After a lengthy airing of Julian Assange’s six year-old laundry – a series of insistent ‘e-pistles’ aimed at bedding a 19 year-old Australian girl – Gawker’s Adrian Chen leaves us with this:
"For the record, Elizabeth (not her real name) says she never felt threatened by Assange’s behavior; she viewed it as misguided attempts at courtship by a socially awkward nerd. "I don’t think he’s a bad person," she said. "He’s just a funny bugger."
I suppose one should be grateful for this cleansing tid-bit at the end of the stain left by this piece, but really, what is the intent here: to infer that this past unpolitic, inappropriate behavior is proof that the current Swedish contention that Assange is a criminal rapist, is true?
And how does this relate to Wikileaks? Discredit Assange’s personal behavior, and you discredit and put into question the legal/moral legitimacy of his journalistic/professional practices?
This smacks of the smear job that Clinton had to deal with. One needs to separate the bedroom from the boardroom or the Oval Office. I just hope Assange does a better job of handling his attackers – and their shit disturbing media brethren than Clinton did – and by this I mean, wouldn’t it be great if he could ‘out’ the perpetrators.
What happens in ‘private’ – assuming it harms no one (and we’ll assume here too that Assange is innocent until proven guilty) – is nobody else’s fucking business