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

Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 465 posts

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#191

Post by toufiqbarhamov »

apsec112 wrote: post #9
belltaco wrote: post #3

What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins? Or is the reasoning that the law should give him special treatment and exemptions not given to others? Also, is the 1st amendment protection even applicable to foreigners on foreign soil?

Yes, First Amendment protections apply to non-Americans. However, as you say, Assange is being prosecuted for conspiracy to hack computers, not for his speech.

That’s true, but you don’t get clicks from outrage by just saying the boring truth. I’ve also been reading rants from people who think the US is going to throw a bunch of other charges at him when he gets here, which is just hilariously wrong. In general a state can’t request extradition on charge A then throw B-Z into the mix when the plane lands. The only way to expand on the original charges are with permission from the country which received the original request on the basis of new information.

But again, that doesn’t feed the conspiracy-minded mob or generate clicks.

Edit response to emiliobumachar:

If the US broke international law and their treaties with the UK it would be a really bad look at the very least. Conversely if that doesn’t happen what are you going to be convinced of?

(Sorry about responding this way, but after two months of getting no response from the mods about rate limiting me, I’m just adapting.)

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#193

Post by KorematsuFred »

rayiner wrote: post #89
apsec112 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, First Amendment protections apply to non-Americans. However, as you say, Assange is being prosecuted for conspiracy to hack computers, not for his speech.

The First Amendment probably does not apply to non-Americans with respect to their conduct abroad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Verdugo-Urqui... > The Court held that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures did not apply where United States agents searched and seized property located in a foreign country owned by a nonresident alien in the United States. Chief J…

American law can not apply to non-Americans abroad.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#194

Post by airstrike »

sigzero wrote: post #140
robertAngst wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of Information only exists because government is historically corrupt and there needs to be a counterweight. Given the corruptness of government, Freedom of Information can be bad. Unredacted data sounds dangerous, but it asks the question- "Why is the government doing it to begin with?"

Because there ARE secrets that governments need to keep.

I find it amazing that this is actually downvoted, but then again this is probably a biased audience as far as that topic goes

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#195

Post by betterunix2 »

ausbah wrote: post #173
doe88 wrote: post #139

I tell you what, I'm moderate, some might say a bit coward, tonight I will sleep as usual, tomorrow I won't protest, never been in a single protest in my life. But I nonetheless think there is something wrong in our current western democracies. Instead of prosecuting people committing murders in a video, these are the men and women revealing these facts that are hunted down, for years. Meanwhile, these same people do…

>Instead of prosecuting people committing murders in a video what..?

Possibly a reference to the "Collateral Murder" video released by Wikileaks, which showed a US military helicopter shooting people in Iraq.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#196

Post by emiliobumachar »

toufiqbarhamov wrote: post #191
apsec112 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, First Amendment protections apply to non-Americans. However, as you say, Assange is being prosecuted for conspiracy to hack computers, not for his speech.

That’s true, but you don’t get clicks from outrage by just saying the boring truth. I’ve also been reading rants from people who think the US is going to throw a bunch of other charges at him when he gets here, which is just hilariously wrong. In general a state can’t request extradition on charge A then throw B-Z into the mix when the plane lands. The only way to expand on the original charges are with permission fr…

If charges B-Z are in fact thrown into the mix after the plane lands, would you then be convinced of a politically motivated conspiracy?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#197

Post by ENGNR »

txru wrote: post #141
ENGNR wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That linked article doesn't say that Assange had any RNC emails, only that Russia probably has some. Given that Russia is very pro-Trump it's not hard to imagine Russia only providing Assange with the DNC ones to publish. And he has said that if he had RNC emails he'd have published them

The Podesta leaks and the DNC emails came from Russia, and he must have known their intent. Either he's an active tool, or a passive and complicit one, but I think my point stands.

Back in the day journalists didn't pick a side, they just checked the facts and published anything in the public interest

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#198

Post by betterunix2 »

ehsankia wrote: post #106
Simulacra wrote: post #6

I use to go back and forth on Julian, but at this point I think he should be punished, but what that punishment should be I don't know. I think Manning stealing the cables was an absolute wrong, and Assange facilitating that shows a level of culpability. He should not be afforded American protection. Crimes were committed, even if they were done with the best intentions, it was still a crime. We all count, or no one…

I would like to know what the Mueller report and US intelligence has on him and his involvement with Russian interference is US elections. Assange was pretty active during the 2016 election and I'd like to see what his involvement was.

I am going to guess that he was an unwitting stooge of the Russians. Assange has been in over his head for a long time -- the "insurance file" fiasco should have been your first clue:

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/leak-at-wikileaks...

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#199

Post by belltaco »

nocturnial wrote: post #189
roywiggins wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how conspiracies work. Each participant does only a part of the overall conspiracy. If I forge a document and give it to you so you can sneak into a secure area and commit a murder, I am not just guilty of forgery, I am guilty of conspiracy to murder. They guy who drives the getaway car is guilty of murder as much as the people who walk into the building. This is the entire point of conspiracy law. Driving a c…

I think you read over the part where I said it was illegal. You don't need to invent scenarios, you can use the facts of this case. Manning already had access and didn't need the password to be cracked. Wikileaks already received information from Manning. Someone in the chat log told Manning they would pass the hash to someone else. They then told Manning "no luck so far". Keep in mind, they haven't provided any proo…

>Or that he actually send the hash to someone else to crack it,

Still a crime.

>And to top it all off, Manning did not need the password in the first place! People keep forgetting this.

Still a crime.

Post reply on HN