Live data from Hacker News

Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

news.yahoo.com

51–60 of 282 posts

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Establishment Democrats hate Assange. Assange published things that hurt the Hillary / 2016 Democrat elections.

It’s not just “Establishment Democrats”. He literally acted as a stooge for the Russian government in publishing DNC emails but suppressing damaging information on Republicans.

>He literally acted as a stooge for the Russian government

Based upon the talking points at the time, establishment Democrats very much wanted this to be true. This makes sense since the Russians are a convenient scapegoat.

>suppressing damaging information on Republicans.

They wanted this to be true but it didnt happen:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5pmo25/debunked_...

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not just “Establishment Democrats”. He literally acted as a stooge for the Russian government in publishing DNC emails but suppressing damaging information on Republicans.

Surely, as a non-American he could chose any side he felt like? Much like I can - randomly or otherwise - choose any faction in the Nigerian elections. Or is their some planet-wide law that he fell under?

He can side with whoever he likes. Doesn’t mean anyone has to like him for it.

Furthermore, as Assange isn’t an American citizen and doesn’t get to vote in the USA, none of them have no reason to put personal dislike aside and defend him or his actions.

Hell, he might have been a lot better off now if he was a USA citizen, or even if he’d been officially working for Russia.

Right now, he’s a conveniently unlicensed hot potato: held personally liable by the powers, not even really seen as a journalist even if he was one.

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#53
post #24

>Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred “at the highest levels” of the Trump administration, said a former senior counterintelligence official. “There seemed to be no boundaries.” No idea why Assange feared to be extradited from Sweden to the USA./s

My "holy shit" moment was this :

  received “sketches” of plans for killing Assange and other Europe-based WikiLeaks members
CIA planned to kill some of my friends

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the worst case scenario of Assange being a free man, exactly?

That Assange is indeed compromised by foreign intelligence but is still able to receive exfiltrated American intelligence.

I'm not sure in what sense do you are using "compromised", it is unclear for me in regards to context.

He is not a US citizen, and he was never a "pro-western-mainstream" or "pro-establishment" type (he was born into a cult with a history of systematic children sex abuse in Australia, one of the leaders was close to the AU government, Assange then became a teenage hacker, etc). He was a contrarian against the West from the start, while being of the West.

Do you use the term in relation to some of Wikileaks goals or mission statements, some hacker ethos, in the sense that he compromised himself in regards to some personal conviction of his ?

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and most of the War on Drugs... He might just be the most loathsome human being we've ever elected President. Although McCain would have been worse had he ever made it. In fact, Biden and McCain have always been my go-to examples of the worst that America has to offer and like cockroaches they always managed to hang on.

Just so everyone is clear, you think Trump would have been the better choice than Biden?

This is a false choice, they can both be awful along different axes. Biden however has a MUCH longer public record of bad policy decisions. Biden's crime bill from 1994 and the Iraq war which he supported caused more human misery than anything Trump had the opportunity to do in 4 years, all prior to the recent election. For all of his faults and criminality, Trump was mostly bluster and didn't actually do very much while in office, mostly it seems like he play golf and watched TV.

In many substantive ways, Biden has continued most of the previous administrations policies. Sure, he's temperamentally different, but still a doddering old fool stuck in the politics of a previous era.

In short, I would prefer neither.

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#56
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that he wrote the bill that became the Patriot Act.

And the Clipper Chip: https://reason.com/2015/04/09/the-feds-want-a-back-door-into... "One fine day in 1991, an ambitious senator named Joe Biden introduced legislation declaring that telecommunications companies "shall ensure" that their hardware includes backdoors for government eavesdropping. Biden's proposal was followed by the introduction of the Clipper Chip by the National Security Agency (NSA) and a remarkabl…

Biden is indeed a dangerous authoritarian who has worked tirelessly to erode civil liberties for decades. Even his VP is a prosecutor who started her career by ending a deferment program and ratcheting up prosecution of non-violent crimes.

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Establishment Democrats hate Assange. Assange published things that hurt the Hillary / 2016 Democrat elections.

It’s not just “Establishment Democrats”. He literally acted as a stooge for the Russian government in publishing DNC emails but suppressing damaging information on Republicans.

This is false. A single republican’s personal laptop got hacked and a years-out-of-date outlook db was stolen.

The DNC had their email server itself hacked, which is an entirely different level of compromise.

Of course, they crafted a narrative that “republicans were hacked too!” which of course is true but highly misleading (typical of such propaganda campaigns).

This was highly effective, as it’s still popping up in discussions like this one 5+ years later.

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not just “Establishment Democrats”. He literally acted as a stooge for the Russian government in publishing DNC emails but suppressing damaging information on Republicans.

Surely, as a non-American he could chose any side he felt like? Much like I can - randomly or otherwise - choose any faction in the Nigerian elections. Or is their some planet-wide law that he fell under?

I don't understand your comment. Whether he should be pardoned or not is separate from him picking sides and making adversaries of the democrats.

Are you suggesting that people shouldn't take the actions of others into account?

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honorable people do the right thing even when they personally do not benefit.

Honorable people are not attracted to politics

They sometimes are but they tend to get filtered out at the lowest levels.

Re: Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an outsider, I don't expect the American government to ever pardon people like him. Presidents come and go but they all play nicely with the military powers that remain after their terms. When presidents promise to do things the rest it the government doesn't like, those promises only get broken. Trump didn't complete his wall, Obama didn't close Guantanamo Bay, and so on. Presidents aren't kings, their actions wi…

"rest of the government" No need to steer away from "deep state" so hard you go hyperbolic. Maybe use "Multiple competing power cabals", if you prefer?

The government is not just the president and the buddies he brings in. There are many departments that need to operate after the president and his crew leave office. All of those have a vested interest in keeping their jobs and being able to operate after the next election.

It's no deep state conspiracy that the Pentagon or the CIA have their own opinion on world politics. If anything, the Trump administration has shown that there are still some restraints to the president's power. At some point details were made foggy or even left out in Trump's security briefings out of fear they might get leaked to Twitter. The end result of this process isn't to keep the elites in power or to control the people, it's much more tame than that. People don't like change and when a new guy rolls in and decides that the way some government body does something is wrong, people will naturally resist.

There is always a power balance, usually in favour of the democratically elected officials, between the elected government and the government that sticks around. When push comes to shove the elected officials always have the power to overrule the unelected ones, but any future endeavours related to these parties would become difficult once you force matters.

The CIA, FBI, DoJ and FDA don't get a complete reshuffle every four years. The figureheads and even organisational top can get replaced, but there are many layers of middle management below them that have cemented their ways in difficult to change processes, workflows and office culture.

The system has its advantages, notably that the country doesn't collapse after giving a complete lunatic the reigns for four years, but also a great many disadvantages, notably elected officials being worked against in their quest for improvement and change. This effect can be increased or decreased, but it won't ever go away and denying that there is more to politics than elites at the top is just nonsensical in my opinion.

Post reply on HN