SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Julian Assange: WikiLeaks is More Accountable than Governments
WikiLeaks founder defends organisation in his first formal public appearance since being arrested over sexual assault allegations
Apr 10, 2011
WikiLeaks is more accountable than democratically elected governments because it accepts donations from members of the public, Julian Assange has claimed, in his first formal public appearance since being arrested in December following accusations of rape and sexual assault.
Questioned at a public debate about the whistleblowing organisation's own transparency, Assange told an audience of 700 people, many of them supporters: "We are directly supported on a week-to-week basis by you. You vote with your wallets every week if you believe that our work is worthwhile or not. If you believe we have erred, you do not support us. If you believe we need to be protected in our work, you keep us strong.
"That dynamic feedback, I say, is more responsive than a government that is elected after sourcing money from big business every four years."
The WikiLeaks founder, who is currently appealing against his extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault, told the audience at a packed debate organised by the New Statesman and the Frontline Club that whistleblowing was essential in a democracy because "the only way we can know whether information is legitimately kept secret is when it is revealed".
He cited the examples of Vietnam and "the disaster that was the Iraq war", saying that if whistleblowers had had the courage to speak up earlier about both conflicts, "bloodbaths" could have been avoided.
He said he "could speak for hours" about the impact of the publication of leaked US embassy cables, much of it through the Guardian, and that leak's positive impact.
The Hindu newspaper had in recent weeks published 21 front pages based on so-called "cablegate" revelations, he said, leading to the Indian government walking out four times and a growing anti-corruption movement in the country.
But the political commentator Douglas Murray, director of the centre for social cohesion, challenged Assange over the website's sources of funding, its staffing and connections with the Holocaust denier Israel Shamir, who has worked with the site.
"What gives you the right to decide what should be known or not? Governments are elected. You, Mr Assange are not."
Murray also challenged the WikiLeaks founder over an account in a book by Guardian writers David Leigh and Luke Harding, in which the authors quote him suggesting that if informants were to be killed following publication of the leaks, they "had it coming to them".
Assange repeated an earlier assertion that the website "is in the process of suing the Guardian" over the assertion, and asked if Murray would like to "join the queue" of organisations he was suing.
The Guardian has not received any notification of such action from WikiLeaks or its lawyers.
Jason Cowley, the editor of the New Statesman and chair of the debate, interjected to ask: "How can the great champion of open society be using our libel laws to challenge the press?"
The WikiLeaks founder was obliged to leave before responding to all the questions in order to comply with the curfew conditions of his bail.
WikiLeaks' lawyer Mark Stephens could not be reached for comment. Asked after the debate whether he could shed any light on the supposed legal action, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristin Hrafnsson said "not really".
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
WikiLeaks is more accountable than democratically elected governments because it accepts donations from members of the public, Julian Assange has claimed, in his first formal public appearance since being arrested in December following accusations of rape and sexual assault.
Questioned at a public debate about the whistleblowing organisation's own transparency, Assange told an audience of 700 people, many of them supporters: "We are directly supported on a week-to-week basis by you. You vote with your wallets every week if you believe that our work is worthwhile or not. If you believe we have erred, you do not support us. If you believe we need to be protected in our work, you keep us strong.
"That dynamic feedback, I say, is more responsive than a government that is elected after sourcing money from big business every four years."
The WikiLeaks founder, who is currently appealing against his extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault, told the audience at a packed debate organised by the New Statesman and the Frontline Club that whistleblowing was essential in a democracy because "the only way we can know whether information is legitimately kept secret is when it is revealed".
He cited the examples of Vietnam and "the disaster that was the Iraq war", saying that if whistleblowers had had the courage to speak up earlier about both conflicts, "bloodbaths" could have been avoided.
He said he "could speak for hours" about the impact of the publication of leaked US embassy cables, much of it through the Guardian, and that leak's positive impact.
The Hindu newspaper had in recent weeks published 21 front pages based on so-called "cablegate" revelations, he said, leading to the Indian government walking out four times and a growing anti-corruption movement in the country.
But the political commentator Douglas Murray, director of the centre for social cohesion, challenged Assange over the website's sources of funding, its staffing and connections with the Holocaust denier Israel Shamir, who has worked with the site.
"What gives you the right to decide what should be known or not? Governments are elected. You, Mr Assange are not."
Murray also challenged the WikiLeaks founder over an account in a book by Guardian writers David Leigh and Luke Harding, in which the authors quote him suggesting that if informants were to be killed following publication of the leaks, they "had it coming to them".
Assange repeated an earlier assertion that the website "is in the process of suing the Guardian" over the assertion, and asked if Murray would like to "join the queue" of organisations he was suing.
The Guardian has not received any notification of such action from WikiLeaks or its lawyers.
Jason Cowley, the editor of the New Statesman and chair of the debate, interjected to ask: "How can the great champion of open society be using our libel laws to challenge the press?"
The WikiLeaks founder was obliged to leave before responding to all the questions in order to comply with the curfew conditions of his bail.
WikiLeaks' lawyer Mark Stephens could not be reached for comment. Asked after the debate whether he could shed any light on the supposed legal action, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristin Hrafnsson said "not really".
WikiLeaks is more accountable than democratically elected governments because it accepts donations from members of the public, Julian Assange has claimed, in his first formal public appearance since being arrested in December following accusations of rape and sexual assault.
Questioned at a public debate about the whistleblowing organisation's own transparency, Assange told an audience of 700 people, many of them supporters: "We are directly supported on a week-to-week basis by you. You vote with your wallets every week if you believe that our work is worthwhile or not. If you believe we have erred, you do not support us. If you believe we need to be protected in our work, you keep us strong.
"That dynamic feedback, I say, is more responsive than a government that is elected after sourcing money from big business every four years."
The WikiLeaks founder, who is currently appealing against his extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault, told the audience at a packed debate organised by the New Statesman and the Frontline Club that whistleblowing was essential in a democracy because "the only way we can know whether information is legitimately kept secret is when it is revealed".
He cited the examples of Vietnam and "the disaster that was the Iraq war", saying that if whistleblowers had had the courage to speak up earlier about both conflicts, "bloodbaths" could have been avoided.
He said he "could speak for hours" about the impact of the publication of leaked US embassy cables, much of it through the Guardian, and that leak's positive impact.
The Hindu newspaper had in recent weeks published 21 front pages based on so-called "cablegate" revelations, he said, leading to the Indian government walking out four times and a growing anti-corruption movement in the country.
But the political commentator Douglas Murray, director of the centre for social cohesion, challenged Assange over the website's sources of funding, its staffing and connections with the Holocaust denier Israel Shamir, who has worked with the site.
"What gives you the right to decide what should be known or not? Governments are elected. You, Mr Assange are not."
Murray also challenged the WikiLeaks founder over an account in a book by Guardian writers David Leigh and Luke Harding, in which the authors quote him suggesting that if informants were to be killed following publication of the leaks, they "had it coming to them".
Assange repeated an earlier assertion that the website "is in the process of suing the Guardian" over the assertion, and asked if Murray would like to "join the queue" of organisations he was suing.
The Guardian has not received any notification of such action from WikiLeaks or its lawyers.
Jason Cowley, the editor of the New Statesman and chair of the debate, interjected to ask: "How can the great champion of open society be using our libel laws to challenge the press?"
The WikiLeaks founder was obliged to leave before responding to all the questions in order to comply with the curfew conditions of his bail.
WikiLeaks' lawyer Mark Stephens could not be reached for comment. Asked after the debate whether he could shed any light on the supposed legal action, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristin Hrafnsson said "not really".
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.