Julian Assange was the head of the then-new whistleblower platform Wikileak which wanted to show with leaked insider information that the goverments of the USA and the West was committing war crimes and other atrocities against human ideals or spying on its own allies. Similar and in connection with Manning and Edward Snowden. There was big talk about a new era of whistleblowers and investigative journalism which also brought established newspapers as the Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post or the German Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) and public television stations as the German NDR or WDR in so called investigative information pools. However the established newspaper withdraw from Assange´s informations as the US government claimed that Assange published secret informations without source protection and that his could harm the informer and sources at the ground and endanger and could even kill them. While Asssange gave a 400 000 pages document to the information pool which the investigative information pools selected and brought to the knowledge of their readers and viewers as a very tiny proportion , it was clear that Assange´s titanic information tsunami could not be read and understood in its whole holistic sense- the same with  Manning´s and Edward Snowden´s revelations. The most known image of that sort of relevations was a US military movie where the US military and its helicopter crew  killed a group of suspected targets which were thought to be terrorists or enemy fighters, but turned out to be a group of innocent journalists and civilians. It was the movie image that was the precedessor of the critic of automized drone wars and a proof that the US wars were not clean wars. However, this sort of investigative journalism and whistle blowing seems to have the idealistic and romantic ideal that wars could be fought in clean ways without civilian collateral damages what is a stupid thing in itself .And it is not a critic of the war and its motives, but a critic of some details of performance. People who really think that wars could be clean reveal that this is not the case. What an astonishing discovery.  Assange´s Wikileaks  was not like Daniel Ellsberg´s Pentagon papers an anaylsis of he war and the motives , but just a show that in a war some atrocities can happen. During the Vietnam war this was obvious and reported by mainstream US television stations and war reporters openly as the fotos of a Napalm burned Vietnamese girl, the execution of a Vietcong by a South Vietnamese police officer or the selfimmolition of a Buddhist monk showed which pushed the anit-war sentiments in the USA. As a lesson of this media reactions, the US military decided that information at the battlefield had to be censored to prevent that civil casualties were shown and during the first US Iraq war embedded journalist and CNN only showed what the military wanted to show. Some sort of clean computer show war with no real civilian or other casualties. Therefore Assange was the revival of the old Vietnam war style reporting which by the US government , its intelligence and military was perceived as state treason. Officially the US government critizised Assange that he leaked inside information of relevant sources and put them in danger. However, the US government couldn´t even produce one case where a leaked informant was killed or threatened. So it seemed that this was just a pretext to censor this sort of war reporting. As Assange was not the only whistle blower, Manning and Edward Snowden joined him in the whistleblower scene, the US government which was also put under pressure by NSA scandals used the emergency brake and started an offensive. After Snowden was in exile in Russia, Manning in prison where he became a woman called Chelsea , Assange was charged for treason and sexual harrassment which brought him to exile in the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he stayed for some years. However Assange tried to use the internet in the embassy to coordinate a whistleblower campaign against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats after Trump openly declared in a US television show that he was waiting for and welcoming  informations from intelligence of other countries and whistleblowers against Hillary Clinton. Assange used his internet connection  to start this sort of campaign against Hilary Clinton and Wikileaks published e-mails of Hillary Clinton and the Democrats against Bernie Sanders and other issues. Assange knew that in this context he was splitting the Democrats and by this way supported Trump with a little help from Russian hackers  and his chances to win and not Sanders .Assange didn´t even try to contact the Democrats in order to use Wikileaks to air e-mails of Trump and the Republicans. Maybe Putin´s hacker wouldn´t granted him this sort of for support for Wikileaks as Putin had hopes in a Trump victory.  Therefore he hoped that Trump would give him an amnesty if he was elected. To prevent the own imprisonment and trial at a US court, he was willing to sacrifice the US democracy. And Trump´s wars and use of drones and civilian victims were not different. Therefore we have a ambivalent feeling, when  people demand :Free Assange. With his support of Trump he is not the idealistic hero icon many people project in him. A real democratic hero doesn´t support a fascist. Very simple. However it is interesting that the USA managed it that all the whistle blowing news had no effect besides a short term scandal and that now the world is not speaking about US war crimes and the NSA, but about Russian and Chinese hackers, desinformation, fake news and hybrid warfare. Assange for the US government seems to be declared as a part of it and therefore a show trial is very likely. Assange is a fallen hero. He discredited himself. Biden and the Democrats should give him an amnesty. Maybe he in exchange could also give some information how Trump and Putin used Wikileaks and him to bring down Clinton and the Democrats..

Free Julian Assange? Why should we be ambivalent in this case?

Julian Assange was the head of he new whistleblower platform Wikileak which wanted to show with leaked insider information that the goverments of the USA and the West was committing war crimes and other atrocities against human ideals or spying on its own allies. Similar and in connection with Manning and Edward Snowden. There was big talk about a new era of whistleblowers and investigative journalism which also brought established newspapers as the Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post or the German Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) and public television stations as the German NDR or WDR in so called investigative information pools. However the established newspaper withdraw from Assange´s informations as the US government claimed that Assange published secret informations without source protection and that his could harm the informer and sources at the ground and endanger and could even kill them. While Asssange gave a 400 000 pages document to the information pool which the investigative information pools selected and brought to the knowledge of their readers and viewers as a very tiny proportion , it was clear that Assange´s titanic information tsunami could not be read and understood in its whole holistic sense- the same with  Manning´s and Edward Snowden´s revelations. The most known image of that sort of relevations was a US military movie where the US military and its helicopter crew  killed a group of suspected targets which were thought to be terrorists or enemy fighters, but turned out to be a group of innocent journalists and civilians. It was the movie image that was the precedessor of the critic of automized drone wars and a proof that the US wars were not clean wars. However, this sort of investigative journalism and whistle blowing seems to have the idealistic and romantic ideal that wars could be fought in clean ways without civilian collateral damages what is a stupid thing in itself .And it is not a critic of the war and its motives, but a critic of some details of performance. People who really think that wars could be clean reveal that this is not the case. What an astonishing discovery.  Assange´s Wikileaks  was not like Daniel Ellsberg´s Pentagon papers an anaylsis of he war and the motives , but just a show that in a war some atrocities can happen. During the Vietnam war this was obvious and reported by mainstream US television stations and war reporters openly as the fotos of a Napalm burned Vietnamese girl, the execution of a Vietcong by a South Vietnamese police officer or the selfimmolition of a Buddhist monk showed which pushed the anit-war sentiments in the USA. As a lesson of this media reactions, the US military decided that information at the battlefield had to be censored to prevent that civil casualties were shown and during the first US Iraq war embedded journalist and CNN only showed what the military wanted to show. Some sort of clean computer show war with no real civilian or other casualties. Therefore Assange was the revival of the old Vietnam war style reporting which by the US government , its intelligence and military was perceived as state treason. Officially the US government critizised Assange that he leaked inside information of relevant sources and put them in danger. However, the US government couldn´t even produce one case where a leaked informant was killed or threatened. So it seemed that this was just a pretext to censor this sort of war reporting. As Assange was not the only whistle blower, Manning and Edward Snowden joined him in the whistleblower scene, the US government which was also put under pressure by NSA scandals used the emergency brake and started an offensive. After Snowden was in exile in Russia, Manning in prison where he became a woman called Chelsea , Assange was charged for treason and sexual harrassment which brought him to exile in the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he stayed for some years. However Assange tried to use the internet in the embassy to coordinate a whistleblower campaign against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats after Trump openly declared in a US television show that he was waiting for and welcoming  informations from intelligence of other countries and whistleblowers against Hillary Clinton. Assange used his internet connection  to start this sort of campaign against Hilary Clinton and Wikileaks published e-mails of Hillary Clinton and the Democrats against Bernie Sanders and other issues. Assange knew that in this context he was splitting the Democrats and by this way supported Trump with a little help from Russian hackers  and his chances to win and not Sanders .Assange didn´t even try to contact the Democrats in order to use Wikileaks to air e-mails of Trump and the Republicans. Maybe Putin´s hacker wouldn´t granted him this sort of for support for Wikileaks as Putin had hopes in a Trump victory.  Therefore he hoped that Trump would give him an amnesty if he was elected. To prevent the own imprisonment and trial at a US court, he was willing to sacrifice the US democracy. And Trump´s wars and use of drones and civilian victims were not different. Therefore we have a ambivalent feeling, when  people demand :Free Assange. With his support of Trump he is not the idealistic hero icon many people project in him. A real democratic hero doesn´t support a fascist. Very simple. However it is interesting that the USA managed it that all the whistle blowing news had no effect besides a short term scandal and that now the world is not speaking about US war crimes and the NSA, but about Russian and Chinese hackers, desinformation, fake news and hybrid warfare. Assange for the US government seems to be declared as a part of it and therefore a show trial is very likely. Assange is a fallen hero. He discredited himself. Biden and the Democrats should give him an amnesty. Maybe he in exchange could also give some information how Trump and Putin used Wikileaks and him to bring down Clinton and the Democrats..