Julian Assange in Limbo • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#31

Post by runawaybottle » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

fit2rule wrote: post #16

runawaybottle wrote: post #13

I forget. Anyone know why we’re treating Julian Assange like the worst criminal that ever existed? “ Those two shootings were a thousand times repeated, though the reports were rare in admitting that the victims were civilians. More usually, the dead were automatically identified as ‘terrorists’ caught in the act, regardless of evidence to the contrary. ” Here’s an argument against Leetcode. There are real patterns i…

Because he revealed evidence of one of the worst crimes committed by humanity in the last 100 years? 4 million innocent people murdered in illegal wars is a lot of blood on the hands of the American people. And, we all know how much they hate to be embarrassed by such things ..

Was WikiLeaks part of exposing Prism as well? Or was that mostly The Guardian?

I remember after 9/11 I grabbed a bunch of books about the Taliban from the library, and my dad said ‘look, the government is going to put you on a list now’, and I naively said ‘No dad, this is America’ (he was an immigrant).

Sad stuff, they did put people on a list.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#32

Post by Retric » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #26

Retric wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way is getting sent files illegal? Last I checked the only protection on classified information was for people that had a clearance at some point. Which is why journalists can generally publish classified information.

It's illegal to keep something you know was stolen.

That applies to physical objects not information. One odd corner case in the US it’s legal to buy bootlegs but not make them.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#33

Post by harikb » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

It should be no surprise that these people might retire from military and join local state police and enjoy killing similarly less fortunate American citizens

> helicopter pilots exchange banter about the slaughter in the street below: ‘Ha, ha, I hit them,’ one says. ‘Oh yeah, look at those dead bastards,’ the other says. They have mistaken the camera held by one of the journalists for a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, unlikely though it was that armed insurgents would stand in the open in Baghdad with a US helicopter hovering overhead. They shoot again at the wounded as one of them, probably the Reuters assistant Saeed Chmagh, crawls towards a van that has stopped to rescue them. When the pilots are told over the radio that they have killed a number of Iraqi civilians and wounded two children, one of them says: ‘Well, it’s their fault for bringing their kids into the battle.’

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#34

Post by MiroF » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #23

MiroF wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Assange leaked documents that he had to illegally acquire first (either with help or without, but either way he was in possession of stolen goods). You can't get whistleblower protection for leaking information you didn't have legal access to. Should we charge the journalists who distributed Snowden's leaks as well? This seems like making a distinction to draw a line between the two, but I am missing the explanatio…

> Should we charge the journalists who distributed Snowden's leaks as well? We don't need to, we know who their source was (Snowden). If Assange wants to claim he's a journalist, that's fine, but then he either needs to accept the consequences of protecting his sources, or out his sources. > but I am missing the explanation for why this distinction has moral import. It's a question of responsibility. When a journalis…

> We don't need to, we know who their source was (Snowden). If Assange wants to claim he's a journalist, that's fine, but then he either needs to accept the consequences of protecting his sources, or out his sources.

Journalists are legally required to put their sources or they are on the hook?

I suggest you revisit the case history on this subject.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#35

Post by jedberg » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

AndrewBissell wrote: post #27

jedberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should we charge the journalists who distributed Snowden's leaks as well? We don't need to, we know who their source was (Snowden). If Assange wants to claim he's a journalist, that's fine, but then he either needs to accept the consequences of protecting his sources, or out his sources. > but I am missing the explanation for why this distinction has moral import. It's a question of responsibility. When a journalis…

Your interpretation of the legal outcome for journalists who publish leaks does not line up with any kind of real jurisprudence, at least not in the U.S. The government is not even making this kind of argument in Assange's own case.

My understanding is that shield laws are different in every state, but the US doesn't have any federal shield laws. Since Assange wasn't in a state when he made the leaks, he wouldn't be protected by state laws.

I also understand that no journalist has ever been successfully prosecuted, but no case has ever gone to the Supreme Court about it either.

My understanding about the Assange case in particular is that they are pursuing other crimes because they are more likely to stick and more likely to result in extradition. But that doesn't mean he's not guilty of other crimes.

I'm not a lawyer though, so if there is other information I'm missing, I'd definitely like to learn about it.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#36

Post by 9HZZRfNlpR » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

AndrewBissell wrote: post #30

Natsu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's quite correct, unless it can be proved that they somehow participated in the actual hacking of some target, they do have legal access to the docs, because receiving such is not illegal. Otherwise, the entire press to whom such things are leaked should be in jail with them.

This is exactly right. The government's case against Assange hinges in large part on alleging that he actively assisted Manning in obtaining the documents that were published.

That is why they are torturing Manning. The problem for her is that the part of America supposed to help her is so tied into the Russian fiasco. No allies really.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#37

Post by mrburton » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

I totally misread this as "Julian Assange in a Lambo". Dyslexia for the win :)

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#38

Post by AndrewBissell » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

runawaybottle wrote: post #31

fit2rule wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he revealed evidence of one of the worst crimes committed by humanity in the last 100 years? 4 million innocent people murdered in illegal wars is a lot of blood on the hands of the American people. And, we all know how much they hate to be embarrassed by such things ..

Was WikiLeaks part of exposing Prism as well? Or was that mostly The Guardian? I remember after 9/11 I grabbed a bunch of books about the Taliban from the library, and my dad said ‘look, the government is going to put you on a list now’, and I naively said ‘No dad, this is America’ (he was an immigrant). Sad stuff, they did put people on a list.

It was really Greenwald and Poitras, and the Guardian just happened to be Greenwald's main outlet at the time. However WikiLeaks did help Snowden with his legal defense and flight to asylum in Russia.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#39

Post by jedberg » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:24 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #34

jedberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should we charge the journalists who distributed Snowden's leaks as well? We don't need to, we know who their source was (Snowden). If Assange wants to claim he's a journalist, that's fine, but then he either needs to accept the consequences of protecting his sources, or out his sources. > but I am missing the explanation for why this distinction has moral import. It's a question of responsibility. When a journalis…

> We don't need to, we know who their source was (Snowden). If Assange wants to claim he's a journalist, that's fine, but then he either needs to accept the consequences of protecting his sources, or out his sources. Journalists are legally required to put their sources or they are on the hook? I suggest you revisit the case history on this subject.

> I suggest you revisit the case history on this subject.

Can you point me at some links? I'm not a lawyer but my understanding is that shield laws are state by state, and there are no federal protections.

Re: Julian Assange in Limbo

#40

Post by asjw » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 11:26 PM UTC

AndrewBissell wrote: post #38

runawaybottle wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was WikiLeaks part of exposing Prism as well? Or was that mostly The Guardian? I remember after 9/11 I grabbed a bunch of books about the Taliban from the library, and my dad said ‘look, the government is going to put you on a list now’, and I naively said ‘No dad, this is America’ (he was an immigrant). Sad stuff, they did put people on a list.

It was really Greenwald and Poitras, and the Guardian just happened to be Greenwald's main outlet at the time. However WikiLeaks did help Snowden with his legal defense and flight to asylum in Russia.

> flight to asylum in Russia.

Ironically Snowden tweets about freedom of information from Russia, where Putin literally kills journalists