Author Topic: Regarding candidacy for the senate  (Read 6128 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline reader

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Regarding candidacy for the senate
« on: December 24, 2012, 13:00:15 PM »
You know...

when reading that article

I cannot claim I disagree - it will be hard for the Wikileaks chief editor to run for what ever political seat on earth without a public dissociation from nazis after this massive fail.

http://wikinews030.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/what-does-the-link-to-a-neonazi-page-do-in-the-wikileaks-tweetfeed-just-another-not-that-easy-topic/

TrxiZ

  • Guest
Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2013, 15:05:50 PM »
I know that where people work mistakes has been made since human kind is on this little planet.

Sure this nazi tweet is a little confusing but at all if you look at the Work of WikiLeaks there is no NAZI at all in it.

I do not want to get this an NAZI -> WikiLeaks Topic.

This was the only tweet and I am sure it was an mistake.

T.

Offline reader

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2013, 16:12:29 PM »
This was the only tweet and I am sure it was an mistake.

T.

T., the screenshots are linked in one of the posts above.

9. in words: nine.
9 tweets to a right-wing populistic paper.
9 in total between march and november, tweeted by a person who would have reasons to be offended if confronted with the assumption that it was a pure "mistake", as if not knowing what page he sends tweets to -and- by a person preparing a political campaign.

plus
a repost of a nazi article by rixstep with regular tweets to rixstep by WL - a repost hiding the fact that it's a nazi article repost incl. a direct link to his blog- clarification of this issue and efforts to repair not only outstanding but it's obvious that WL sees - according to the silence - sees not even the reasons why they should get active here

plus
direct link to the nazi article repost by the official support page justice4 (called a "resource" there)


a "mistake"? if then - how so, how did it happen? and then - what are the steps WL undertakes to repair it and to prevent a repetition of the "mistake"?



Offline Riney

  • Support Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3000
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2013, 17:54:39 PM »
a "mistake"? if then - how so, how did it happen? and then - what are the steps WL undertakes to repair it and to prevent a repetition of the "mistake"?

   The questions you ask reader, are not able to be answered, I don't know the tweeter or what they were thinking. How it happened is anyone's guess. I would not waste my time trying to figure out what it would take to repair or prevent it, because WikiLeaks would not care to take my suggestion on the matter in the end.

   May I ask, what is your absolute obsession about this really? Neither myself and I presume T, have any interest in it. But you seem to have made this your top priority to get to the bottom of it.       
"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage" Anais Nin .. and yet we must arm ourselves with fear

enrica

  • Guest
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2013, 08:46:59 AM »
... I'm reading the long pece & analysis you have posted, reader...

For what I've seen, WikiLeaks has always tweeted from Rixstep because they defend Julian Assange. All the tweets the analysis refer to are Pro-Assange.

My personal opinion is that WikiLeaks in this case didn't care about verifying the accountability of their sources, and simply posted in support of Julian Assange.

I, myself had read the tweets when they were posted, and I had no idea the mentioned suces could be of extreme right. I suppose WL too didn't simply know enough to tweet this stuff.

If it has been a mistake? Yes of course.
What I think is that it happened in "good faith", with the only aim to defend Julian's right of a fair treatment, and his right not to be smeared by media calling him a "rapist" when there is still (in 2013) no charge against him.

I've seen many times wikileaks tweeting "with the guts". I suppose this comes from the will (and the passion) of defending their editor in chief.

WikiLeaks itself has No link with nazi.
... By The Way if I well remember there are even cables on shoah, and many other humanitarians issues, so the facts and their leaks confirm there is Nothing nazi in WL.

The fact I can retweet from right wing exponents, doesn't mean endorsing all their views.
So it is for wikileaks.

I just agree on the fact they should control a bit more if their sources are accountable, otherway yes, their aims risk to be misunderstood.

---

If it can affect Assange's campaign?
... Well I still need to understand if his party is separated from the organization wikileaks, just named "wikileaks"...
I've always been told that, despite Julian Assange is the leader of wikileaks, he is not the whole organization. So the party should be separated from WL itself, formally.
... If so, no, these tweets shouldn't affect anything because Assange is one person IN wikileaks, and the tweets are by wikileaks twitter, not Assange's direct statements.

Offline reader

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2013, 15:07:40 PM »
... For what I've seen, WikiLeaks has always tweeted from Rixstep because they defend Julian Assange. All the tweets the analysis refer to are Pro-Assange.
My personal opinion is that WikiLeaks in this case didn't care about verifying the accountability of their sources, and simply posted in support of Julian Assange.

"And simply posted in support of JA.", without verifying the source as you suggest.

I therefore repeat: a person "simply posting" without verifying the source - is this a person you would give access to for the official twitter account?

I, myself had read the tweets when they were posted, and I had no idea the mentioned suces could be of extreme right. I suppose WL too didn't simply know enough to tweet this stuff.

A private person living in an other country does not have to know that first - however, WL present themselves as a page run by journalists and as a journalistic organisation. Please note there is a different level of responsibility for checking what you tweet if you describe yourself this way and want to be preceived as such. Especially in cases like this - they are busy with Swedish law and media for a time long enough to definitely expect them to know the basics of the media and political landscape there.

Not to mention the fact that exactly this is the critical thing here - the tweets - whether indeed a case of not verifying (embarassing as ever can be for them then) or not (if not, the tweets are more than just "frustrating", as Christian Christensen called them https://twitter.com/ChrChristensen/statuses/247263708445818880 ) - were sent to people / followers accounts across the world. It's not their duty to check official tweets, you can't expect that from them - this is WL's job. Tweeting links to a right-wing-populistic newspaper out to 1,6 mio is, in my eyes, more than just frustrating and irresponsible.


If it has been a mistake? Yes of course.

question: who or what page / link is exactly your source for this statement?

There would be a source if the WL account would have acted as you can expect in cases of "mistakes" - withdrawal of a tweet and a quick apoloigze (that would have caused some laughter online, ppl shaking their heads and asking what strange personnel currently has access to the official twitter account - but at least the issue would have been corrected and the source for the assumed "mistake" would be there).

So, let me repeat that: what exactly is your source for the statement these tweets were "just mistakes"?


WikiLeaks itself has No link with nazi.
... By The Way if I well remember there are even cables on shoah, and many other humanitarians issues, so the facts and their leaks confirm there is Nothing nazi in WL.

There is an obvious link on an obvious nazi repost, the obvious link to the obvious repost is on the official support page justice4 - sorry, the link is there and the repost is there, so how can you claim there is "no link"?


Now let's for a second turn back to the unfortunate shamir incident, quoting from media that some supporters describe as belonging to a "smear campaign":

"Shamir has a years-long friendship with Assange, and was privy to the contents of tens of thousands of US diplomatic cables months before WikiLeaks made public the full cache. Such was Shamir's controversial nature that Assange introduced him to WikiLeaks staffers under a false name. Known for views held by many to be antisemitic, Shamir aroused the suspicion of several WikiLeaks staffers – myself included – when he asked for access to all cable material concerning "the Jews", a request which was refused.

When questions were asked about Shamir's involvement with WikiLeaks, given his controversial background and unorthodox requests, we were told in no uncertain terms that Assange would not condone criticism of his friend. Instead, a mealy-mouthed statement distancing WikiLeaks from its freelancers was issued. Still later, when damning evidence emerged that Shamir had handed cables material to the dictator of Belarus – a man he holds in high esteem – to assist his persecution of opposition activists, Assange shamefully refused to investigate." (Nov 8, 2011)



"He also denied that he had any special connection with WikiLeaks, though the group's spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, confirmed that he was their representative in Russia, just as his son is in Scandinavia. ... Given the tight if murky links between the Russian security apparatus and the quasi-fascist Nationalist movement with which Shamir is associated there, it has worrying implications for the security of anyone named in the cables." (Dec 17, 2010)


"...So I decided to grit my teeth and carry on. Dismay mounted, however, with the arrival of Israel Shamir, a self-styled Russian "peace campaigner" with a long history of antisemitic writing. Shamir was introduced to the team under the pseudonym Adam, and it was only several weeks after he had left – with a huge cache of unredacted cables – that most of us started to find out who he was.

Press enquiries started to trickle in. A little research revealed his unsavoury history, but I was told Julian would be unwilling for WikiLeaks to publish anything critical of Shamir. Instead, shamefully, we put out a statement simply distancing WikiLeaks from him...."
(Sept 2, 2011)


(if anyone needs the source for these quotations, all you need is to quickly google with the quoted sentences)

Alright, now please understand this - whether supporters like it or not, this is the background of the question raised above.

A person like Shamir was able to get in contact with the organisation, a person introduced under a false name - all we can assume is that JA knew that introducing the person to the team will be not backed up by the entire team otherwise.

Now whether supporters like it or not - they have to be aware that this is the background that shines through when news about tweets to right wing populistic papers or direct links to nazi article reposts pop up.

Therefore I am asking again: what is your exact source for the claim that the risk of a contact  with people who are at least indifferent to Nazi mindsets can be totally excluded?

And what is your exact source for the claim that this exact risk will not rise again as soon as he gets out from the embassy?

I definitely don't plan to mix this topic with the legal case and the actual diplomatic issue, all I  am asking is - what is your source for that? Since facts known so far do prove the risk is sadly there.






« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 15:37:30 PM by reader »

enrica

  • Guest
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2013, 22:35:42 PM »
WikiLeaks has now explained their position very clearly:

@wikileaks 5 jan 2012

Note. When we link to an article, we do not endorse the organisation. For example, we sometimes link to articles even by the NYTimes.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/287642319023398912

TrxiZ

  • Guest
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2013, 23:27:23 PM »
WikiLeaks has now explained their position very clearly:

@wikileaks 5 jan 2012

Note. When we link to an article, we do not endorse the organisation. For example, we sometimes link to articles even by the NYTimes.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/287642319023398912
:)

Offline reader

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2013, 16:20:35 PM »

ariana

  • Guest
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #9 on: January 07, 2013, 16:28:05 PM »
There seems to be a text in German explaining very clearly why this tweet does not explain anything

http://wikinews030.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/ein-unganehmenes-thema-das-zur-sprache-kommen-muss-wikileaks-und-rechtsextremismus-10-tweets-nach-fria-tider-und-der-repost-einer-naziseite/

then please post it on the correct board...the German lanuage board.

ariana

  • Guest
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2013, 16:45:00 PM »
There seems to be a text in German explaining very clearly why this tweet does not explain anything

http://wikinews030.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/ein-unganehmenes-thema-das-zur-sprache-kommen-muss-wikileaks-und-rechtsextremismus-10-tweets-nach-fria-tider-und-der-repost-einer-naziseite/

You seem quite obsessed by this topic of WL Twets to fria tider. I suggest you start a new thread instead of writing on a thread " Regarding candidacy for the senate ". WL have commented on this suject and it requires no more attention I think but if you want to dicsuss this mor ethen please open a thread with a related title

thanx

Offline reader

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Regarding candidacy for the senate
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2013, 16:07:51 PM »
just found a pirate pad regarding the planned speech at the Oxford Union Society and the planned protest against it

https://leser.piratenpad.de/factfacts

it links to the fb event page on top of the pad


Note when I find a link in a hashtag and find it interesting, I link it sometimes in a forum even if it was tweeted by an account that the wikileaks-forum account recently hurried up pretty much to block and to tweet that it blocked them. (You must have been under new fire of some fanatics, I heard... can understand such reactions. As long as they are corrected earlier or later by one or the other person who ran amok back then.)

The page linked in one of the posts above details why exactly the "comment" in a tweet is irrelevant and does not resolve the issue. Google translate is definitely not an application I can recommend, but sometimes it manages to give you a general idea of the content, as a side comment to the person who asked for the "correct board".

And to the person above: you don't have to be "obsessed" with a topic to recognize a massive political fail (by a person who just started to warm up for a political campaign... who is aside of that the chief editor of a "media organisation". You just can't have both. Either the position is correctly named and the campaign started OR you tweet such links. And think that supporters will tolerate even that. There are some fanatic supporters who don't stop to relativate them. They however -DO- have to understand that the topic re the nazi text repost is in public since months ago... the tweet links were registered by the people who replied to them, the issue is there and visible. Fanatic "supporters" thinking that their continuous relativation of right wing extremism is "helpful" or "supportive" should try to finally wake up and ask themselves why there are reasons to doubt that. People reading their relativations online -do- think and -do- come to conclusions. They -do- wonder what such relativations show, they -do- wonder which party such people voted for at the last elections in their country,- probably -, - obviously -, if they continuously try to back up and relativate even links to nazi reposts and tweets to a right wing extremist newspaper.)
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 16:38:01 PM by reader »