Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#71

Post by noer » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

gnode wrote: post #49

ezoe wrote: post #20

I guess this news gives Assange a valid reason for his bail-jumping. He was suspected of raping in Sweden. That was what he was bail-jumping for. But the real reason is the threat of his extradition to US for... what? revealing the war crime of the US? That shall never be a crime. War crime shall not be hidden. US shall be punished for obstructing the information of war crime.

> for... what? revealing the war crime of the US? They're trying to get him for being an accomplice to specific computer crimes related to the acquisition of that information. Of course, the motivation is retribution for embarrassing the government.

The motivation probably also the normalization of prosecuting a journalist the United States sees as a threat/enemy. Assange is very flawed (to say the least), but if he's successfully prosecuted then it opens the door to prosecuting other journalists as well.

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#72

Post by justinmchase » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

ezoe wrote: post #20

I guess this news gives Assange a valid reason for his bail-jumping. He was suspected of raping in Sweden. That was what he was bail-jumping for. But the real reason is the threat of his extradition to US for... what? revealing the war crime of the US? That shall never be a crime. War crime shall not be hidden. US shall be punished for obstructing the information of war crime.

They're going to say espionage and then make everything classified and so he will have no defense and we will never be given proof.

The funny thing is that he's currently being held for not being able to justify bail jumping but now that he's being extradited it justifies his bail jumping... Its absolutely crazy to watch how the law is basically completely fake at a certain level.

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#73

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #46

ezoe wrote: post #20

I guess this news gives Assange a valid reason for his bail-jumping. He was suspected of raping in Sweden. That was what he was bail-jumping for. But the real reason is the threat of his extradition to US for... what? revealing the war crime of the US? That shall never be a crime. War crime shall not be hidden. US shall be punished for obstructing the information of war crime.

He ran to the UK... that's not the place you go if you're fleeing the long arm of the US. Assange long ago lost any credibility as far as I'm concerned. I think his statements are about crafting his own public narrative than really revealing any of his motivations / actual choices. Wikileaks repeatedly claimed they would release X information, and then simply didn't and wouldn't say a word. I'm not sure if they still…

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#74

Post by duxup » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

mtgx wrote: post #64

duxup wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems logical that such a thing would happen.

Not necessarily. Climate change is arguably destroying the U.S. through droughts, hurricanes, floods, etc. But you don't see the U.S. react so swiftly. It's really when the interests of those in power that are affected, that the "state acts so quickly."

Folks will argue how much and when, but the US state is still a democracy and people elected people who oppose action on climate change... it makes sense.

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#75

Post by gcb0 » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

Veen wrote: post #14

gcb0 wrote: post #8

this confirms that jumping bail was the right course of action. Sweden didn't produce a single evidence of the crime, and US extradition hearings are happening behind closed doors. how isn't this exactly what prompted him to ask for asylum, which the UK magistrate called paranoia at the time?

It's not behind closed doors. The article says some journalists were allowed in and what Assange said in the hearing is reported in the article.

cool. hopefully we will have a transcript somewhere?

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#76

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

ifdefdebug wrote: post #43

mavdi wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the things he revealed can be classified as treason. War crimes maybe, treason no way. I also wonder why he never revealed any of Russia's alleged crimes in Ukraine or Syria. Just a thought.

Did he have access to data about "Russia's alleged crimes in Ukraine or Syria"?

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#77

Post by Veen » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #58

Veen wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your view is irrelevant unless you can change the law.

Not necessarily if they can get on the jury and use jury nullification. Or make this concept more well known to people who may be on the jury.

Jury nullification is hard to pull off though. I'm not sure Assange would have the support he'd need to guarantee a jury finding in his favor (assuming he's actually guilty of what he's accused of).

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#78

Post by bogomipz » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

mothsonasloth wrote: post #5

Assange has found himself as political currency for the British government. I imagine his extradition will be "expedited" with a little nudge from Jeremy Hunt. Very saddening.

Well I think he found himself as political currency for the Ecuadorean government and Rafael Correa first. The suspension of Assange's Ecuadorian citizenship was a card played by Correa's successor President Moreno. Correa has continued to support Assange and has excoriated President Moreno for this action.

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#79

Post by kemayo » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

gcb0 wrote: post #8

this confirms that jumping bail was the right course of action. Sweden didn't produce a single evidence of the crime, and US extradition hearings are happening behind closed doors. how isn't this exactly what prompted him to ask for asylum, which the UK magistrate called paranoia at the time?

Here's a 2012 article detailing what Sweden provided: https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/media/2012/09/legal-mytho...

i.e. basically they showed Sweden had charged him with stuff which was a crime in both Sweden and the U.K., a bunch of courts agreed that the charges looked at least reasonable and were valid grounds for extradition to Sweden, and then Assange went to the Equadorian embassy.

I think that extraditing him to the U.S. looks like petty revenge from their government given what he's charged with, but the Swedish extradition seems fair, and arguably was in his best interest to have gone along with at the time.

Re: Julian Assange Appears in Court for U.S. Extradition Hearing

#80

Post by coldtea » Thu, May 02, 2019, 3:50 PM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #9

resters wrote: post #3

Keep in mind all the crimes by US officials that Assange revealed. In my view many of those crimes committed by officials are treason, yet all have been swept under the rug.

[flagged]

Accusation of whataboutism is a thought-stopper.

What-about-X allows you to put things in perspective.

Things - including crimes (or alleged crimes) - don't exist in isolation.

It depends who they happen to (I wouldn't care much to punish the person who helped murder a dictator and bring democracy, for example), it depends if they help stop bigger crimes (I'd applaud the small guy that does a crime to bring down much larger criminals), and they

And even if an accusation is only checked in isolation by a court (though even courts take into account the larger context), we're not courts, we're people and we can see beyond the narrow confines and what's legal, to see what's good/moral/etc. Jean Valjean's conviction was "legal" too.

Without that, one is either purposefully pushing for your own agenda (our their own country's etc.), or getting lured into considering X alone, without anybody letting them consider its significance and bigger impact. They're then "straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel".

(That's also part of how "demonizing" someone works).

The knee-jerk condemnation of "whataboutism" is a legalist/moralist thought-stopper that kills all political thinking and nuance of society/world at large.