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

Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

stundin.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 334 posts

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#91

Post by NaturalPhallacy »

dragonwriter wrote: post #88
NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Russian bit can be politically inconvenient for you and yet also be true. I'm not sure how it's politically inconvenient for me when I'm a registered Pacific Green. People need to stop "thinking" in false dichotomies like left vs right or liberal vs. conservative. Astrology is six times smarter.

> I'm not sure how it's politically inconvenient for me when I'm a registered Pacific Green. The West being less hostile to and more willing to collaborate with Russia is a frequent position promoted in Pacific Green circles; Russia being tied to active hostile activity against Western regimes is politically inconvenient to that message.

>The West being less hostile to and more willing to collaborate with Russia is a frequent position promoted in Pacific Green circles

Pure DNC propaganda. Zero basis in reality.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#92

Post by capableweb »

joshuamorton wrote: post #75
Synaesthesia wrote: post #70

Important to note that nothing Wikileaks has published has ever had to be retracted. They've told the truth to the public about governments, which is why they're targeted. In fact several Pulitzer Prizes have been awarded thanks to their efforts. They've never been shown to put anyone at risk either, a testament to their careful vetting process, showing that they're responsible too. This is clearly a political attack…

> They've never been shown to put anyone at risk This is false. They've denied putting people at risk, but there's decent evidence that their leaks have directly shared pii and harmed large numbers of random unimportant people.

Could you share this decent evidence for us who haven't seen it before?

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#93

Post by rbanffy »

fscksnowden wrote: post #62
rbanffy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange is not even a US citizen. How can he be a traitor?

fair enough, he runs a so called "hostile intel svc"

Look. I’ve met Assange and he felt like an asshole. I also agree Wikileaks was used to manipulate an election in the US, but, from that to claim he runs a “hostile intelligence service” is a bit too much.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#94

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

daenz wrote: post #9

For someone who has not followed Assange news for a long time, what is the general accusation of his crimes? Is it just that he published secret material that he received from other sources?

From Wikipedia:

>The charges stem from the allegation that Assange attempted and failed to crack a password hash so that Chelsea Manning could use a different username to download classified documents and avoid detection.[41] This allegation had been known since 2011 and was a factor in Manning's trial; the indictment did not reveal any new information about Assange.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Julia...

I don't believe it counts as journalism if you help someone commit a crime- that's the crux of the issue. Notice that real journalists who are passive receivers of information do not get criminally charged.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#95

Post by billyhoffman »

capableweb wrote: post #92
joshuamorton wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They've never been shown to put anyone at risk This is false. They've denied putting people at risk, but there's decent evidence that their leaks have directly shared pii and harmed large numbers of random unimportant people.

Could you share this decent evidence for us who haven't seen it before?

Wikileaks posted diplomatic cables without redacting the names or other forms of PII. Actual journalists from the New York Times, Der Speigel, Le Monde, The Guardian, and El País all signed a statement saying this was a gross breach of people’s privacy and potentially put these people in danger.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/02/leader...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cab...

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#96

Post by joshuamorton »

capableweb wrote: post #92
joshuamorton wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They've never been shown to put anyone at risk This is false. They've denied putting people at risk, but there's decent evidence that their leaks have directly shared pii and harmed large numbers of random unimportant people.

Could you share this decent evidence for us who haven't seen it before?

The two I'm aware of are https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikileaks-reportedly-outs-100s-... and https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/07/why-did-wikileaks-he..., which published the names of afghan informants to the us military, and the names, phone numbers, and addresses of half of the Turkish population, respectively.

The first clearly endangered people, the second contained basically nothing of reporting use, it was just a trove of pii

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#97

Post by jude- »

billyhoffman wrote: post #95
capableweb wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you share this decent evidence for us who haven't seen it before?

Wikileaks posted diplomatic cables without redacting the names or other forms of PII. Actual journalists from the New York Times, Der Speigel, Le Monde, The Guardian, and El País all signed a statement saying this was a gross breach of people’s privacy and potentially put these people in danger. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/02/leader... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_ca…

This is the reason why I don't feel too bad for Julian Assange, and why I don't refer to him as a "journalist." Not redacting PII is such a rookie mistake that I can't see it as anything other than journalistic malpractice.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#98

Post by stefan_ »

billyhoffman wrote: post #95
capableweb wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you share this decent evidence for us who haven't seen it before?

Wikileaks posted diplomatic cables without redacting the names or other forms of PII. Actual journalists from the New York Times, Der Speigel, Le Monde, The Guardian, and El País all signed a statement saying this was a gross breach of people’s privacy and potentially put these people in danger. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/02/leader... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_ca…

You mean after an "actual journalist" put the password for the cache of all unredacted cables that "actual journalists" received in his book?

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#99

Post by extra88 »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #85
belltaco wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of evidence has been shown for this part: >Russians hack DNC

Nope: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-r...

Yep.

The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity has members who have done good work for the public and the country. However, the memo referenced in your link did not even have the backing all the group's members and its arguments have been persuasively criticized.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran_Intelligence_Professio...

Post reply on HN