51–60 of 173 posts
How is it possible there is not yet a huge mob gathering near the court and threatening to burn everything. Because, this is literally revolting. How many people support that? And how many people are disgusted by that? Would nobody regret doing nothing?
"The charge against Julian is very specific; conspiring with Chelsea Manning to publish the Iraq War logs, the Afghanistan war logs and the State Department cables. The charges are nothing to do with Sweden, nothing to do with sex, and nothing to do with the 2016 US election" I'd like to call out the popular and prolific users of hacker news who previously were all about Sweden, sex and election interference and who…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt most people care. Outside of a few friends, I doubt most people I know know that this is 1) going on and 2) who Assange even is.
It doesn't help that Assange is kind of unsavory. It should not affect things, but it does.
But is it possible that actually the judge is prepared to deny the extradition, and cannot say anything just yet because of the secret duty? If she thinks all of that is torture for Assange, maybe she is right to want it to end as soon as possible, especially if she already has taken her decision.
That isn't the case. This ruling was made by a magistrate, who only deals with lower cases and administration for bigger cases. The actual extradition case will be heard by a different person.
Appeals go to the Administrative Court list of the High Court, though, which is potentially a panel of very senior judges indeed.
In 50 years, people will look in disgust and utter disbelief at our treatment of Assange. Or maybe this is too optimistic. Maybe our grandsons will indeed understand us. They will understand us too well, and be ashamed of us.
He will be forgotten in ten years. And for a good reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't help that Assange is kind of unsavory. It should not affect things, but it does.
also that "mainstream" journalists refuse to recognise him as a journalist and defend his rights like they would one of their own.
Mainstream American journalists have been bending over backwards doing exactly that with regard to the US indictment, even when it requires rather unusual characterization of what journalism normally entails to make the case.
They haven't been focussed on the extradition because they don't view the extradition as the problem, but the indictment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the issue with Assange was that he never showed any "limitation of harm" when he chose not to redact any of the content. It's a pretty core tenant of journalism ethics. Those sort of subtleties are important when you're going to be arguing in front of a judge.
But the sort of pond scum that work for the British tabloids also never show any restraint, and yet no-one questions that they are journalists. No, it's the "just a blogger" thing - if you only publish on the internet and not in print then your journalistic credentials will always be slightly suspect. (source: I ran a newspaper, and while 90% of our readers read our stories on our website or FB page, according to our…
They would never publish classified material without clearing it first with the UK government. And at minimum carefully redacting information that would put people in harm's way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is he if not a journalist? He is not accused of leaking documents himself, but of facilitating their dissemination. Sounds more or less like the textbook definition of journalism to me.
So the issue with Assange was that he never showed any "limitation of harm" when he chose not to redact any of the content. It's a pretty core tenant of journalism ethics. Those sort of subtleties are important when you're going to be arguing in front of a judge.
It's possible Assange hasn't been sleeping enough for years due to the stress of his situation. The effects of that might resemble those of torture and debilitating drugs. Just something to consider...
Consider this: Sleep deprivation is torture. Anyone being held in a condition like this and not getting serious medical attention -- psychological and physiological -- is also torture. The fact that after several months outside the confines of the embassy-cell, he is still in a condition that resembles torture victims is evidence enough of that. It's also very convenient that it looks like this is self-inflicted and…
But that's not the first thing which came to my mind in reading TFA when the author referenced torture and drugs.
Reading the description of Assange's incoherent ramblings reminded me of a relative who suffered from extreme sleep apnea for over a decade, where he basically would never sleep for more than a few minutes before choking himself awake. He became pretty incoherent and insane, and his machismo pride prevented him from seeking treatment for it.
I don't think I'd be sleeping well in Assange's shoes.
"Extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense." If an American journalist in UK is publishing Chinese military secrets, he will not be extradited to China. If an Australian journalist in UK is publishing American military secrets, will he be extradited to America? This is the question now...
Many would argue that Assange isn't a journalist. And so that also is a factor.
However, I’m sure the judge will be influenced by her estimate of how likely Assange’s defense is to win their case.