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

Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 286 posts

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#211

Post by bootlooped »

joering2 wrote: post #64
blhack wrote: post #9

What I've wanted for Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and if Obama would have done it before leaving office, it would have earned him infinite respect: Try them, possibly even find them guilty of something, but also award them with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. What these people have done is probably illegal, but it is unquestionably about the most American, patriotic act you could commit. Sp…

Couldnt upvote this more. Imagine sitation in which you drive on highway and on the other side of median you see a car crashed with people burning inside. You drive by without stopping because pulling over on highway, leaving unatended cr and jaywalking across highway lanes is illawful. What kind of society one would live if we would never engage in any action because of blank asumption that eventual parsonal liabili…

I don't see how this analogy works for Assange, since he's done everything he can do to avoid liability.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#212

Post by dnautics »

nostrademons wrote: post #132
dnautics wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example in Obama's political tenure when he had ever done anything consistent with that sentiment or that strategy? Politically, Obama's heroes are the progressives of the Wilsonian and Roosevelt era. Wilson jailed Eugene Debs for sedition, and ironically it took the era's conservative firebrand (H L Mencken) rabble-rousing about it in exactly that spirit and eventually Harding (not exactly a socialis…

H.L. Mencken wasn't really a conservative firebrand, more of an iconoclast. His position then could be likened to that of Trey Parker & Matt Stone today, i.e. shits on everything, liberal and conservative, for the lulz, and occasionally makes some very perceptive social commentary in the process.

that's very fair, although I would say he was more sophisticated than Matt & Trey, and his favorite enemy was FDR.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#213

Post by resters »

resters wrote: post #135
travmatt wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m never going to understand the praise for Julian Assange. He may have started out with good intentions, but his turns towards Putin and subsequent actions are pretty unforgivable in my estimation. I can’t see how a moral person could stand by his decisions, honestly. I think Pussy Riot summer him up best: "But Julian Assange, he openly works with [Russia]," Nadya Tolokno told The Daily Beast in an interview Thursd…

So what does it mean for Assange to do something that favors one nation's interest over America's? Wikileaks is not meant to benefit "US interests" in the sense of pleasing US leaders. The entire point of a transparency organization is to reveal information that helps the people of the country understand what their leaders are up to. If it was revealed, for example, that Trump was a pedophile, the case could be made…

The parent is a logical argument yet nobody tries to refute it, only downvote it for political reasons.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#214

Post by Buge »

eeeuo wrote: post #168
blhack wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, and this is why it would have gained him so much respect in my eyes. I think it's possible to both recognize the importance of intelligence agencies, and recognize why whistleblowing should be discouraged, but at the same time recognize the patriotism required to do it anyway. Giving these people the Medal of Freedom, to me, would have been an acknowledgment of that. "Yeah, you shouldn't have done that, but y…

Leaking secrets is not a freedom of speech issue. I would agree with you if Snowden narrowly leaked the details of the PRISM program. I think if he did that he would have been a genuine hero. But he didn't. He downloaded as much secret information as he could, and gave them to organizations that were openly hostile to American interests. Consider the level of detail of methods and sources in the information leaked by…

Did Snowden give is data to organizations that were hostile to the US? I thought he gave it to journalists, and let them censor as they saw fit.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#215

Post by Buge »

lifeformed wrote: post #209
bootlooped wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That second link appears to just go to the Wikileaks Wikipedia page now, the section may have been removed? This article covers the same content: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...

Some reason the period at the end of the URL gets deleted when I try to post it. It's supposed to go to the section right above the first link.

I assume so many people post a url then a period immediately after it to end the sentence, that HN strips off the period at the end of the url, assuming it's not part of the url and was instead meant to end the sentence. I can see that the period in your comment is not linkified, so HN considered it not part of the url. By doing this, HN is going against RFC 3986 which says that the period is an unreserved character and is valid in fragments (and paths) without being escaped.

You can work around HN's behavior by escaping the period as %2e

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_betwe...

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#216

Post by resters »

slg wrote: post #159
resters wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will continue to ponder your point, but I am inclined to disagree. Suppose we consider a two page document of classified information. Leaking one or two sentences from the document can be done in a highly misleading way. In fact, our officials routinely leak information in this way, fed to reporters to spin a narrative that supports a political goal. But seeing a trove of documents can make the broader malfeasance…

That isn't what Wikileaks is doing. They aren't releasing "a trove of documents [that] can make the broader malfeasance much more clear". They are releasing absolutely everything they receive. The simplest example is their refusal to redact the names of Afghani civilians who worked with the US government and therefore put their lives in jeopardy. That type of action by Wikileaks says that they believe their political…

The example you give is frequently used as an example of Wikileaks being the cause of atrocities rather than the one revealing the atrocities.

Wikileaks has been under attack by various governments for a long time, eventually resulting in Assange losing his freedom.

But more importantly, the big news orgs (NYTimes, WaPo, etc.) who had initially partnered with WL on the war logs were pressured into ending their journalistic cooperation with Wikileaks. Both papers went on to assassinate Assange's character at every turn after that, conveniently omitting the unique definition of rape in Swedish law, etc.

In case my point is not clear, the idea is that the NYT should have been proofreading the release to be sure that all of the appropriate redaction occurred, but it couldn't do this because it had already taken sides with the US Government and other corrupt governments against Wikileaks.

Worse yet, the papers follow the lead of US officials in focusing their reporting on Assange's personality while ignoring most of the actual information that was leaked. Regardless of what you think about Assange or WL, it's pretty hard to argue that the so-called journalists from our once-great newspapers did anything but a horrible and irresponsible job of covering the leaked information.

So strong is the intimidation created by the government that even the Snowden leaks could not be accurately published in The Guardian.

How is it possible that people don't see the obvious... things that WL publishes embarrass governments and officials because they reveal very serious crimes. But I suspect nobody will address this last point because like the papers, most opponents of Assange really want the story to be about Assange and not about the deeply concerning information that he heroically made available to us.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#217

Post by resters »

viraptor wrote: post #157
resters wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that Snowden's leaks would have been better sent to Wikileaks. We've seen perhaps 5% of the information, and much of the illegal behavior is likely still going on. The only hope that US intel agencies have to redeem themselves as working toward the interests of the people and not against them is to be totally transparent about all illegal behavior and to undergo a full audit to stop all of it.

If that was the process, we'd hear about everything lumped together and quickly forgotten about in confusion. The way it was published instead, people have time to process specific revelations and let the whole thing stay alive for multiple media cycles.

After being put under duress by many state sponsored attacks, Assange had to resort to a PR stunt strategy. Yes, it is unfortunate, but anyone who was under such attacks and was determined to make such a vital institution as WL survive would have done the same thing.

They attacked WL's journalistic partners, fundraising channels, even forced Assange to hole up in an embassy, as well as (likely) many other attacks.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#218

Post by jasonvorhe »

syngrog66 wrote: post #171
blhack wrote: post #9

What I've wanted for Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and if Obama would have done it before leaving office, it would have earned him infinite respect: Try them, possibly even find them guilty of something, but also award them with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. What these people have done is probably illegal, but it is unquestionably about the most American, patriotic act you could commit. Sp…

Assange is a Russian agent. Snowden most likely as well. They both deserve execution & infamy, not praise.

The death penalty. How civil of you.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#219

Post by MrBingley »

Good. It's quite clear that WikiLeaks is in cahoots with the Russians after the DNC hack, and their collusion with the Trump campaign to try to show their "impartiality" is despicable. I used to have some respect for WikiLeaks, but they are just Russian pawns. Snowden I respect, but not Assange.

Re: Ecuador will hand over Julian Assange to the UK

#220

Post by bootlooped »

resters wrote: post #111
windowshopping wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange is a hero? Last I checked he was working with Russia to support the Trump campaign. Used to respect him a lot, lost all my respect for him and WikiLeaks when he got involved in trying to influence elections. That was not that site's mandate.

It's not really accurate to say he was trying to influence elections. His goal is to publish verifiable documents that bring transparency to important political issues. He did not take sides whatsoever in the 2016 election, and obviously would have loved to publish information about Trump if any had been leaked to WL.

> and obviously would have loved to publish information about Trump if any had been leaked to WL.

I don't think that's clear, since they were in seemingly friendly contact with Donald Trump Jr and Roger Stone. When caught, Assange claimed they were only pretending to be friendly with them. If Wikileaks has no credibility, the explanation is unbelievable, if the explanation is believable it means they are willing to lie and deceive to achieve their goals, which in turn loses them credibility.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/roger-s...

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/assange...

Post reply on HN