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

501–510 of 792 posts

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

#501

Post by TakuYam »

user743 wrote: post #446
alexvoda wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe somewhere in here lies a fundamental problem with today's society. We have reached an absurd level of polarization. Any opinion you hold that is in contradiction with someone else's opinion, qualifies you for membership of the opposing camp. We should really work on depolarisation.

The establishment is the enemy, not each other. Also, I'm not sure where this "keep friends and family separate from business" idealogy came from, but business is just organizing production. If we're not going to try to hold those keys with our friends and family, then elites will hold them for us. Side note-no actual progress can come until there is sound money again.

> The establishment is the enemy, not each other.

The problem with the premise that the establishment is a lot like The Matrix. Some people are so hopelessly enamoured with the establishment that they will do whatever it takes to defend it.

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

#502

Post by shadowgovt »

fredstarr wrote: post #358
ceejayoz wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I no longer hold the view that our media deserves the first amendment protection that it does. That, uh, might be a bit of an overcorrection.

Overcorrection? No it is not. They enjoy misleading and diverting attention away from the things that really matter. Just take a look at these lawsuits: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-maddow... https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-karen-mcdougal-case... Look, these talking heads are simply well-paid entertainers - nothing more. All they spew is lies, propaganda and downplay the things that…

Of course, the problem with removing First Amendment protections is you only know about these lawsuits because Business Insider and Glenn Greenwald enjoy First Amendment protections.

That having been said: the First Amendment is not absolute, and there are exceptions to the general principle that people are free to say what they feel (Assange, for example, could be tried on espionage if he's extradited). But in general, exceptions are carved with a jeweler's chisel, and only when extremely necessary and when there are no other possible remedies.

In this case, the sickness you've highlighted has several potential non-first-amendment remedies, including enforcing monopoly laws, passing new monopoly laws, and taxing billionaires at a rate that would make it difficult for them to keep the surplus cash-on-hand to buy 70% of the US's newspapers. And changing the market via law to find a new way to pay for news since the Internet era has completely ingested and digested their traditional advertising model.

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

#503

Post by maybelsyrup »

jessaustin wrote: post #483
Lucasoato wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a different world we would be living in if Bernie Sanders had won the US presidential elections.

I fear we'd just be in another JFK situation. We're only allowed so much representative government.

100%. Sanders wouldn't have made it to his own inauguration. They would have never allowed it.

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

#504

Post by pydry »

ben_w wrote: post #425
pydry wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For encouraging Americans to break American laws, which I think is the non-legalese summary of the accusation? Were Gandhi/MLK/Rosa Parks wrong when they made a point of breaking unjust laws and encouraging others to follow along? Many liberals at the time thought yes - "the law being the law" and all that. It does sound like you're making the same argument they were?

Judging if any given law is or isn’t just is too far outside my skills to have strong feeling about what Assange did one way or the other. I do know that rule of law doesn’t function if everyone gets to decide for themselves what is and isn’t an unjust law, even though I can say with the benefit of hindsight that Rosa Parks deserved her Congressional Gold Medal, and that I hope I would’ve recognised the law as unjust…

>I hope I would’ve recognised the law as unjust at the time.

I'd have hoped so too, but from what you've written it sounds like you would have slotted in with the liberal whites who declared support-for-ending-segregation-in-theory but would also say that "this isn't the right way" or "this isn't the right time".

They made rather similar arguments to yours about the primacy of the rule of law as a principle.

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

#505

Post by Mezzie »

joshuamorton wrote: post #482
Mezzie wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they should keep the 1st Amendment for the journalists. The medias' marketing departments and execs, however, should be regulated to within an inch of their lives. If they let their journos spout shit, they should be legally on the hook if they EVER claim truth. If they lie, don't allow them to take advertiser or subscriber money. You can say whatever you want, but you can't charge people for it and you can't li…

Who decides who is lying? If the media and government are in bed today, won't that get worse when the government can arbitrate what truth is harming the not mainstream media?

At this point I think the best chance of implementation would be something like the Board of Labor, OSHA, or some open source bug reporting where specific lies can be be reported and fined/punished for. Maybe random audits like the IRS. I'd like the determination to lie with the public, but the issue is coupling determination from enforcement given how intertwined information control is with power.

Right now? It wouldn't work. It's an angry pipe dream.

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

#506

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

pelasaco wrote: post #486
brandelune wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect Assange does not want to be tortured and murdered and thus does not want this. Are you insane ?

From the article: "The US had offered four assurances, including that Mr Assange would not be subject to solitary confinement pre or post-trial or detained at the ADX Florence Supermax jail - a maximum security prison in Colorado - if extradited. Lawyers for the US said he would be allowed to transfer to Australia to serve any prison sentence he may be given closer to home. And they argued Mr Assange's mental illness…

the "assurances" had an unless we feel like it exemption.

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

#507

Post by queuebert »

realce wrote: post #500
queuebert wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, I find it very hard to decide what to think about these issues. Our military certainly makes mistakes, and people should be held accountable, but on the other hand the U.S. upholds much stricter rules of engagement than any of its enemies (hell, even stricter than our cops). Should credit not be given for that?

> but on the other hand the U.S. upholds much stricter rules of engagement than any of its enemies (hell, even stricter than our cops). Should credit not be given for that? In all honesty and at the very minimum, being criticized openly and fairly for atrocities is the cost of being seen as capable of virtuous military action. The older I get though, the less objective distinction I see. I'm sure that's how the dead…

I'm ashamed to admit I forgot about that once the news cycle moved on. Someone should definitely be held accountable, especially since all evidence points to it not even being an honest mistake, but rather a PR move made against the advice of ground commanders.

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

#508

Post by the_other »

emilecantin wrote: post #208
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

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…

AUKUS

The timelines of the extradition and the submarine deal don't match up exactly... but the idea that the English-speaking countries can rely on one another runs deep and long.

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

#509

Post by jessaustin »

nickysielicki wrote: post #445

Surprisingly few technical people understand the extent to which the CFAA charges he faces are bullshit. It all goes back to a jabber log that they got from Manning. The gist of it is as follows: Manning: Manning: can you guys crack NTLM? Assange: we have rainbow tables. I’ll forward it onto someone on our team. Few days later, Manning: any update on NTLM? Assange: no luck so far. And this is computer conspiracy. No…

  s/Assange/Nathaniel Frank/
Manning was chatting with "Nathaniel Frank". That was understood to be a pseudonym for someone at Wikileaks, but there's no proof of any of that. So, these charges are even more bullshit.

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

#510

Post by janto »

queuebert wrote: post #471
realce wrote: post #246

Fabricate a narrative that allows your country to murder tens of thousands of people == fine and not illegal. Tell soldier how cryptographic maths work == double castration and the CIA tries to assassinate you. Don't forget that the Collateral Murder video showed not only Iraqi citizens but also Reuters journalists being machine-gunned from the sky. No person has ever been criminally charged for these murders.

As an American, I find it very hard to decide what to think about these issues. Our military certainly makes mistakes, and people should be held accountable, but on the other hand the U.S. upholds much stricter rules of engagement than any of its enemies (hell, even stricter than our cops). Should credit not be given for that?

A free media forms part of what keeps a Western military to stricter rules of engagement.
Post reply on HN