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

The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 577 posts

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#481

Post by foldr »

flunhat wrote: post #139
foldr wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which articles are you referring to?

There's at least this one: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/julian-assange-i... . Technically free to leave the embassy, so it's not a false statement. But would definitely be arrested and extradited if he did, so it's not quite a fair statement either. Also found this article which said he wouldn't be prosecuted by the U.S. in 2013: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julia... Also, lol…

>Technically free to leave the embassy,

Indeed.

>But would definitely be arrested and extradited

Who has ever denied that he'd be arrested? To say that he'd definitely be extradited is speculation.

It's still not at all clear that he will be prosecuted by the US, so I can't see anything particularly silly about someone predicting in 2013 -- before the Russian links were widely known -- that Assange would not be prosecuted by the US.

The New American does not appear to be a serious publication. No doubt you can find people on the internet who've said silly things on all kinds of topics.

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#482

Post by DoctorOetker »

stef25 wrote: post #436
resters wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. As I put it in another comment, if someone leaked information that led to Jerry Sandusky being stopped several years sooner, would it matter if the leaker was affiliated with a rival football program? Because of how WL releases full, minimally redacted documents, there is really no reason to worry about the details. Failures of journalistic integrity happen because of strategic omissions or intentional misdi…

Technically, how is it even possible to verify the authenticity and completeness of leaked emails unless by the owner or the hoster?

this is a good question, see rester's comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18466194

DKIM DomainKey Identified Mail, obviously diplomatic communications must prevent spoofing (!), so those mails are signed anyway, ensuring provenance of the emails

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#483

Post by stavros »

narag wrote: post #367
StavrosK wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest you read the article you linked.

I suggest you read the article you linked. Please review carefully the chain of comments, because it seems there could be some misunderstanding there: consumer451 was answering to darawk, not to you. Maybe instead of "to textbook whataboutism" was meant to be "with textbook whataboutism"? Otherwise this thread is total nonsense to me. No surprise either...

He was responding to them, saying that they, in turn, were responding to textbook whataboutism, ie my comment.

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#484

Post by stef25 »

kazagistar wrote: post #446
stef25 wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you'd have no problem with your neighbor hacking and dumping your entire inbox online for the whole world to see?

There is a difference between individuals and governments. Public servants like politicians choose to enter the public space willingly, and must be held accountable and responsible. The only safe way for a government to hold power is via transparancy and auditability. Of course those to whom we relinquish the power of life and death should be held to a different standard of lower privacy. Having the government secret…

I agree with politicians choosing to enter the public space and that they should be held accountable.

Spying on private citizens is wrong but has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make, which is - despite the fact govt should be held accountable, that does not mean they aren't entitled to private communication.

The public doesn't need to know every letter they wrote during their political career and their communications certainly don't have to be accessible by anyone wholesale, which is in fact exactly what WL is trying to achieve. Lower privacy != no privacy.

WL completely ignores the concepts of confidentiality, security clearances, NDAs at all levels of government, from your standard office clerk all the way up to the president and everything in between. There's no way that can be justified.

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#485

Post by nl »

hnmonkey wrote: post #437
resters wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire Guccifer narrative is the most speculative and least substantiated aspect of the entire drama. That doesn't mean it's false, however. But one might wonder why anyone cares about it or gives it any consideration, when there are so many far stronger data points. The Guccifer narrative supports (weakly) the idea of a link between Russia and the emails. So in order for this to matter you have to believe that R…

> The Guccifer narrative supports (weakly) the idea of a link between Russia and the emails. Gufficer is literally a person or group of persons in Russian GRU (military intelligence). It's about as direct a link as you can get and the American government came out and said this.

You don't even need to rely on the US government for this.

Everyone from the Dutch[1] to private companies have come to the same conclusion (and had linked the hacking group to Russia before the DNC hack).

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-russia-cyberc...

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#486

Post by narag »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #476
narag wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries will prosecute you if you are from that country or if the crime is commited in their jurisdiction.

at least comparatively in this thread, yours is one of the most down to earth replies, and it got downvoted?

Maybe it was downvoted in error, sometimes it happens and it's better not to think too much about it.

Sometimes the problem is that the downvoter thinks that I'm implying something that didn't cross my mind. Most times I prefer to keep the downvote better than explaining everything to the boredom point :)

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#487

Post by narag »

codedokode wrote: post #480
narag wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries will prosecute you if you are from that country or if the crime is commited in their jurisdiction.

But Assange is not from US and he published information on Wikileaks not from US. Australia and other countries are not in US jurisidiction yet.

That's my understanding too. But USA authorities have a history of trying to expand their reach as much as possible and there are several interpretations that they could resort to.

As an example, they could say that Assange was an accomplice of Manning, that was convicted of a crime commited in the USA.

Remember when Evo Morales' plane was stopped and searched in Spain (sigh) to catch Snowden? And that's a head of state violation! Or the CIA flights, etc. You can complain as much as you want but that's a fait accompli situation.

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#488

Post by DoctorOetker »

coretx wrote: post #307
komali2 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an obviously absurd belief given he's in an embassy. The USA has done a lot of insane shit but that would be a ridiculous line to cross to eliminate a single "criminal."

I'll give you some absurd and ridiculous details. When the WL backend for collateral murder was hosted at bahnhof in Sweden, moving it to .CH was among other reasons done because of certainly the US, and specifically & allegedly homeland security having launched a DDOS attack so strong it could have kicked Sweden offline. When US agents started their smearing campaign against Assange in Sweden, they accidentally adde…

>In Brussels, WL volunteers where threatened by US agents with silenced pistols in a parking lot.

I live in Belgium, but never heard about this, when did this happen, do you have any references?

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#489

Post by guitarbill »

codedokode wrote: post #420

As I understand, Assange is not an US citizen. How can they prosecute him? Wikipedia page [1] says: > Opinions of Assange at this time [2010] were divided. Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard described his activities as "illegal," but the police said that he had broken no Australian law. United States Vice President Joe Biden and others called him a "terrorist". Some called for his assassination or execution. Tha…

There are more egregious cases. Kim Dotcom has never been to the US, yet is somehow facing extradition to the US. None of these cases are about justice, it's more like bullying.

Re: The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

#490

Post by DoctorOetker »

coretx wrote: post #428
brokenmachine wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When US agents started their smearing campaign against Assange in Sweden, they accidentally added smear to wikipedia that did not happen yet. Citation?

I can't quote it but i can tell you my two independant sources namely Birgitta Jonsdottir ( former Icelandic MP, and one of the people who noticed it ) and Amelia Andersdotter ( former Swedish member of the european parliament, and my ex partner ). Both are highly accessible so you can get your first hand confirmation yourself.

I am trying to understand "...they accidentally added smear to wikipedia that did not happen yet."

The way I understand it they added something to wikipedia before it happened? How did they know it would happen?

On wikipedia articles you can view the history of pages, it would be interesting to locate the exact edit...

Post reply on HN