As you are a member of the DiEM25 advisory panel, we are sure you’ve read the „Manifesto for Democratising Europe“ and approved it.
The manifesto provides the foundation for our everyday work with DiEM. There is talk of a transparent Europe where all decision-making takes place under the citizens‘ scrutiny. At another point in this manifesto it is written that we fight for a liberated Europe where privilege, prejudice, deprivation and the threat of violence wither, allowing Europeans to be born into fewer stereotypes, to enjoy every chance to develop their potential, and to be free to choose more of their partners in life, work and society.
Unfortunately, over the last number of months we, the members of the DSC Leipzig, don’t always have the impression that you advocate for these goals.
We fight for democracy. And democracy doesn’t mean that everybody has to have the same opinion, but the members of a movement should at least agree in terms of their fundamental values. As a public figure and as a member of the DiEM25 advisory panel, your statements and actions affect DiEMs public perception. For that reason your public manner should reflect exactly those fundamental values. Therefore we ask you to question yourself. Is your personal political agenda still compatible with the fundamental values of DiEM25?
We don’t feel adequately represented when you, for example, call male feminists sleaze bagsor when you spread theories, which prompt that you think feminism, in combination with capitalism and atheism are part of a conspiracy. We don’t feel adequately represented when you allude to a plan to increase the amount of migrants through sterility of western women, because you believe that’s more favourable for companies.. This is, on presumption that we understand your point correctly. Those are just two examples for your suspect attitude towards feminism and the role of women and men in society.
If we want to delve further into examples, we can look at the case of Rose McGowan. Ms McGowan is the young woman whose Twitter account was temporarily banned, because she tweeted the personal telephone number of a bystander during her coverage of the Weinstein Case. One could justify that based on Twitters terms of service or one could make the „feminists mob“ responsible for that decision, like you did.
We could also talk about one of your interviews for the movie „Risk“, where you claim that the accusations of rape against you are just part of a feminist conspiracy and where you try to discredit one of your claimants with the statement: „She started a lesbian nightclub in Gothenburg.“. 
What we will never tolerate are your antisemitic statements. It is absolute not ok to say things like „Raphael Satter has always been a rat, but he’s jewish.“. Or tweets like:„tribalist symbol for establishment climbers? Most of our critics have 3 (((brackets around their names))) & have black-rim glasses. Bizarre.“.
Another point of criticism is your standing related to Trump and Clinton. That you are not a fan of Hillary Clinton is no secret- we neither. On the one hand we understand that you are not really well disposed towards someone who apparently wants you to die and you also have every right to criticize a politician. However, on the other hand, we don’t put up with your support for the racist, sexist liar that is Donald Trump. You have supported him.
You have supported his campaign and adopted party on the quiet for someone who embodies everything that DiEM works against. Even if you don’t see things as Trump does, you have to acquiesce the impeachment, that you are not credible anymore. You talk about a smear campaign at any given opportunity and you and wikileaks were symbols for transparency for many years.
Now, however, you take part in a secret smear campaign against Hillary Clinton? Your excuse that you would just publish everything that people upload on wikileaks seems unreliable given the fact that you restrained documents that revealed corrupt behaviour in the kremlin. That’s not the political transparency that we at DiEM are working toward.
All given reasons are contrary to the manifesto and convey a bad perception of what we as a movement are doing. Therefore we ask you to reconsider your statements and actions and to give a public comment on the issues mentioned above.
We want to make it clear, that we support whistleblowing against surveillance capitalism. We wholeheartedly support the freedom and safety of every person, who makes abuses of power public, but we expect those to adhere to the priciples of transparency and to resist the temptation to misuse their influence to further their own political agenda.
Respect for transparency, for diversity and respect for any person, even in a situation where we disagree, is the basis for every change we want to stand for with DiEM25 and we expect and demand this kind of conduct from every single member. We cannot excuse one of those members who is positioned to represent DiEM25 to the public to disregard those values with their words and actions.
The members of the DSC Leipzig
 – https://mobile.twitter.com/julianassange/status/921760921931927552?lang=de
 – https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/904006478616551425?s=17
 – https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/904021394106847236?s=17
 – https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/918950497884737537?s=17
 – https://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonwillmore/risk-review-laura-poitras-julian-assange?utm_term=.viWk3vNg7P#.jwEPJL74Bn
 – „Can’t we just drone this guy?“ https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Clinton-ueber-Julian-Assange-Koennen-wir-den-Kerl-nicht-einfach-drohnen-3340894.html
 – https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange-donald-trump-jr-hillary-clinton/
 – https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/
 – https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks-election-clinton-trump/