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

Assange Hearing Day 2

craigmurray.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 298 posts

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#21

Post by 9nGQluzmnq3M »

EliRivers wrote: post #2

Consider the source, right? Always ask ourselves "What does this source, this reporter, this organisation, want us to think?" That doesn't mean that we have to ignore everything they say; it just becomes us to know what the source's own agenda is, to better arm ourselves. Craig Murray's website suggests he is, for example, a credulous believer of Russian explanations for events. He does on occasion correct himself (s…

Craig Murray is a former career diplomat and UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who got railroaded out of the foreign service for having the temerity to note that Uzbek leader Islam Karimov was (literally) boiling his opponents to death. If this is an agenda, I support it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Murray

Also: https://archive.is/20061012215514/http://www.craigmurray.co....

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#22

Post by shadowprofile77 »

mcv wrote: post #14
101404 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting learning was, how to most effectively frame a person if you want them to lose public support. They first did the "rapist" framing. Making up a case that never existed and repeating it in the media all the time. Surprisingly, that didn't work as effectivity as expected. So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". That seems to have achieved the intended outcome with many previous support…

These are not things that "they" did, though. They're things that "he" did.

Well, no. Assange did not accuse himself of rape and then push out a media narrative about it over successive months. "They" (in this case, Swedish and other legal authorities and various news agencies did). And though the question of his level of guilt in those cases remains somewhat ambiguous as far as I know, the now dropped rape cases have the whiff of political smear to them.

Regardless of Assange's merits or failures as an activist or human being, the current conditions he's being subjected to absolutely do indicate a man being made an example of for politically motivated reasons and in violation of basic legal guarantees. That is something that's far more dangerous than anything he himself is likely to be convicted of.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#23

Post by resters »

mcv wrote: post #14
101404 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting learning was, how to most effectively frame a person if you want them to lose public support. They first did the "rapist" framing. Making up a case that never existed and repeating it in the media all the time. Surprisingly, that didn't work as effectivity as expected. So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". That seems to have achieved the intended outcome with many previous support…

These are not things that "they" did, though. They're things that "he" did.

You believe that Assange is both a rapist and a right wing zealot? There is no evidence to support either claim.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#24

Post by arethuza »

fit2rule wrote: post #18
Tomte wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is about England...

I think it goes without saying that the UK is becoming less and less the kind of place that any freedom-loving person would want to visit. Living in Europe, I am aware of a number of people who have decided to have nothing more to do with the place, and these are wealthy, educated, business leaders. I can't imagine where this is going to lead if Assange is not freed as a result of these proceedings. We are watching t…

There have been significant cutbacks in the criminal justice system in England and Wales over the last decade or so - ironically by the party of "law and order".

I can strongly recommend the book by the Secret Barrister:

https://thesecretbarrister.com/

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#25

Post by bambax »

ganzuul wrote: post #9

This is horrifying. As a European I'm afraid to even visit the USA. I'd expect this from some third world hellhole but not from a country which professes to have the rule of law.

Since Brexit and because of it, the UK is becoming part of the US empire; it's a dominion and as such, it will obey US injunctions in that case and any other.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#26

Post by tokamak-teapot »

bilekas wrote: post #15

This is always going to happen when you go about doing what he did in such a flamboyant way. I agree that he was by no means an angel, but I also see the reasons why the governments want to set an example. People have this idea that it's a terrible thing if their governments have secrets.. It's normal.. That doesn't justify this treatment of him. By any means, one would think he would be treated well in public. > Is…

Yes he's being made an example of. He brazenly broke the (unwritten) rules and this is an educational beatdown[1].

It will end badly for Assange, because two of the "three cases where the EBD may be dangerous" (see linked article) apply. Whether Assange is 'in the right' or not, #1 will still apply to him.

[1] https://chirontraining.blogspot.com/2013/03/cofv10-education...

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#27

Post by AllegedAlec »

bilekas wrote: post #15

This is always going to happen when you go about doing what he did in such a flamboyant way. I agree that he was by no means an angel, but I also see the reasons why the governments want to set an example. People have this idea that it's a terrible thing if their governments have secrets.. It's normal.. That doesn't justify this treatment of him. By any means, one would think he would be treated well in public. > Is…

> If thats right or wrong is anyones guess

You're fucking joking right?

Something about "cruel and unusual punishment", which is present in both English and American law. Furthermore, there's this little document called the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights', which has stuff to say on this matter too, and has been signed by both the US and England.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#28

Post by fit2rule »

arethuza wrote: post #24
fit2rule wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it goes without saying that the UK is becoming less and less the kind of place that any freedom-loving person would want to visit. Living in Europe, I am aware of a number of people who have decided to have nothing more to do with the place, and these are wealthy, educated, business leaders. I can't imagine where this is going to lead if Assange is not freed as a result of these proceedings. We are watching t…

There have been significant cutbacks in the criminal justice system in England and Wales over the last decade or so - ironically by the party of "law and order". I can strongly recommend the book by the Secret Barrister: https://thesecretbarrister.com/

>Woolwich Crown Court

".. if a single day at Woolwich Crown Court does not convince you the existence of liberal democracy is now a lie, then your mind must be very closed indeed."

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#29

Post by _iyig »

Tomte wrote: post #12
ganzuul wrote: post #9

This is horrifying. As a European I'm afraid to even visit the USA. I'd expect this from some third world hellhole but not from a country which professes to have the rule of law.

The article is about England...

Why have you been downvoted? You are correct. This extradition hearing, and the alleged mistreatment of Mr. Assange, is taking place in London under British authorities.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#30

Post by untog »

101404 wrote: post #11
AndyMcConachie wrote: post #3

> Julian had twice been stripped naked and searched, eleven times been handcuffed, and five times been locked up in different holding cells. On top of this, all of his court documents had been taken from him by the prison authorities, including privileged communications between his lawyers and himself, and he had been left with no ability to prepare to participate in today’s proceedings. Still barely any mention of t…

An interesting learning was, how to most effectively frame a person if you want them to lose public support. They first did the "rapist" framing. Making up a case that never existed and repeating it in the media all the time. Surprisingly, that didn't work as effectivity as expected. So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". That seems to have achieved the intended outcome with many previous support…

The rape accusations were credible, he just refused to answer to them. That doesn’t mean they were invalid in the first place, it just means they’ll never be proven in a court of law.
Post reply on HN