You are part of an organization whose “primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behaviour in their governments and corporations.”
However, your boss ends up being a megalomaniac with a paranoid resistance to transparency, a lack of political neutrality, and an addiction to concentrating power in his own hands.
If you’re Daniel Domscheit-Berg (my goodness, what fun you could have with the first part of that hyphenated last name), the above observation provides a compelling entering argument to spill your guts on the true nature of the WikiLeaks organization, or perhaps better said, of its front-man, Julian Assange. Remember, you can’t spell Assange without a-s-s.
The review of Domscheit-Berg’s book at the Washington Post brings to mind a more depraved (but less deadly) Jim Jones.
Of course a guy like Assange needs an enemy to rally around:
Domscheit-Berg was concerned about growing criticism that all of WikiLeaks’s major publications in 2010 were aimed at its “only enemy,” the United States — mostly because focusing on a less visible adversary “wouldn’t have gotten [Assange] on the nightly news.”
That might make you wonder what WikiLeaks didn’t drop.
Domscheit-Berg appears to have only eaten the pudding; perhaps he skipped the kool-aid.