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

Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 792 posts

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#261

Post by vntok »

gausswho wrote: post #250
cainxinth wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “he’s a world famous journalist with prior work” That’s a claim not a fact. It’s also possible he was an asset for a hostile intelligence service posing as a journalist. I’m not normally one to side with Mike Pompeo, but I agree with his assessment on this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/mike-pompeo-c... “‘WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence…

You agree also with the use of 'hostile'? If not, do you agree the US is in the right to extradite non-US intelligence operators?

Yes I agree. He himself declared numerous times that his intention was to be hostile to the US (and going as far as naming the Clintons explicitely as a target of his campaign).

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#262

Post by kspacewalk2 »

lettergram wrote: post #183

To fully appreciate the context: - he’s not a us citizen - none of the “crimes” happened on US soil - he’s a world famous journalist with prior work - was charged with bogus crimes in Europe in an attempt to arrest him. All dropped - the person who stole the files he released is already free and the tax payers paid for their transition

- the alleged crimes were committed against the US, i.e his participation in the exfiltration of secret data from US government. Surely his physical location when committing these crimes should have no bearing on whether it's a criminal matter.

- calling him a journalist is a mighty stretch even before he started, let's call it his "full-stack collaboration" with the Russians

- Manning served the time and is thus free. Assange did not serve time, so from the perspective of the US justice system is a few steps back in the process of paying for his crime. Regardless of guilt or innocence, nothing seems strange about this concept itself. If you're caught for a crime committed with others back in the 90s you're also gonna go to prison, even if your co-conspirators are out free already.

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#263

Post by pera »

cainxinth wrote: post #236
lettergram wrote: post #183

To fully appreciate the context: - he’s not a us citizen - none of the “crimes” happened on US soil - he’s a world famous journalist with prior work - was charged with bogus crimes in Europe in an attempt to arrest him. All dropped - the person who stole the files he released is already free and the tax payers paid for their transition

> “he’s a world famous journalist with prior work” That’s a claim not a fact. It’s also possible he was an asset for a hostile intelligence service posing as a journalist. I’m not normally one to side with Mike Pompeo, but I agree with his assessment on this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/mike-pompeo-c... “‘WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence…

Do you think siding with Pompeo on this issue is more sensible than "siding" with NGOs like ACLU, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Reporters Without Borders?

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#264

Post by mrsuprawsm »

pydry wrote: post #256
kstenerud wrote: post #204

This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…

I suspect Assange doesn't regret this. I kind of get the impression that becoming a martyr was a sacrifice he was prepared to make if he managed to rip off the mask and expose the unbridled imperialist evil lurking underneath the "civilized press conference veneer" presented by the US government.

It's a bit of a sad sacrifice, though. Nothing (significant) has changed about the US's imperialism as a result of his disclosures, it's just mildly more acknowledged.

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#265

Post by pydry »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #239
emilecantin wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-US citizen, that's what I find most troubling about this. Change the countries and it's immediately apparent how absurd it is: Imagine a US citizen living in Mexico exposed some Peruvian state secrets (doing something which isn't a crime in Mexico), and now Peru is applying pressure to extradite the guy. Chances are everybody involved would laugh in Peru's face, so why does the UK entertain this in Assange's…

> As a non-US citizen, that's what I find most troubling about this. Extradition isn't unique to the United States, though. It's a common feature of most large country's legal systems. This doesn't mean that any country can prosecute foreign people with arbitrary laws at their leisure, though. Most extradition agreements would require that the offense be a crime in both countries, for example, and require a reasonabl…

>This doesn't mean that any country can prosecute foreign people with arbitrary laws at their leisure, though. Most extradition agreements would require that the offense be a crime in both countries, for example.

Ok but Anne Sacoolas ran over and killed a kid (definitely a crime here) and she wasn't extradited.

While Julian Assange exposed a US war crime and is extradited because US espionage law literally counts that as spying. Not a crime in the UK.

It really does appear that "at their leisure" is precisely how it works. There's the exercise of raw power with a thin veneer of false legal pretext on top designed to manufacture consent and convince those susceptible to the just world fallacy.

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#266

Post by tiahura »

cainxinth wrote: post #236
lettergram wrote: post #183

To fully appreciate the context: - he’s not a us citizen - none of the “crimes” happened on US soil - he’s a world famous journalist with prior work - was charged with bogus crimes in Europe in an attempt to arrest him. All dropped - the person who stole the files he released is already free and the tax payers paid for their transition

> “he’s a world famous journalist with prior work” That’s a claim not a fact. It’s also possible he was an asset for a hostile intelligence service posing as a journalist. I’m not normally one to side with Mike Pompeo, but I agree with his assessment on this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/mike-pompeo-c... “‘WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence…

What difference does it make if he’s a journalist, an astronaut, or a haberdasher? Shouldn’t the law apply equally regardless of your profession and level of celebrity?

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#267

Post by ttybird2 »

bladegash wrote: post #240
ttybird2 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"However, I do not agree that a “journalist” should be able to enable espionage" "Espionage" like publishing warcrimes. "I consider setting up a website purely designed to encourage leaking of potentially classified information and assisting with the ability to do so as being no different than any other criminal conspiracy" Transparency is a government duty. It is a shame but totally justified that private citizens h…

"Yet given how the events turned out it seems that he was right. He was hiding in the embassy in fear that they would try to send him to the US." If only we could all flee when faced with consequences for breaking laws that we disagree with. "Transparency is a government duty. It is a shame but totally justified that private citizens have to 3nforce it. As for "criminal", sounds like yet another victimless crime. If…

"If only we could all flee when faced with consequences for breaking laws that we disagree with."

These who can flee the overreach of foregin countries trying to enforce their unjust laws on them, do so.

"versus damaging to the diplomatic relations and ability to conduct diplomacy with much of the rest of the world."

Yeah, if a country commits horrible warcrimes then most of the world will not want to deal with them. It was not assange who was responsible for this but the US itself. One would not accuse a rape victim of ruining the reputation of their abuser.

"Oh, goodness. Thanks for adding to taking the time to provide your perspective and add to the discussion."

Pray tell. If it is zero then you can just say so, and if you did try to expose warcrimes I will take it back.

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#268

Post by bladegash »

Karunamon wrote: post #210
bladegash wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do not draw a distinction in intent between informing the public and furthering the goals of a foreign adversary? Not saying he was, just an example, of how intent absolutely does matter from a legal perspective.

What if accomplishing the first thing necessarily accomplishes the second thing? For example, informing on any nation's heretofore unknown war crimes hurts them on the world stage.

That's a good question and I am not 100% sure where I would personally/morally draw the line. I think the conversation would be much different if all that were released was the evidence of what people consider to be a war crime. However, there was a lot more than that released than just that. Whether A (benefit to society) is greater than B (risk/damage) is always a hard distinction to make and up for significant discussion/analysis.

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#269

Post by nnvvhh »

papito wrote: post #259
kstenerud wrote: post #204

This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…

"Laws are people, and I can manage people." - Logan Roy, Succession, HBO "How do you ensure the green? You can't. As in life, in traffic, you leave yourself an out... You move diagonal, you turn the wheel when you hit a red light. You don't try down Broadway to get to Broadway. You are going to butt heads with these friends of ours? You are going to come at them head on? They got lives, Freddy, families." - Cop Land

Funny, I was thinking of a Logan Roy quote: “Life's not knights on horseback. It's a number on a piece of paper. It's a fight for a knife in the mud.”

Re: Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules

#270

Post by harry8 »

bladegash wrote: post #83

The framing of Assange as an innocent “journalist” being persecuted for just doing his job is, in my opinion, disingenuous. I do not necessarily agree with all the actions the US Government has taken with him, or their handling of some of the information that was leaked. However, I do not agree that a “journalist” should be able to enable espionage, let alone encourage/incite it. In case my point is unclear, I consid…

A journalist is /any/ citizen engaging in journalism. ANY. As soon as you have to "qualify" to be a "journalist" and can't be an "activist" What you have is state controlled media.

Indiscriminate publishing. So you think the vetting done in partnership with the Washington Post and the New York Times was not journalism and the employees of the NYT and WaPo who are now not journalists should be prosecuted along side him? That's pretty radical.

Post reply on HN