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

91–100 of 298 posts

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#91

Post by EliRivers »

johnrackles wrote: post #90
EliRivers wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be honest; I genuinely don't know how many times I would expect someone to have handcuffs attached and released in such circumstances. Is eleven times a lot? The Guardian doesn't actually express whether this is excessive or lenient. The Guardian doesn't seem to make any comment on that. I would expect his defence lawyer to complain about his conditions no matter what. The article headlines with thehandcuffs, bu…

The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, certainly thinks assange is being tortured. https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian...

Why are you telling me this? I didn't say he wasn't. Genuinely, I think he's getting a raw deal. The balance of sources certainly indicates that. This isn't about whether or not his treatment is acceptable; this is about ensuring that we read sources carefully. Although it seems to be turning into the idea that to question a source is to take an opposing view, and even that to suggest a source be examined critically is to take an opposing view.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#92

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

bilekas wrote: post #37
AllegedAlec wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. He's being made an example of, its clear as day. My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. > "cruel and unusual punishment" Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped.…

The post is interesting.

I had a similar revelation when my wife, a self-professed history buff, said she won't read My Struggle, because she will be put on the list somewhere. I initially found it amusing, but then I understood that even though she apparently does not seem to care much about privacy, she instinctively understands how weird things have become today. She does not want to address it, but she adjusts her behavior to fit the mold.

Bilekas post is the same. It attempts to present a neutral position. It recognizes current state and assumes that this is just how things are.

Personally, I find it chilling that an individual today is willing to effectively say the following:

1. Assange may be innocent, but it does not matter as the real verdict was already rendered. This is just a formality. 2. His pre-punishment punishment is not as bad as it could have been somewhere else. 3. Assange knew what he was getting into, therefore he does not have basic human rights ( variation of: you don't kick the bear argument )

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#93

Post by jonathanstrange »

I think there is an important point missing in the debate. This is an extradition hearing. It doesn't matter whether Assange is guilty of the alleged crimes the US has come up with or not, what matters is whether he is expected to receive a fair trial in the US and whether the potential sentences in the US would be roughly on a par with what he'd expect for the same alleged crimes in the UK. For all I can see, this is definitely not the case.

You can even make a case that almost nobody should be extradited to the US by any country, since the US justice system has serious flaws, might not be just at all (e.g. it has about 10 times longer maximum prison sentences than in the rest of the civilized world) and the US penal system constitutes a constant human rights violation. For example, the administrations of many US prisons are notoriously unable to prevent the raping and murdering of their inmates. I've even heard people from the US making jokes about prison rape, as if that was to be expected and part of the "justice". As another example, a prison in Illinois was under 23 years of permanent lockdown, meaning that all inmates were in isolation for 23 years. There are credible accounts that Assange is facing imprisonment in high-security isolation facilities similar to what they did to Manning for a long time. I cannot understand why any civilized person would allow a treatment as inhumane as in US maximum security prisons with isolation, regardless of the crime.

Generally speaking, countries should review their extradition treaties. US justice is non-proportionality based on revenge and involves frequent human rights abuses. The same is true of other countries like Japan or Russia, but AFAIK extradition requests to these countries are much rarer.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#94

Post by mft_ »

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…

Tortured?

I mean, some of what you describe is unpalatable, unpleasant, and maybe (IANAL) contrary to expected standards of the treatment of prisoners... but tortured?

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#95

Post by mcv »

joosters wrote: post #87
mcv wrote: post #34

That judge does not exactly come across as impartial in this description. I'm not a lawyer, but it does look like a mistrial of some sort. Whatever you think of Julian Assange, he deserves a fair trial, and this doesn't sound like he's getting one.

The problem is, from the very first paragraph, this website doesn't come across as anything close to impartial either. So I'd suggest you find some more sources before you criticize the judge.

True. Like I said: "from this description". No idea how accurate it is. It would be good to have other sources.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#96

Post by raxxorrax »

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.

Scrapped my wishes of visiting as they started an unrelated war to save face against terrorism they probably caused themselves to a degree through intelligence operations where they propped up the perpetrators. The same they did with Saddam. At least they cleaned up that to a degree, but it also wouldn't win many prices.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#97

Post by BigJ1211 »

fit2rule wrote: post #47
mcv wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As pointed out elsewhere, the rape allegations are credible. And while I'm not calling him a right-wing zealot, and considered him left-libertarian for his dedication to free information and opposition to censorship, he did at some point seem to work with Trump and Russia in order to falsely discredit Clinton and get Trump elected. So again, there is evidence to support it.

How credible is a rape case when the police themselves admitted to altering the reports of the accusers to fit the narrative given to them?

[1] https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...

A source for that statement.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#98

Post by mft_ »

bambax wrote: post #25
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.

I’d be interested in your sources for these statements?

I understand the long history of cooperation between the US and UK (not always balanced) but has anything substantive changed since, or because of, Brexit?

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#99

Post by simion314 »

bilekas wrote: post #37
AllegedAlec wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. He's being made an example of, its clear as day. My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. > "cruel and unusual punishment" Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped.…

>He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped.

Solitary confinement without any justified reason is a form of torture and from the UN employee documents linked in this thread it is illegal and against human rights.

FYI you could have torture that is not physical in case you did not know. For this individual that was not proven guilty and is not a danger he must be treated as any other individual, not that if he is guilty you can torture him anyway.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#100

Post by jonathanstrange »

101404 wrote: post #79
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.

It's no different here in the EU. After all, Sweden and the UK (until recently) are EU countries. I'm from Germany, and I can totally see things like this could happen here too.

There is no way somebody could face in Germany for whistleblowing (or computer hacking, etc.) the same as what Assange is facing in the US if he's extradited. The alleged crimes they've stacked up against him have a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison. It's simply ridiculous.
Post reply on HN