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

Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 432 posts

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#91

Post by raverbashing »

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…

> Stand up for journalists. Real journalists.

Of which Assange isn't

He was more than happy to support the current administration in the electoral process, with heavy editorializing and biases

So, I guess sorry they renegued on their promises? Oh but he should have guessed it.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#92

Post by sitkack »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #43
nickysielicki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so much worse than this. Via instant messenger, Manning asked Assange whether Wikileaks could crack NTLM hashes. Assange said (paraphrasing), "Yeah, we can probably do that." Manning sent the hashes. Assange said he'd work on cracking them. A few days later, Manning asked if the hashes had been cracked. Assange replied that there hadn't been any progress. End of story. That's a federal crime. No hashes were crac…

Ah. Yes. That makes sense. People like Manning and Snowden expose nastiness, but, at the same time, we absolutely need to ensure military and espionage secrets (Full disclosure: my father was in the CIA, but quit on moral grounds - http://cmarshall.com/miscellaneous/MikeMarshall.htm ). People die when military secrets get exposed. That's often completely unintended, but it happens anyway. My father had a post similar…

When we have unfallable machinery in place to keep secrets safe, and no honorable people to leak them what will we have then?

Is the world worse off because of the Pentagon papers?

You bring up Plame, but I think you are doing your readers a disservice in not citing that she was exposed not by journalist, but by a people in power to silence the truth that her husband was speaking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair#Civil_suit

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#93

Post by sanderjd »

raxxorrax wrote: post #55
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The whole Russian story was a scam. Tell that to Adrian Chen or anyone that has actually investigated Russia's meddling in foreign affairs: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html This was reported before the election detailing the agency that would go on to be fingered by the state department and others in their role in US election meddling. This involved actual reported places, actual employees…

Of course Russia meddles in election, the US does that too. That is not relevant to the FISA abuse wich let to severe surveillance of the current administration to find a straw to attach it to them. They didn't find one btw. which is unusual in politics. Trump may indeed be extremely clean and that is something quite hard to say.

I downvoted this comment because it is dizzying how quickly you moved the goal posts from "the whole Russia thing was a scam" to "of course Russia meddled".

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#94

Post by thatlongthrow1 »

dijit wrote: post #85
fsloth wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Selectively releasing everyone else's dirt except for Russia is a strong indicator of non-neutral stance.

Sorry I must have missed where anyone in this thread-chain has asserted that statement at all.

WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign

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

>In the summer of 2016, as WikiLeaks was publishing documents from Democratic operatives allegedly obtained by Kremlin-directed hackers, Julian Assange turned down a large cache of documents related to the Russian government, according to chat messages and a source who provided the records.

>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.

>The logs, which were provided to FP, only included WikiLeaks’s side of the conversation.

>“As far as we recall these are already public,” WikiLeaks wrote at the time.

>“WikiLeaks rejects all submissions that it cannot verify. WikiLeaks rejects submissions that have already been published elsewhere or which are likely to be considered insignificant. WikiLeaks has never rejected a submission due to its country of origin,” the organization wrote in a Twitter direct message when contacted by FP about the Russian cache.

Assange would later go on to propagate and distribute manipulated leaks sent by Guccifer 2.0 and other known Russian fronts like the "CyberBerkut" promotion of his I linked at the thread top.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#95

Post by ShamelessC »

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'm generally on Assange's side in all of this. I agree he shouldn't be charged and this is all a disgrace.

Having said that, I once went to wikileaks and found a PDF of Steve Job's supposed STD test which claimed he was HIV positive. That was a surprise to me as my understanding was that he died of cancer. I looked into it and no one could corroborate the story and the general consensus seemed to be that it was faked.

Even if it was real, I struggle to see why it's important to leak the private medical records of someone with a deadly STD, although I'm sure there are multiple perspectives on this.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#96

Post by thatlongthrow1 »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #81
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think it says something that this is the best you can come up with. Hi I can basically see you sneering with a "gotcha" face through that text. Sorry but Assange's history of leak revisionism, favoring Russia specifically, is deep. When Assange was working with "Anon" who was really an FBI snitch, he accepted files hacked from Syria. When they were released they were missing information about Russia including bank…

This is a politically motivated perversion of Justice , you here are implying he is loyal to Russia and therefore deserves it. You know, even if you were right, you are not helping your case? Its not just my opinion, its the UN opinion. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?N...

>Its not just my opinion, its the UN opinion.

From the article you linked:

Mr Nils Melzer, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; is part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Special Procedures, the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system, is the general name of the Council’s independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

>they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#97

Post by jessaustin »

cptskippy wrote: post #75
YPCrumble wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn’t the burden of proof be on the government at this point that they wouldn’t do everything in their power to spy on citizens and punish people for trying to stop them?

The burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused.

Assange is the one in jail. If "proof" had any chance of putting e.g. Pompeo in jail, we'd be happy to provide it.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#98

Post by [deleted] »

raxxorrax wrote: post #84
threeseed wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is so much to talk about with Russia though. a) Widespread evidence not just from US but from UK and EU of efforts to interfere in elections and referenda e.g. Brexit. b) State sponsored propaganda via social networks which even as recent as last week was having to be removed. c) Continued meetings between Trump and Putin where only translators are present i.e. no State Dept representatives. d) 20+ years of Tru…

Yes, if I need an explanation of governance failure, I would blame Russia too. I just don't get why you believe it without any evidence.

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#99

Post by jessaustin »

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #34
ganzuul wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Min…

The Russian cache was eventually quietly published online elsewhere, to almost no attention or scrutiny.

...with no f#@*ing link to the "eventually quietly published" material so we may examine it for ourselves! Does this material actually exist?! FP is truly a useless excuse for journalism!

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#100

Post by raverbashing »

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.

To be fair the Equador government helped him a great deal but apparently even them got tired of it.

I think they did what they could given the circumstances.

Post reply on HN