Live data from Hacker News

Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

theguardian.com

11–20 of 162 posts

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#11
post #9

> The move came after Assange tweeted on Monday challenging Britain’s accusation that Russia was responsible for the nerve agent poisoning of a Russian former double agent and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury earlier this month. So it's actually not so wrong to think that Russia is not >proven I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to…

> why would the UK-Ecuador relations be in danger of a tweet of a fugitive?

Because he's a fugitive that they are sheltering. They've taken responsibility for him.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#13
post #9

> The move came after Assange tweeted on Monday challenging Britain’s accusation that Russia was responsible for the nerve agent poisoning of a Russian former double agent and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury earlier this month. So it's actually not so wrong to think that Russia is not >proven I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to…

> I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to the conclusion that Putin is responsible this time.

Putin is given far too much credit. But the Russian wetworks division, under Putin's authority, has its fingerprints all over the Salisbury attack.

> shouldn't people like Assange reveal it?

Largely Assange has been an anti-liberal democracy apologist for the last 5+ years. A sad turn for someone starting at a radical anarchist position, but it's been pretty obvious. He's also largely destroyed any of Wikileaks rep as a honest broker and reduced it to the reputation of "anti-US intelligence". AFAICT, he's operating as a (probably unwitting) Russian front these days.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#15
post #2

The key bit: > The Ecuadorian government said in statement that it had acted because Assange had breached “a written commitment made to the government at the end of 2017 not to issue messages that might interfere with other states”.

At this point, they can give any plausible reason, it wouldn't make a difference. They're just bending over to the US... It's surprising they lasted that long already :-/

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#16
post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

>convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia

How about judging the information on its merits, not its source? Why does it matter one wink if you don't like the leakers?

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#17
post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

Aren't we getting enough Russia bashing from the MSM ?

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#18
post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

> convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia How about judging the information on its merits, not its source? Why does it matter one wink if you don't like the leakers?

Intent matters.

There's a difference between a whistleblower wanting to expose things that violate the constitution because they want those things to stop, and a foreign agent exposing the same actions, but with the intent to destabilize people's trust in their government.

The end result might be the same. But to say it doesn't matter where a leak came from, is to also say that whistleblowers are no different from foreign spies.

Update to add my bias here: This is why I can respect the actions of Edward Snowden, but find Julian Assange completely untrustworthy.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#19
post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

Do you really need something like Wikileaks to expose how corrupt Russia’s government is? I’m pretty sure it’s common knowledge now.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#20
post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

> convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia How about judging the information on its merits, not its source? Why does it matter one wink if you don't like the leakers?

I'll question the information merit of any rotten source. I suggest you do the same.
Post reply on HN