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

Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 432 posts

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#111

Post by wyck »

fsloth wrote: post #72
dijit wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ugh, don't make me do this: Selectively releasing documents is not the same as releasing something later proven to be false, which is what the GP asserted. FWIW you could play devils advocate here and say that wikileaks could not independently verify the omitted things; but I'm not going to go there because it's conjecture. Just as your suggestion that it's collusion with Russia, however likely, is also conjecture.

Selectively releasing everyone else's dirt except for Russia is a strong indicator of non-neutral stance.

What most people seem to fail to realize is that in of itself is not necessary proof of collusion. There is the "street" theory that publishing records on powerful Russians ends with a bullet in your head( or worse) and not jail or any legal proceedings. Something to think about.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#112

Post by wyck »

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #94
dijit wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry I must have missed where anyone in this thread-chain has asserted that statement at all.

WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... >In the summer of 2016, as WikiLeaks was publishing documents from Democratic operatives allegedly obtained by Kremlin-directed hackers, Julian Assange turned down a large cache of documents related to the Russian government, according to chat messages and a source who pr…

Nothing your saying in this thread is true.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#113

Post by 34679 »

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #19

Wikileaks used to be something, then Assange decided to filter leaks based on whatever biases he felt that day. He alienated a lot of his initial supporters doing this, focusing only on leaking content from "the west." Later fully engaging with state sponsored hackers to meddle in the US election[1] while again ignoring any leaks about Russia[2] and friends. As far as I can tell there is nothing left of Wikileaks, it…

Reporting about western countries isn't expected to land you in a jail cell or early grave, as is the case with Russia and China.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#114

Post by AnHonestComment »

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #110
AnHonestComment wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

I edited to include a source after you posted: the founder of BLM refers to herself as a trained Marxist.

The reason people are speaking about it more now is such Marxist groups seized part of one city (Seattle) and staged riots nationally. Generally speaking, when an ideological group uses their network to stage violent riots, people talk about it.

People such as Jordan Peterson or Michael Knowles have been speaking about Marxism in universities and other institutions for a while.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#115

Post by thatlongthrow1 »

wyck wrote: post #112
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... >In the summer of 2016, as WikiLeaks was publishing documents from Democratic operatives allegedly obtained by Kremlin-directed hackers, Julian Assange turned down a large cache of documents related to the Russian government, according to chat messages and a source who pr…

Nothing your saying in this thread is true.

Refute.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#116

Post by chmod775 »

input_sh wrote: post #42
Ygg2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't the news dead silent in regards to that accusation? Moment US raised its charges, the Sweden rape case is nowhere to be found. Not to mention, Assanage agreed to that investigation if they could guarantee not to be extradited to US.

That's because Sweden allegations are discontinued. Quick time frame of the latest development: 2017-05-19: Suspended investigation, revoked arrest warrant. Statement that the investigation can be resumed if Assange visited Sweden before August 2020. 2019-04-11: Case re-opened following his arrest. In September of this year 7 new witnesses were revealed. 2019-11-19: Investigation discontinued, stating "the evidence i…

> I personally believe that he's guilty due to the sheer amount of witnesses

Yeah because the Swedish police is totally credible at this point.

So this is what we know of the first woman who went to the police, according to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer, starting this whole charade:

- There were no rape allegations. She described the sexual intercourse as consensual. Instead she was worried Assange may have HIV and asked whether the police could force him to take a test.

- Instead, and for no apparent reason, police try to pressure her into accusing Assange of rape. She refuses. She also refuses to sign the interrogation transcript created by the police.

- Finally, and emotionally exhausted, she goes home and writes one of her friends a SMS: "I don't want to report him. I just want him to take a test, but police want to get him for rape." and the next day: "Police is fabricating this."

- Then, that very next night, newspaper are already calling Assange a rapist.

Another fun tidbit:

- Some time later Swedish police was ready to come to the UK to interrogate Assange, but was asked not to by the UK.

- Also Swedish police was worried because their highest court wanted them to either charge him or drop the case, and was told by the UK: "Don't get cold feet now."

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kha_5G70pi0

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#117

Post by 34679 »

macspoofing wrote: post #78
tsimionescu wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So not only are Assange and the people who gave him information supposed to risk their lives to bring these things out to the public, they are also supposed to do it in an objective balanced manner? Facts are facts. As long as they are printing true facts, they can only be doing good, even if they are only printing the truth about one particular country. Even if they were only printing leaks from a single policital p…

I don't think that's what OP meant. At one point, I also thought WikiLeaks was going to be a new type of internet-era news organization pushing for full transparency, regardless of the target. I was disappointed when it turned out they were aimed solely at discrediting America and would editorialize and time their drops for maximum damage. They decided to become that kind of an organization, and they lost credibility…

Is it not possible that Wikileaks decided it was safer for them to report on the US, given our supposed press freedoms?

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#118

Post by kome »

op03 wrote: post #17

Feels like the last decade has shown Leaking to the General Public is not very productive. As in outcomes are poor. There is always something else lined up every 2 minutes to pull attention away from the leak. I am not sure if anyone studies "leaking effectiveness" but I am guessing in info tsunami conditions larger the leak less impact it has. Cause no one knows whose network of power is going to get impacted so eve…

> Feels like the last decade has shown Leaking to the General Public is not very productive. As in outcomes are poor.

Who cares about "productivity" or outcomes? I am in for the truth. And WikiLeaks really helped.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#119

Post by 0x8BADF00D »

raxxorrax wrote: post #37
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never once published anything that has been proven false. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/885395248612085760 He has helped launder edited material from Russian state sponsored hackers in the past. That is one instance, should I find more?

The whole Russian story was a scam. We have documents saying that is was told to abuse FISA powers. Not that I like the persons it was employed against, but it is far larger than watergate if we had honest discussion about it. If you still talk about Russia, you have been fooled immensely and for me it is beyond comprehension how anyone could earnestly believe that story arc. You are spreading lies.

Not only was it a scam, it was the first time in US history that a shadowy cabal of unelected federal government officials tried to invalidate the results of an election. It also led to the erosion of rule of law, which will impact the US greatly in the future.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#120

Post by fsloth »

wyck wrote: post #111
fsloth wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Selectively releasing everyone else's dirt except for Russia is a strong indicator of non-neutral stance.

What most people seem to fail to realize is that in of itself is not necessary proof of collusion. There is the "street" theory that publishing records on powerful Russians ends with a bullet in your head( or worse) and not jail or any legal proceedings. Something to think about.

Well, yes, getting to Russia's shit list is a nasty experience even for non-Russians, as well known examples show, such as that of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessikka_Aro
Post reply on HN