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

Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 225 posts

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#171

Post by tharmas »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #86
Lord-Jobo wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrecklessly and without simple redaction, in such a way that very well might have resulted in the deaths of US officials. And highly questionable selective publishing. I think the guy is getting fucked over in this unfairly, but let's not pretend he has released information to a reasonable standard.

All of this is over the Manning leaks, where Assange tried to go over the documents with the US government so he could do a responsible disclosure. The US refused. He then got a team of journalists together to sift through the documents to make sure things were properly disclosed. Some Guardian journalists then published the encryption keys in a book.

I seem to recall the Journalists had an argument with Assange over the leaking. The Journalists wanted to take their time and carefully filter out any info that was not necessary such as informants identities. Assange wanted to get the stuff out as quickly as possible perhaps out of fear of being stopped before it was released.

Snowden's mistake was revealing himself. He should've done what the Panama Papers leaker did.

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#172

Post by amanaplanacanal »

prmoustache wrote: post #15

I still don't understand how a country can grant extradition of a non US citizen to the USA for "espionage". Every country is potentially spying on every other country and it doesn't even matter if they are supposed to be allies or enemies. The only limits are resources.

I thought the legal case was about hacking, not espionage.

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#173

Post by amanaplanacanal »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #152
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would the alternative be? Expats can commit cyber crimes risk-free? Just don't be a citizen of the country you reside in or the country you're attacking and you're immune! They can extradite him because Australia says that they can. Most of our countries at the highest levels agreed to this. It's called international law and it's messy.

If you insult the prophet Mohammed in a Facebook post should Iran be able to extradite you from the USA to Iran in order to charge and punish you for committing that crime in their country? Obviously not. Yet the USA does this routinely. It's effectively what Assange did.

Normally I think it has to be a crime in both countries. Breaking into computers is.

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#174

Post by Etherlord87 »

throw0101c wrote: post #29
prmoustache wrote: post #15

I still don't understand how a country can grant extradition of a non US citizen to the USA for "espionage". Every country is potentially spying on every other country and it doesn't even matter if they are supposed to be allies or enemies. The only limits are resources.

> I still don't understand how a country can grant extradition of a non US citizen to the USA for "espionage". The act happened on a computer system with-in US jurisdiction. See also "Three North Korean Military Hackers Indicted in Wide-Ranging Scheme to Commit Cyberattacks and Financial Crimes Across the Globe": > Indictment Expands 2018 Case that Detailed Attack on Sony Pictures and Creation of WannaCry Ransomware…

> The act happened on a computer system with-in US jurisdiction.

So let's say I google some information about Koran and find a website with Koran, analysis etc. Turns out it's hosted in Saudi Arabia, and the act of me, an atheist, reading Koran is blasphemy, punishable with death.

So should I be extradited to Saudi Arabia, given that the act happened on a computer system with-in Saudi Arabia?

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#175

Post by simiones »

flerchin wrote: post #26
roenxi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Would" is a strong word. "Might" seems a bit more reasonable. There is currently an escalating war in Europe and Germany has already rolled over and accepted the Nord Stream pipe as an act of God. Well, I don't actually know where their investigation is up to, but they're not acting like their infrastructure was attacked by a military. They're just taking it on the chin, probably some strongly worded diplomatic prot…

Huh, I always figured it was the Germans themselves that blew it up. To remove the blackmail angle.

Probably the Germans and the Russians working together, I would say. Makes the most sense, after all, what losing the billions they invested together in building it would hurt everyone else the most, right?

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#176

Post by phyalow »

tim333 wrote: post #168
phyalow wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plot was exceptionally well advanced and was actively surveiling the equadorian embassy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstler_v._Central_Intelligen...

From that link >The lawsuit alleged that the CIA violated their constitutional rights by recording their conversations with Assange and copying their devices after suspicions were raised that Assange was working for the Russian intelligence services. Recording conversations is not the same as plotting a kidnapping.

> Recording conversations is not the same as plotting a kidnapping.

That is true, but I was replying to OP who said such a thing never happened, when it is clear they did, including the CIA hiring a 3rd party firm to monitor Assange via illeagal methods.

Revisiting your point, this is the original source of the kidnapping allegations: https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london...

This Yahoo News investigation, based on conversations with more than 30 former U.S. officials — eight of whom described details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange — reveals for the first time one of the most contentious intelligence debates of the Trump presidency and exposes new details about the U.S. government’s war on WikiLeaks. It was a campaign spearheaded by Pompeo that bent important legal strictures, potentially jeopardized the Justice Department’s work toward prosecuting Assange, and risked a damaging episode in the United Kingdom, the United States’ closest ally.

The CIA declined to comment. Pompeo did not respond to requests for comment.

Additionally later on accusations of a plot to assaninate Assange became prominent too. These allegations were presented and detailed in court last month by Assanges legal team. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-68344106 (ctrl-f assassinate).

Disgusting.

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#177

Post by Etherlord87 »

andrewla wrote: post #121
handity wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has exerted unbelievable pressure to ensure Assange remains a non-threat. Just because they're happy with the current state of affairs doesn't mean Assange has anything to gain by "facing the court and just getting it over with". The best outcome would be for the UK to uphold its own treaties, refuse to extradite Assange, and allow him to walk free. Anything less would be a travesty and miscarriage of justice.…

He will have to be put on trial (by a jury if he so elects) and convicted before he goes to prison; there is no automatic conviction and even if he is refuse bail he will not be in prison. If the UK refuses to extradite him, then it's a matter of his looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life waiting for the hood and a chopper out. Besides, I have no faith in the UK court' ability to do anything here; they're…

> [...]before he goes to prison[...]

And where is he now?

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#178

Post by Etherlord87 »

andrewla wrote: post #143
weberer wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're storing UFOs in Guantanamo Bay now?

Guantanamo Bay detention camp is a secret? But if you know about it ... and I know about it ... then ... maybe it's not a secret prison?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/29/us/politics/pentagon-guan...

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#179

Post by [deleted] »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #152
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would the alternative be? Expats can commit cyber crimes risk-free? Just don't be a citizen of the country you reside in or the country you're attacking and you're immune! They can extradite him because Australia says that they can. Most of our countries at the highest levels agreed to this. It's called international law and it's messy.

If you insult the prophet Mohammed in a Facebook post should Iran be able to extradite you from the USA to Iran in order to charge and punish you for committing that crime in their country? Obviously not. Yet the USA does this routinely. It's effectively what Assange did.

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange granted permission to appeal against extradition to US

#180

Post by hylaride »

willcipriano wrote: post #170
hylaride wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mid-level diplomat in some authoritarian country writing a blunt opinion/analysis of its government's possibly dangerous leaders is not spying on every American.

Sure that could be the person "at risk". Could also be the guy behind having US troops guard the opium fields of pedophiles during a opioid epidemic

That's my original point. Assange/Wikileaks made little, if any, distinction between an American mid-level diplomat that's stationed at an embassy sending intel on the mistresses, corruption, or misdeeds of the local leadership and the genuine terrible things that were covered up and arguably should have been leaked.

Leaking government misdeeds is whistle-blowing and has legal and moral justifications (and when wikileaks first arrived on the scene I was 100% supportive of it). Leaking troves of generic government data that's unrelated to any misdeeds, is a crime. Assange, for a host of reasons, decided to do the latter and is now in a FAFO situation.

Post reply on HN