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

101–110 of 298 posts

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#101

Post by mc32 »

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…

I guess A.I. can say Assange wasn’t a prisoner until he left the embassy, then he was detained and imprisoned.

Never the less, A.I. is probably influenced by politics as much as any other organization. Like the ACLU. Before the 2000s they were more about principles by and large and now it’s become principles+politics.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#102

Post by cmroanirgo »

_iyig wrote: post #29
Tomte wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

From the day 1 proceedings [0]:

> Normal courts in this country are public buildings, deliberately placed by our ancestors right in the centre of towns, almost always just up a few steps from a main street. The major purpose of their positioning and of their architecture was to facilitate public access in the belief that it is vital that justice can be seen by the public... When enquiring about facilities for the public to attend the hearing, an Assange activist was told by a member of court staff that we should realise that Woolwich is a “counter-terrorism court”. That is true de facto, but in truth a “counter-terrorism court” is an institution unknown to the UK constitution. Indeed, 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.

Something very fishy is going on here, it seems. So while the proceedings might appear to be above board, it seems that Mr Murray (the reporter here) is convinced of otherwise:

> It’s the Lubyanka.

[0] https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#103

Post by d--b »

Given the state of the justice system in the UK and USA, maybe the best course of action for Assange is to get extradited, then tell the public that Wikileaks helped expose Hillary's private email server, and get pardoned by Trump...

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#104

Post by chaostheory »

mc32 wrote: post #101
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…

I guess A.I. can say Assange wasn’t a prisoner until he left the embassy, then he was detained and imprisoned. Never the less, A.I. is probably influenced by politics as much as any other organization. Like the ACLU. Before the 2000s they were more about principles by and large and now it’s become principles+politics.

It’s about funding for amnesty int. On a side note, it can be confusing when you refer to them as AI

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#105

Post by mcv »

BigJ1211 wrote: post #89
mcv wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way the rape case was initially dropped and then picked up again certainly seemed weird, and there may have been political pressure behind it. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, though. The stories of the women involved seemed very credible, and unlikely to have been made up, considering they were supporters of him. But I totally agree that this treatment in this extradition case sounds terrible, and the judge s…

The rape case is rather odd to say the least, as posted above by a user you might want to read this article: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea... Basically it comes down to the story not adding up, drummed up charges, testimony that was changed by the police. After the headline was made on August 20th (accusing him of rape) the person that 'accused' him (she hadn't (yet)) was questioned on…

Not sure what "stealthing" is. I know that in Sweden, having sex with someone in a way they don't want, still counts as rape, and I think that's not unreasonable. It's certainly a different case than violent rape, but that doesn't mean it's 'not actually rape'.

I hadn't heard that the condom contained no DNA. That certainly sounds odd to me, but I'm no forensic expert. If that's sufficient proof that the whole story is a lie, then that's certainly worthy of investigation. False rape allegations are as serious as rape in my opinion.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#106

Post by shawabawa3 »

mft_ wrote: post #98
bambax wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

the US has a lot of leverage due to post-brexit trade deal negotiations, afaik that's the only change

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#107

Post by mcv »

tyingq wrote: post #84
fit2rule wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

That is pretty curious. “police officer IK, who had formally questioned SW on 20 August 2010, modified and replaced the content of SW’s original statement in the police database, upon instruction of her superior officer MG and without consulting SW.” https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublic... (The report itself)

Is that not tampering with evidence? If true, I'd expect some serious investigation into this.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#108

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

baud147258 wrote: post #69

Why is he calling Bellingcat a warmongering propaganda operations and saying they've got a "source of state, corporate or institutional finance"? I though they were independent

because Elliot Higgins is an Atlantic Council puppet who gets his intel from UK spooks for strategic disemination, and responds to anyone who challenges him with "suck my balls". The guy is a information-terrorist and I hope the Russians slip him something into his tea one day.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#109

Post by bilekas »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #92
bilekas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 he…

> 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 )

I get what you mean and yes, you have a point. I guess I'm just surprised that people are getting annoyed this is happening now when it was always going to happen.

It's like constantly reminding someone that the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand. Then people being surprised and outraged that the water burnt your hand.

This outrage just seems almost topical. It should have been made earlier, it wasn't so this is the result.

Re: Assange Hearing Day 2

#110

Post by Zenst »

have_faith wrote: post #44
mnem wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick search using Google news in the UK shows that all the main broadsheets and many of the tabloids have Assange related stories over the past several days at least. I don’t think it’s fair to characterise the media as disinterested.

None of the homepages I looked at today (Guardian, BBC) has a single mention of Assange. Yes they all had token articles buried somewhere though if you search.

There is only so much space front pages have and much more impacting news events transpiring currently. The aspect as you say that even the Guardian has no mention of this upon its front page, should be testament to that, more so as they would be the first ones in many eyes to jump all over this if it was felt by them to be front page material over other content.

However - https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/feb/26/julian-assange... does not appear to be a token article in any way, shape or form. Though if one is to label anything not upon the front page as a token article, then I concede that point from that perspective, albeit I disagree with that assertion given the substance and depth of the article in this instance.

Post reply on HN