Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#31

Post by himinlomax » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:02 PM UTC

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #25

nickysielicki wrote: post #18

> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…

>I hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never once published anything that has been proven false. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/885395248612085760 He has helped launder edited material from Russian state sponsored hackers in the past. That is one instance, should I find more?

Was the info false, or do you just object to the sourcing?

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#32

Post by ReptileMan » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:03 PM UTC

henearkr wrote: post #14

notkaiho wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be misunderstanding your comment, but Assange is Australian.

Oh, sorry if it was not very clear, I was saying that US treatment of the Assange case was disgusting me. By "American great minds", I was thinking about all the American mathematicians and scientists whose books I passionately devour, and the splendid futuristic projects of some tech corps, which bring sci-fi dreams to reality.

I mean ... the US has not even got hands on him yet. He hasn't been in US custody for a second. There is absolutely no case. Yet.

If you want to feel contempt strongly towards someone - the UK, Ecuador and Sweden governments are the ones to blame so far.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#33

Post by mellosouls » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:03 PM UTC

ganzuul wrote: post #24

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #19

Wikileaks used to be something, then Assange decided to filter leaks based on whatever biases he felt that day. He alienated a lot of his initial supporters doing this, focusing only on leaking content from "the west." Later fully engaging with state sponsored hackers to meddle in the US election[1] while again ignoring any leaks about Russia[2] and friends. As far as I can tell there is nothing left of Wikileaks, it…

You sound as warmblooded as a snake. Got any facts to back up these claims with prosecutor?

You sound as warmblooded as a snake.

What's with the abuse?

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#34

Post by thatlongthrow1 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:03 PM UTC

ganzuul wrote: post #24

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #19

Wikileaks used to be something, then Assange decided to filter leaks based on whatever biases he felt that day. He alienated a lot of his initial supporters doing this, focusing only on leaking content from "the west." Later fully engaging with state sponsored hackers to meddle in the US election[1] while again ignoring any leaks about Russia[2] and friends. As far as I can tell there is nothing left of Wikileaks, it…

You sound as warmblooded as a snake. Got any facts to back up these claims with prosecutor?

>You sound as warmblooded as a snake.

Yea you are keeping it real civil there huh. I can tell you are here for honest debate and won't just move the goalposts or start with personal attacks again.

>Got any facts

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...

WikiLeaks declined to publish a wide-ranging trove of documents — at least 68 gigabytes of data — that came from inside the Russian Interior Ministry, according to partial chat logs reviewed by Foreign Policy.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#35

Post by thatlongthrow1 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:04 PM UTC

himinlomax wrote: post #31

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never once published anything that has been proven false. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/885395248612085760 He has helped launder edited material from Russian state sponsored hackers in the past. That is one instance, should I find more?

Was the info false, or do you just object to the sourcing?

Yes the info was false.

>A few hours later, the assessment worsened: a friendly source from CNAIPIC was telling them that some of the documents had been forged. One document number, when checked against CNAIPIC’s system, reportedly corresponded to a wholly unrelated matter. The remaining real documents didn’t seem to have come from CNAIPIC either. Instead, police were apparently investigating “a small IT company that has worked for CNAIPIC in the past and that apparently some of the stolen data were on a machine they took to repair in Rome.” There was an immediate suspicion that it was “a giant op by the police to [discredit] anonymous and to tarnish our reputation and credibility.”

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#36

Post by tomp » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:05 PM UTC

notkaiho wrote: post #13

lambdaba wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think they are? I ask because I haven't researched beyond the initial news stories.

Aren't the initial news stories credible?

No, there weren't any initial allegations in the first place. The "raped" (not really) women only went to the police to force Assange get an STD test - even they didn't consider themselves victims!

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#37

Post by raxxorrax » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:05 PM UTC

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #25

nickysielicki wrote: post #18

> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…

>I hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never once published anything that has been proven false. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/885395248612085760 He has helped launder edited material from Russian state sponsored hackers in the past. That is one instance, should I find more?

The whole Russian story was a scam. We have documents saying that is was told to abuse FISA powers. Not that I like the persons it was employed against, but it is far larger than watergate if we had honest discussion about it.

If you still talk about Russia, you have been fooled immensely and for me it is beyond comprehension how anyone could earnestly believe that story arc.

You are spreading lies.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#38

Post by tsimionescu » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:05 PM UTC

op03 wrote: post #17

Feels like the last decade has shown Leaking to the General Public is not very productive. As in outcomes are poor. There is always something else lined up every 2 minutes to pull attention away from the leak. I am not sure if anyone studies "leaking effectiveness" but I am guessing in info tsunami conditions larger the leak less impact it has. Cause no one knows whose network of power is going to get impacted so eve…

The fact that the media is largely refusing to give proper attention to the few primary sources we have on government affairs, preferring to print statements and tweets is the real problem here. If journalism looked the way it is often pictured in movies, this would go vastly differently.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#39

Post by henearkr » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:06 PM UTC

ReptileMan wrote: post #32

henearkr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, sorry if it was not very clear, I was saying that US treatment of the Assange case was disgusting me. By "American great minds", I was thinking about all the American mathematicians and scientists whose books I passionately devour, and the splendid futuristic projects of some tech corps, which bring sci-fi dreams to reality.

I mean ... the US has not even got hands on him yet. He hasn't been in US custody for a second. There is absolutely no case. Yet. If you want to feel contempt strongly towards someone - the UK, Ecuador and Sweden governments are the ones to blame so far.

Yes, you're right. But the pressure to do so comes from the US all the same...

You're right that what's happening in UK with Assange is very disturbing... I followed Craig Murray's blog posts.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#40

Post by DangerousPie » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 12:07 PM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #18

> In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked…

Real journalists don't just publish anything they can get their hands on with no regards for where the data came from, for what purposes it was given to them and whom their publication might harm.