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

181–190 of 432 posts

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#181

Post by thatlongthrow1 »

monocasa wrote: post #177
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK I'll be explicit. You attempted to spin the opinion of special rapporteur into that of the UN. In every special rapporteur article they have to put the disclaimer I posted because of people like you attempting to frame something in false or malicious ways. To recap your claim: >Its not just my opinion, its the UN opinion. UN's actual position as stated in the article you posted: >The Special Rapporteurs are part o…

The UN's own press statements refer to the Special Rapporteurs as "UN Experts" https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?N...

There is a reason people have to put annoyingly long official titles in when discussing persons and their opinions. "UN Special Rapporteur" does not equal the UN, it specially does not equal an official position of the UN which is what the user tried to do.

You have to be specific. "UN Special Rapporteur" does not equal the UN, which is why that specific language is put onto the footer of all their articles.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#182

Post by [deleted] »

wazoox wrote: post #27
pell wrote: post #6

I'm not a fan of Assange and I think the allegations in Sweden were credible. But what is currently happening to him is beyond unjust.

They were credible until they were revealed as complete fabrications by no other than the UN human rights reporter: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?N... https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2018/02/13/news/few_documen... https://english.elpais.com/spanish_news/2020-05-01/why-julia...

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#183

Post by paulchap »

Maybe I'm just too much of a pessimist, but I think Assange (and others like him) are naive to assume that bringing leaks to the general public really has that much of an effect in today's world - people just don't care enough. You won't find many people actually reading the documents... maybe they notice those going viral, but that's probably it. People don't associate WikiLeaks with the idea of transparency, they associate it with scandals. A tabloid newspaper isn't something the majority of the population respects. WikiLeaks seems to share that negative image. Most of my (Gen Z) peers don't even know WikiLeaks exists.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#184

Post by DaniloDias »

dijit wrote: post #63
thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think it says something that this is the best you can come up with. Hi I can basically see you sneering with a "gotcha" face through that text. Sorry but Assange's history of leak revisionism, favoring Russia specifically, is deep. When Assange was working with "Anon" who was really an FBI snitch, he accepted files hacked from Syria. When they were released they were missing information about Russia including bank…

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.

It is not worth engaging. I have met powerful people who have an unreasonable bug up their ass about Assange.

These are Americans who state that this Australian is a traitor who should be prosecuted and executed for treason over the collateral murder video. It is the same exact moral and ethical rot that has corrupted our police forces.

Edit: These downvotes are enlightening.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#186

Post by ReptileMan »

Tepix wrote: post #158
ReptileMan wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean ... the US has not even got hands on him yet. He hasn't been in US custody for a second. There is absolutely no case. Yet. If you want to feel contempt strongly towards someone - the UK, Ecuador and Sweden governments are the ones to blame so far.

So you are saying charging a journalist with these things is OK?

Well ... a prosecutor can charge anyone with anything. Winning a case is a whole different matter.

Not a first amendment scholar but Assange is probably pretty safe on disseminating the information.

But they claim he committed felonies obtaining it.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#188

Post by chasd00 »

henearkr wrote: post #101
fsloth wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange case? It's been a very bad idea for decades to get on US governments shit list. The range of options range from financial restraints to summary assassination without a trial. People should understand this. US is a stabilizing force in the world but they are not about universal human rights or world peace.

Lots of journalists, say, in France for example, hurl shit in the face of US every day, with lots of investigations, and they still are more or less protected and the country where they live abide by the law... So, that's what personally I would have expected and hoped about Assange too. The reality is different from what you present: it is not common that journalists opposing to US are (internationally) repressed at…

It depends on what line is crossed. Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize and still assassinated a US citizen on foreign soil without due process and justified it with a loop hole in the law.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-justificati...

the take away is this, when you're on the US Gov. shit list you're safe until you're not.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#189

Post by ReptileMan »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #89
ReptileMan wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean ... the US has not even got hands on him yet. He hasn't been in US custody for a second. There is absolutely no case. Yet. If you want to feel contempt strongly towards someone - the UK, Ecuador and Sweden governments are the ones to blame so far.

There is a United Nations report detailing how Assange is being politically prosecuted. This is no longer merely an opinion of his sympathysers.

He is not politically prosecuted, he is politically persecuted by prosecution that is pulled out of someone's ass.

But once again - he hasn't been touched by US so far. There are numerous governments that could have given him asylum, and the EU court of human rights is suspiciously silent.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#190

Post by xvedejas »

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #168
arcticfox wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I agree that he had a right to privacy, same as anyone else. Agreed. > As an officer of a public corporation, how much privacy can one expect? So we should violate his rights without repercussion? Lost me.

As a public figure you cannot have any reasonable expectation of privacy. That’s different from saying what should be done with his private medical records.

The only reason public figures don't reasonably have that expectation is because so many people are willing to break the law to leak their personal data. That this happens so often is not a valid justification for it happening.
Post reply on HN