an active court case. No one should speak under those circumstances, so it doesn’t inspire me with confidence that you have a objective viewpoint.

2. So people don’t get killed… really… really.

3. If they are going to keep doing what they’re doing then wikileaks needs to be very careful how they represent themselves and it is an important question, whether an event was a direct result of a leak, is it not? Just because punditry says it so doesn’t make it so.

4. Well, you would expect everyone who heard what is stated in the leaks to feel anxiety about the loss of human life, THATS THE DAMN POINT! The fact that he is keeping calm means nothing, he has been privy to this information for long enough in advance to swallow it.
Andrew

Methinks starting the war in the first place is what really costs lives, not revealing the truth about it.
Virgendelasvacas

You are really dumb. I’m going to go alert 4chan of your post here. Enjoy your 400 anchovy pizzas.
Anonymous

Typical gossip bull. Who gives a rats about Julian, this is about the documents. What’s next Julian forged 400,000 documents that’s the kind of crap gossip mongering interview are leading too.
100,000 people die and the interviewer is worried about accusations without charges, pregnant women die onto the way to giving birth because panicked husbands don’t stop quickly enough at check points.
Anonymous

Typical gossip bull. Who gives a rats about Julian, this is about the documents. What’s next Julian forged 400,000 documents that’s the kind of crap gossip mongering interview are leading too.
100,000 people die and the interviewer is worried about accusations without charges, pregnant women die onto the way to giving birth because panicked husbands don’t stop quickly enough at check points.
Tunaghost

I think you may be seriously underestimating how easily sensitive information can get people killed. Haystack is correct, there is a huge risk that the information he has revealed can and will be used to get people killed. That’s not really debatable. Obviously not all the information that is classified is done so because it is potentially dangerous (I’m sure we all agree that there’s a fair amount of ass-covering), but questioning how exactly he’s qualified to judge is not only reasonable but essential.
Tunaghost

I’m not sure why you’re questioning whether or not sensitive information can get people killed. That’s not even debatable.
Tunaghost

It’s not just soldiers at risk from leaking sensitive information, though. Questioning how dude is a fair judge of what will or will not get people killed (frankly, I’m not sure how a case could be made that he is at all in a position to judge) is pretty damn important. We’re all just weighing the benefit of wikileaks against the possible danger to both US soldiers and their civilian support and civilians in general.
Andrew

Considering that these documents relate to torture, rapes, and the killing of civilians, I don’t really care about most the criminals and accomplices who might get killed because of their release. I’m not a big supporter of government secrecy, nor of governments’ liars and killers. And I don’t trust Assange any less than I do the intelligence community.
http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

So maybe he’s put people in danger…

Similar situation…you bust a group of people committing crimes…by publicizing their crimes they are at risk of revenge against them..so does the risk begin with the publicity…or with the crimes?

To a lot of people, a desire to protect our troops is very important…and I’m there with that…all in favor of well protected troops…but the risk starts with the crimes against human beings…not with the publicity about it…so the assessment that’s called for is not “let’s hang the whistleblowers”…it should be “lets hang the criminals”, whether the criminal has brass on his shoulder or not.

The best protection for our troops is ethical conduct…which used to make enemies surrender on the spot because of out reputation as a just nation…we can have that reputation back…but we won’t get it by silencing evidence of war crimes…because the victims of same already know about it…and they already want revenge…these documents don’t change that…they’re living with that reality…all that has changed is that WE know about it and can’t play make believe and pretend that all is well and we’re the heroes in this little melodrama. We are the nightmare inflicted on others…the jackbooted thugs that kill with impunity and torture at will…sometimes out of mere frustration or boredom. Even if we aren’t individually responsible, we are citizens of a nation each with the power to passively permit or actively oppose serious wrongdoing…and we haven’t lived up to our end of that responsibility. If we don’t demand accountability, we won’t get any…and that’s gone on too long.

Respect isn’t a free lunch…its earned and always has been…all that’s changed is our willingness to coast on the achievements and worth of our nations past…as if that excuses slacking off for a few decades. We’ve become the old quarterback who tells the same story and hasn’t done anything but ride a couch for 40 years.

Now we want the safety of our personnel AND the freedom to let gross incompetence and criminal acts go unpunished and unchecked…sorry…it doesn’t work that way. The price for safety is disciplined personnel and a just system that deals with wrongdoing…and its a steep price sometimes…but not paying it becomes far more expensive when you remember that Al-Qaeda uses the daily conduct of our military…not the documents…as recruitment fodder.

So enough parroting the GOP party line on Assange…he and others got the information out…information that isn’t a shocking surprise to the Afghan or Iraqi with dead relatives who didn’t deserve death…its only shocking and horrifying to us…and we should choose mature understanding and justice over flustered denial and scapegoating.
http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

So maybe he’s put people in danger…

Similar situation…you bust a group of people committing crimes…by publicizing their crimes they are at risk of revenge against them..so does the risk begin with the publicity…or with the crimes?

To a lot of people, a desire to protect our troops is very important…and I’m there with that…all in favor of well protected troops…but the risk starts with the crimes against human beings…not with the publicity about it…so the assessment that’s called for is not “let’s hang the whistleblowers”…it should be “lets hang the criminals”, whether the criminal has brass on his shoulder or not.

The best protection for our troops is ethical conduct…which used to make enemies surrender on the spot because of out reputation as a just nation…we can have that reputation back…but we won’t get it by silencing evidence of war crimes…because the victims of same already know about it…and they already want revenge…these documents don’t change that…they’re living with that reality…all that has changed is that WE know about it and can’t play make believe and pretend that all is well and we’re the heroes in this little melodrama. We are the nightmare inflicted on others…the jackbooted thugs that kill with impunity and torture at will…sometimes out of mere frustration or boredom. Even if we aren’t individually responsible, we are citizens of a nation each with the power to passively permit or actively oppose serious wrongdoing…and we haven’t lived up to our end of that responsibility. If we don’t demand accountability, we won’t get any…and that’s gone on too long.

Respect isn’t a free lunch…its earned and always has been…all that’s changed is our willingness to coast on the achievements and worth of our nations past…as if that excuses slacking off for a few decades. We’ve become the old quarterback who tells the same story and hasn’t done anything but ride a couch for 40 years.

Now we want the safety of our personnel AND the freedom to let gross incompetence and criminal acts go unpunished and unchecked…sorry…it doesn’t work that way. The price for safety is disciplined personnel and a just system that deals with wrongdoing…and its a steep price sometimes…but not paying it becomes far more expensive when you remember that Al-Qaeda uses the daily conduct of our military…not the documents…as recruitment fodder.

So enough parroting the GOP party line on Assange…he and others got the information out…information that isn’t a shocking surprise to the Afghan or Iraqi with dead relatives who didn’t deserve death…its only shocking and horrifying to us…and we should choose mature understanding and justice over flustered denial and scapegoating.