Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules • Hacker News Board

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

#681

Post by plandis » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

elif wrote: post #646

mafuy wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did significant help in showing a major war crime that was covered up. That is, without doubt, more important. As a journalist, you sometimes have to jump a fence - that is generally, and legally, accepted. Else writing 'do not view or publish' on your crime diary would be sufficient to conceal it.

it is also worth noting that julian didnt jump any fence. He received and published data full stop. The only espionage was on part of the whistleblowers.

> In 2010, Assange gained unauthorized access to a government computer system of a NATO country. In 2012, Assange communicated directly with a leader of the hacking group LulzSec (who by then was cooperating with the FBI), and provided a list of targets for LulzSec to hack. With respect to one target, Assange asked the LulzSec leader to look for (and provide to WikiLeaks) mail and documents, databases and pdfs. In another communication, Assange told the LulzSec leader that the most impactful release of hacked materials would be from the CIA, NSA, or the New York Times. WikiLeaks obtained and published emails from a data breach committed against an American intelligence consulting company by an “Anonymous” and LulzSec-affiliated hacker. According to that hacker, Assange indirectly asked him to spam that victim company again.

> In addition, the broadened hacking conspiracy continues to allege that Assange conspired with Army Intelligence Analyst Chelsea Manning to crack a password hash to a classified U.S. Department of Defense computer.

10 seconds of perusing the indictment against Assange alleges he actively did things other than merely publish data that was given to him.

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

#682

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #615

jollybean wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is ridiculous. Assange is alleged to have cooperated with a member of the US forces to release gigabytes of diplomatic cables etc. - which is possibly a crime. In all but rare cases, you absolutely do not have the right to break into systems of national security and release arbitrary information under the guise of 'journalism'. His extradition is perfectly rational, legal and judicially legitimate. The Abu Garib…

> you absolutely do not have the right to break into systems of national security He didn’t do that, he didn’t help Manning get any additional access, the whole basis of their case is in Assange agreeing to look at some stuff for Manning and then never getting back to him. Assange didn’t hack or crack anything.

[deleted]

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

#683

Post by jonnybgood » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

josteink wrote: post #535

zepto wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the US intends to murder him.

> I doubt the US intends to murder him. And Epstein committed suicide. Right?

How is Epstein at all relevant? I believe the conspiracy theory is around powerful people trying to keep their secrets secret. Meaning not let the US government know their secrets so they can avoid prosecution. So the US government would want Epstein alive. Why do you think the US government is prosecuting Ghislane Maxwell right now?

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

#684

Post by plandis » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:32 PM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #615

jollybean wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is ridiculous. Assange is alleged to have cooperated with a member of the US forces to release gigabytes of diplomatic cables etc. - which is possibly a crime. In all but rare cases, you absolutely do not have the right to break into systems of national security and release arbitrary information under the guise of 'journalism'. His extradition is perfectly rational, legal and judicially legitimate. The Abu Garib…

> you absolutely do not have the right to break into systems of national security He didn’t do that, he didn’t help Manning get any additional access, the whole basis of their case is in Assange agreeing to look at some stuff for Manning and then never getting back to him. Assange didn’t hack or crack anything.

In part of the indictment he’s accused of literally helping Manning to crack password hashes she obtained illegally.

> The superseding indictment alleges that Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect that Assange actively encouraged Manning to provide more information and agreed to crack a password hash stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a United States government network used for classified documents and communications. Assange is also charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to crack that password hash.

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

#685

Post by plandis » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

choward wrote: post #562

regnull wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> none of the “crimes” happened on US soil He is charged with helping Chelsea Manning to hack into a government computer which did happen on US soil. “ they charged him with conspiring to commit unlawful computer intrusion based on his alleged agreement to try to help Ms. Manning break an encoded portion of passcode that would have permitted her to log on to a classified military network under another user’s identity…

There is no evidence he helped her. Their main witness was a pedophile who lied to try get his own charges lessened. There is no case against Assange. The allegations are bogus.

Are you saying this after reviewing all the evidence that the department of justice has or…?

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

#686

Post by sneak » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:45 PM UTC

jollybean wrote: post #656

sneak wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Assange will face a trial like everyone else It's worth noting that Manning, his alleged co-conspirator in this thing, was declared guilty by Obama, in public, before her trial ever began (when she was, under the law, to be presumed innocent). She was also tortured in jail prior to conclusion of the trial, to such an extent that she attempted suicide twice. The extradition is only rational, legal, and judicially le…

"was declared guilty by Obama, in public, before her trial ever began " That's not how it works. Biden made similar public declarations about Rittenhouse, who was subsequently found not guilty. Now, none of them should be talking about, but that they did does not imply a miscarriage of justice. The extradition is legitimate, and Assange will receive a fair trial in the US where the whole world will see the evidence a…

The points you make are orthogonal to the fact that there is no way that Assange will receive a fair trial in the USA.

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

#687

Post by sneak » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:46 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #564

sneak wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "sobering view of how the world really works" for whom this is unexpected, which is to say, the most naive. I think perhaps you're giving too many people too much credit. I would assume that the vast majority of people in the USA think it's a functioning democracy, subject to the rule of law, with human rights. None of these things are true, and, yet, these beliefs are very widely held.

It certainly beats the majority of other countries in this aspect We wouldn't be talking about Assange having legal recourse had he got in the wrong way of a lot of other places. The buck stops somewhere, no system is perfect and special cases are special cases. As again per the last paragraph in my initial response.

Imagine a parent that physically abuses their young child way less than all of the other parents on their block.

It's not really a defense. The USA, and in particular the parts of the USA that have the most power, do not really care at all about human rights, and are not held accountable for not caring about human rights.

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

#688

Post by austhrow743 » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

mercy_dude wrote: post #386

ceejayoz wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well can you elaborate why you think it is? Because "we'll revoke your First Amendment rights if we don't like how you're using them" is a very big step on a very steep and very slippery slope. Assange's defense is likely to revolve around the First Amendment. Weakening it would hurt him, even.

My point is the way founding fathers envisioned first amendment protection, they never foresaw the rise of a small billionaires oligarchs owning large stake of media and newspapers to promote views favouring their narratives. I am not speaking of first amendment of individuals which I think is also under attack by the same group of people, look how the mainstream media would love to cancel certain people they don’t l…

That journalists and individuals have separate first amendment rights guaranteed by the constitution is a lie created by the same mainstream media you’ve lost faith in.

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

#689

Post by at_a_remove » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #680

at_a_remove wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, the disparity is what interests me. Surely Manning is at as least guilty of "hacking" as Assange. And yet ... different treatment.

In what was is there different treatment? Manning stood trial, was imprisoned, and is now free. Assange has not.

It's gonna be super neat to find out. Are you of the opinion that Assange will be eventually set free?

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

#690

Post by StanislavPetrov » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:59 PM UTC

mercy_dude wrote: post #283

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…

The most infuriating among all of them has been our media - specifically mainstream media. They have played the entire saga down and in many cases many mainstream media pundits actively espoused for Assanges punishment [1]. I no longer hold the view that our media deserves the first amendment protection that it does. Mainstream media right now has no other purpose other than being active vehicle of the powerful and b…

>I no longer hold the view that our media deserves the first amendment protection that it does.

I think the Assange case is an excellent reminder that "our media" doesn't really have any First Amendment protection. You don't need First Amendment protection if you are spewing DC blob talking points all day. And if you challenge the DC blob, like Assange did (or Gary Webb and others), it very quickly becomes clear that those protections don't exist at all.