Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 150 posts

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#131

Post by teddyh »

reitanqild wrote: post #115
openasocket wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except he was in the UK for almost 2 years fighting the extradition to Sweden. The whole time he was saying the Swedish extradition was "actually an attempt to get me into a jurisdiction which will then make it easier to extradite me to the US" as if the UK is any less likely to cooperate with the US. If the US wanted him they could have asked for extradition from the UK during those 2 years.

IIRC: as a citizen it was somehow harder to extradite him from UK than from Sweden.

As far as I know he’s not a UK citizen, but an Australian citizen. But maybe being from the commonwealth counts as special?

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#132

Post by mirimir »

scoggs wrote: post #77
mirimir wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting argument: > Poitras has also violated her unambiguous promise to the subjects of the film that they would have an opportunity to review the film in advance and request changes, and that they could decline to appear if they or their lawyers felt that the movie put them at risk. So I'm wondering whether Assange declined to appear, and she refused. That'd be funny, in a sad way. Still, I've follow…

For some reason my mind immediately went to the fact that Wikileaks has to honor protecting its sources. I know it should be real obvious that the task of protecting sources itself is most paramount in their operation, but for some reason I get the feeling that "full disclosure" includes "how do you get the info / who do you get the info from / tell us juicy secrets / tell us the truth about your legal cases". I don'…

Sure. But prudent leakers handle that themselves. So there really isn't anything to protect. Leaking is different from journalism. In journalism, identities of sources matter. In leaking, only the leaks matter. And, by the way, I don't believe that Snowden needed to dox himself. He left the decision to Poitras and Greenwald, and I think that they unnecessarily trashed his life.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#133

Post by mirimir »

moomin wrote: post #53
mirimir wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't respect someone who talks about curing the world of ignorance, and having the courage to tell the truth, but then cowers for 7 years in a embassy because he's too afraid to stand up and tell the truth, whatever it was, about what happened. It was more about not wanting to rot in US prison, I think.

Except that a) the US weren't interested (ironically, they may be now) and b) he repeatedly refused to meet Swedish investigators at the embassy, where there was no chance of rendition whatsoever. People were dropping out of Wikileaks 10 years ago because of Assange's behaviour. Seems like Poitras is just the latest in a long line of people who are attracted to the principles of Wikileaks, but turned off by the reali…

The US wasn't interested? With Manning in jail? He's not a US citizen. For him, US prison would be a lucky outcome. Rendition and torture would be a realistic fear.

I do, on the other hand, wonder why he'd consider Sweden a greater risk than the UK.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#134

Post by mirimir »

asveikau wrote: post #91
mirimir wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re Poitras turning on Assange: https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/23/risk-a-sad-comedown-... I had forgotten that she and Appelbaum had been lovers. Bringing him into the mix destroys the film's objectivity.

What is this supposed to convince me of? I am now more convinced that Assange is guilty if this is the way his defenders talk. This reads like a guy trying to defend a rapist. Does he seriously not understand why people get touchy on the subject of sexual assault when he calls it political correctness? This is not simple unorthodoxy as alleged in your link but a serious crime. It's​ also hilarious that he is compared…

I've read many articles about what went down in Sweden. I've seen no claims that he forced either woman to have sex. He didn't seduce them. They wanted to have sex with him, and bragged to their friends.

And they remained friendly with him afterward. Until they learned that he'd had sex with both of them. That's when it got crazy. Also, one of them was concerned that a condom had broken, and wanted him tested for STDs. That's initially why she filed a police report.

After that, it was mostly driven by the prosecutor. It's not impossible that the US government played a role in that. But the women were initially Wikileaks supporters, and weren't likely part of a plot to entrap him.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#135

Post by mirimir »

valuearb wrote: post #107
mirimir wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re Poitras turning on Assange: https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/23/risk-a-sad-comedown-... I had forgotten that she and Appelbaum had been lovers. Bringing him into the mix destroys the film's objectivity.

It's a documentary. Criticism of it should be based on facts, not some assertion that the director is an emotional slut.

It's no longer a documentary. It's a personal attack. It's not that Poitras is "an emotional slut". It's that she has an agenda, which is very different from the one that she professed when starting the project. She should have killed the project. And it may well turn out that she violated her working agreement with Wikileaks.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#136

Post by asveikau »

mirimir wrote: post #134
asveikau wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is this supposed to convince me of? I am now more convinced that Assange is guilty if this is the way his defenders talk. This reads like a guy trying to defend a rapist. Does he seriously not understand why people get touchy on the subject of sexual assault when he calls it political correctness? This is not simple unorthodoxy as alleged in your link but a serious crime. It's​ also hilarious that he is compared…

I've read many articles about what went down in Sweden. I've seen no claims that he forced either woman to have sex. He didn't seduce them. They wanted to have sex with him, and bragged to their friends. And they remained friendly with him afterward. Until they learned that he'd had sex with both of them. That's when it got crazy. Also, one of them was concerned that a condom had broken, and wanted him tested for STD…

I googled and found: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange...

If this is as reported, I am not a lawyer but it sounds like he committed a crime, and he is most certainly a major asshole, among other things pushing the boundaries of what constitutes consent, then making the other party feel uncomfortable in their own home.

Then he blames the consequences on a global conspiracy. Probably part of the abuser personality, to evict himself from blame.

I was thinking, western intelligence has done a lot of sketchy things, usually in the form of coups, more recently with "enhanced interrogation" or eavesdropping... But I am not aware of any other case where people claim they falsely accused somebody of rape. Doesn't fit the profile.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#137

Post by papabrown »

tgragnato wrote: post #119
papabrown wrote: post #111

I've always had mixed feelings about Assange going back to the beginning of WL. While I take my hat off to what he has claimed is the purpose of WL, I never quite trusted Assange the man. It always felt to me like the kind of power that WL has needs to be wielded by a person of great moral integrity and Assange never struck me as that kind of person. Information is powerful and it can be used both to force transparen…

> Nobody can operate effectively in a 100% transparent environment. > Many leaks seem to stir up trouble where nothing illegal or malicious is actually occurring. A distinction has to be made between secrecy and privacy. While Assange built a great tool against secrecy (and that's what scares Washington and alikes), it may be something good for privacy (hypothetically, the relationship with your aunt is safe, and may…

I don't think we're that far off. I didn't say we didn't need WL. I said, I don't necessarily trust Assange to be in charge of it. He's a self-promoter. A hypocrite. Opinionated. These are things even some of his best friends might say about him. Not exactly the character traits for someone who has access to things that may be both secret and private.

If he has secret video of US forces firing on unarmed civilians, yes, of course, I consider it an obligation of WL to release it and expose who covered it up.

If a diplomat sends a cable back to his superiors at the State Department and says, "The prime minister is rumored to act irrationally under stress. I suggest that we do not snap react to any statements he makes without obtaining further clarifications from other contacts within the administration." what good does that information being in the public domain do? It embarrasses the prime minister. It ruins the relationship between the sender and the prime minister. But what public good does it do to have this information in the public domain?

Sometimes I think WL revels in knocking the powerful down a peg or two whether or not they've actually done anything other than share a private thought that was now exposed to the public.

And part of my point is that I think Assange already picks sides. He's doling out punishment based on his own political biases. That's why I don't trust him.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#138

Post by tgragnato »

papabrown wrote: post #137
tgragnato wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody can operate effectively in a 100% transparent environment. > Many leaks seem to stir up trouble where nothing illegal or malicious is actually occurring. A distinction has to be made between secrecy and privacy. While Assange built a great tool against secrecy (and that's what scares Washington and alikes), it may be something good for privacy (hypothetically, the relationship with your aunt is safe, and may…

I don't think we're that far off. I didn't say we didn't need WL. I said, I don't necessarily trust Assange to be in charge of it. He's a self-promoter. A hypocrite. Opinionated. These are things even some of his best friends might say about him. Not exactly the character traits for someone who has access to things that may be both secret and private. If he has secret video of US forces firing on unarmed civilians, y…

> I don't necessarily trust Assange to be in charge of it.

As long as published documents are verifiable by a third party, you don't need to trust him.

> If a diplomat sends a cable back to his superiors at the State Department and says ...

When a government does not listen, you get to a point where you need unconventional (read controversial) arguments to be heard. Like it or not, the more things you publish, the more impact you have: that's exactly what Wikileaks is.

For a more detailed exposition: https://youtu.be/TSR-b9yuTbM

> He's doling out punishment based on his own political biases.

It may be, but is it really relevant? If you have infos regarding Russian and/or Chinese activities that Wikileaks do not want to disclose, you can always publish them through another channel.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#139

Post by mirimir »

asveikau wrote: post #136
mirimir wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read many articles about what went down in Sweden. I've seen no claims that he forced either woman to have sex. He didn't seduce them. They wanted to have sex with him, and bragged to their friends. And they remained friendly with him afterward. Until they learned that he'd had sex with both of them. That's when it got crazy. Also, one of them was concerned that a condom had broken, and wanted him tested for STD…

I googled and found: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange... If this is as reported, I am not a lawyer but it sounds like he committed a crime, and he is most certainly a major asshole, among other things pushing the boundaries of what constitutes consent, then making the other party feel uncomfortable in their own home. Then he blames the consequences on a global conspiracy. Probably part of…

Thanks, I hadn't seen that article. He does sound horrible. And yet, I wonder why those women took so long to decide that they'd been raped. I have read that it's not uncommon. And I suppose that, being Wikileaks supporters, they didn't want to make a scene.

So yes, he does seem like a major asshole.

Re: Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship

#140

Post by int_19h »

dragonwriter wrote: post #93
int_19h wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what he's trying to say is that a representative democracy with single-member districts (rather than any sort of party lists) and first-past-the-post, winner-takes-all electoral system, is inherently biased against political compromises and towards partisan polarization.

> with single-member districts (rather than any sort of party lists) Single-member, FPTP districts are the issue (or, rather, the lack of proportionality and meaningful choice that comes with that is the issue); the absence of party lists, OTOH, is irrelevant. There are solutions to the issues posed by single-member, FPTP districts that retain candidate-centered elections and do not use party lists. (STV in multimemb…

How do you get proportional representation with single-member districts without involving party lists somehow (as in e.g. MMP)? STV doesn't fix it - while it makes third party votes viable, it still means that third parties are going to win far fewer districts than the overall proportion of their vote across all districts.
Post reply on HN