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

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

news.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 282 posts

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

#251

Post by mikem170 »

giardini wrote: post #129

Did anything useful come out of the "Vault" revelations? I mean for examples improvements in the WWW, PC hardware/software, browsers, etc.

The wikipedia page on the vault 7 mentioned a number of specific vendors that patched their software, cisco for example [0]:

> Cisco quickly reassigned staff from other projects to turn their focus solely on analyzing the attack and to figure out how the CIA hacking worked, so they could help customers patch their systems and prevent criminal hackers or spies from using similar methods.

> On 20 March, Cisco researchers confirmed that their study of the Vault 7 documents showed the CIA had developed malware which could exploit a flaw found in 318 of Cisco's switch models and alter or take control of the network.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_7#Cisco

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

#252

Post by busterarm »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #206
busterarm wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your bogeyman largely did nothing for four years. Actually sorry, he was the first politician anywhere in this country to guarantee women basic human rights in prison (he federally guaranteed that women in prison have access to sanitary products not through commissary, which is a priviledge that can be taken away). Biden has been a trainwreck for 50 years. Barack Obama himself said "never underestimate Joe's ability…

Your bogeyman largely did nothing for four years. Actually sorry, he was the first politician anywhere in this country to guarantee women basic human rights... The theocrats he nominated for the Supreme Court will be there for decades, ensuring that no women without the resources of, say, a Trump family member, will be able to maintain control of their own bodies.

Your shortened, incomplete quote of what I said takes me out of context completely. But you're not refuting the actual point that I made, you're going on some tangent.

Also the "theocrats" that he's appointed to the Supreme Court haven't even towed his line on any major decisions they've had to vote on and basically have completely stabbed him in the back if you take things from his sides' perspective.

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

#253

Post by pphysch »

refurb wrote: post #245
pphysch wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you list some them? Bonus points if outside Western Europe.

Taiwan, South Korea, Japan.

Those are all essentially client states of USA, dependent on USA as security provider. Some even argue they are occupied.

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

#254

Post by fit2rule »

giantrobot wrote: post #219
roody15 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Chelsea Manning bears the overwhelming fault from a US Legal perspective. He was a member of the armed forces under oath and knowingly shared classified information. Assange has no oath to the US and despite his interest in the material it is quite a stretch to somehow suggest he “made” Chelsea share this info.

I never said he made Manning do anything. He directed and assisted Manning. A journalist doesn't help a source get more material. They don't because they know it's illegal.

This is false. Journalists help their sources, all the time. Its a key part of journalism to develop sources that produce the truth of the story.

The idea that journalists are only allowed to publish what's handed to them serves the intelligence communities' purpose of being the only sources of righteous propaganda.

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

#255

Post by refurb »

pphysch wrote: post #253
refurb wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taiwan, South Korea, Japan.

Those are all essentially client states of USA, dependent on USA as security provider. Some even argue they are occupied.

Even if true, that’s irrelevant to the question asked?

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

#256

Post by boomboomsubban »

milkytron wrote: post #250
legolas2412 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consideration means planning. If you caught a policeman planning to shoot an innocent African American, or if a neo-nazi was found to be planning to blow up a synagogue, would you not suggest taking legal action? If I planned to kill someone just like the us govt did, I would be in prison the next day. Assange should be given a fair trial. But the government spying illegally and planning to kill him doesn't give anyo…

> But the government spying illegally and planning to kill him doesn't give anyone confidence in that. Planning to kill him is terrible, but was the spying actually illegal? With all the permissions the government has on spying, I have such a hard time determining if any single instance of spying is illegal or not, regardless of whether it's ethical.

They presumably violated Ecuadorian law, very likely violated international law, and arguably US law. I am not 100% certain that attorney-client privilege applies to someone facing sealed indictment, though I suspect it does. IANAL

Also "illegal" may not be the right term. Similar actions by intelligence operatives led to the Ellsberg case being dropped, but no charges were filed as a result of those actions.

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

#257

Post by raxxorrax »

simorley wrote: post #125
photochemsyn wrote: post #62

The real reason they were so pissed off at Assange seems to be in two parts: 1) The Chelsea Manning State Department cables. The video was all the hype, but just dig through the 'SECRET' cables on Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc. 2) Those Vault7 CIA leaks are incredibly embarrassing, it's like so closet cr…

> Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc. Is this a shock to anyone? "Human rights and democracy" is the new imperial "white man's burden". We use it to justify invading, colonizing and stealing from others. When have we ever cared about human rights and democracy? I forget if it was chomsky or someone else who said that we've murdered m…

The propaganda works. Look how many victims claim that the release of this information endangered people. Well, no kidding, innocent lives are on the line. The best way to prevent further damage there should be consequences and reflection on government interventions.

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

#258

Post by raxxorrax »

pvg wrote: post #135
photochemsyn wrote: post #62

The real reason they were so pissed off at Assange seems to be in two parts: 1) The Chelsea Manning State Department cables. The video was all the hype, but just dig through the 'SECRET' cables on Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc. 2) Those Vault7 CIA leaks are incredibly embarrassing, it's like so closet cr…

Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc. You can go to the cable archive and type 'human rights' in the search box and see this isn't remotely true. Whatever one might think of US diplomacy and its goals, the cables are mostly of historical interest and cause for mild embarrassment. They don't really show some diabolically clever empire c…

Doesn't explain the heavy handed procecution then.

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

#259

Post by raxxorrax »

marcinzm wrote: post #85
photochemsyn wrote: post #62

The real reason they were so pissed off at Assange seems to be in two parts: 1) The Chelsea Manning State Department cables. The video was all the hype, but just dig through the 'SECRET' cables on Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc. 2) Those Vault7 CIA leaks are incredibly embarrassing, it's like so closet cr…

> That's kind of insanely deceptive and criminal I think. That just seems like standard for spy agencies along with a pretty mild black propaganda angle. Even books about WW2 propaganda cover the topic. I think people just underestimate what spy agencies actually do and how dirty it’s always been.

Formerly there were consequences if a spy gets caught, even one of your own nation. This just brushes it off...

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

#260

Post by raxxorrax »

m0zg wrote: post #199
boomboomsubban wrote: post #90

I don't see how anybody could read this and then pretend that Assange has any chance of a fair trial in America. Not only were his communication constantly monitored for years, already a breach of client attorney privilege, the US considered flagrant assassination as a potential way to handle him. I've heard many people say that Assange committed actual crimes and it's time for him to face the consequences of those a…

Not after the entirety of the liberal press branded him a Putin stooge because he emabarrassed Hillary Clinton, that's for sure. Embarrassing the Clintons generally doesn't do any favors to one's life expectancy in this banana republic.

I agree that the "liberal" press does a very poor job to get to the bottom of anything recently, it just reiterates propaganda and I don't think they are able to hold anyone accountable. Educational deficits of young journalists are pretty appararent. That said, you don't need to add some weird stuff here.
Post reply on HN