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

Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 162 posts

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#21

Post by dleslie »

pnathan wrote: post #13
drinchev wrote: post #9

> The move came after Assange tweeted on Monday challenging Britain’s accusation that Russia was responsible for the nerve agent poisoning of a Russian former double agent and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury earlier this month. So it's actually not so wrong to think that Russia is not >proven I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to…

> I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to the conclusion that Putin is responsible this time. Putin is given far too much credit. But the Russian wetworks division, under Putin's authority, has its fingerprints all over the Salisbury attack. > shouldn't people like Assange reveal it? Largely Assange has been an anti-liberal democracy apologist fo…

The two books from his earlier self, Cypherpunks and When Google Met Wikileaks, are well worth the read for anyone who comments here on HN, I think.

I agree, he changed dramatically sometime around or during the Trump campaign; I hardly recognize him any longer.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#22

Post by tway923423 »

atonse wrote: post #18
tway923423 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia How about judging the information on its merits, not its source? Why does it matter one wink if you don't like the leakers?

Intent matters. There's a difference between a whistleblower wanting to expose things that violate the constitution because they want those things to stop, and a foreign agent exposing the same actions, but with the intent to destabilize people's trust in their government. The end result might be the same. But to say it doesn't matter where a leak came from, is to also say that whistleblowers are no different from fo…

>But to say it doesn't matter where a leak came from, is to also say that whistleblowers are no different from foreign spies.

Well I guess we have to agree to disagree then. If a "foreign spy" reports that Dow Checmial is dumping pollution in the river, I'm gonna question Dow first, not the spy.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#23

Post by tway923423 »

mavdi wrote: post #20
tway923423 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia How about judging the information on its merits, not its source? Why does it matter one wink if you don't like the leakers?

I'll question the information merit of any rotten source. I suggest you do the same.

>I'll question the information merit of any rotten source.

Go ahead and question it.

Have you come up with any evidence that it's fabricated?

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#24

Post by olefoo »

alacombe wrote: post #15
ceejayoz wrote: post #2

The key bit: > The Ecuadorian government said in statement that it had acted because Assange had breached “a written commitment made to the government at the end of 2017 not to issue messages that might interfere with other states”.

At this point, they can give any plausible reason, it wouldn't make a difference. They're just bending over to the US... It's surprising they lasted that long already :-/

That is a deeply condescending statement that does nothing but display your own ignorance of the norms and constraints of international diplomacy.

Ecuador would at this point in time be fully justified in declaring that Assange was no longer welcome on their territory and expelling him from his hidey-hole. That they are merely cutting off his internet is extremely generous of them given the trouble and expense he has caused them.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#25

Post by Sangermaine »

tway923423 wrote: post #23
mavdi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll question the information merit of any rotten source. I suggest you do the same.

> I'll question the information merit of any rotten source. Go ahead and question it. Have you come up with any evidence that it's fabricated?

The concern isn't fabrication. The concern is that the information is being intentionally selectively provided to influence events.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#26

Post by Sangermaine »

tway923423 wrote: post #22
atonse wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intent matters. There's a difference between a whistleblower wanting to expose things that violate the constitution because they want those things to stop, and a foreign agent exposing the same actions, but with the intent to destabilize people's trust in their government. The end result might be the same. But to say it doesn't matter where a leak came from, is to also say that whistleblowers are no different from fo…

> But to say it doesn't matter where a leak came from, is to also say that whistleblowers are no different from foreign spies. Well I guess we have to agree to disagree then. If a "foreign spy" reports that Dow Checmial is dumping pollution in the river, I'm gonna question Dow first, not the spy.

You're being either extremely naive or intentionally obtuse.

No one is saying the information is false or should be ignored. To use your example, if there were reason to believe that this spy was revealing this information on behalf of Dow's competitors to influence the market and shield/draw attention away from their own malfeasance, that's a concern. The source and the intent of the source does actually matter.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#27

Post by dxhdr »

chx wrote: post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

The USA is the strongest country in the world politically, economically and militarily. Who better to criticize than the USA if the goal is to change the status quo?

"Damaging" Russia makes no sense. They don't make the rules!

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#28

Post by sdhgaiojfsa »

vondur wrote: post #19
chx wrote: post #12

How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.

Do you really need something like Wikileaks to expose how corrupt Russia’s government is? I’m pretty sure it’s common knowledge now.

That would kinda seem to be the point of it.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#29

Post by roenxi »

pnathan wrote: post #13
drinchev wrote: post #9

> The move came after Assange tweeted on Monday challenging Britain’s accusation that Russia was responsible for the nerve agent poisoning of a Russian former double agent and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury earlier this month. So it's actually not so wrong to think that Russia is not >proven I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to…

> I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to the conclusion that Putin is responsible this time. Putin is given far too much credit. But the Russian wetworks division, under Putin's authority, has its fingerprints all over the Salisbury attack. > shouldn't people like Assange reveal it? Largely Assange has been an anti-liberal democracy apologist fo…

> But the Russian wetworks division, under Putin's authority, has its fingerprints all over the Salisbury attack.

There is strong circumstantial evidence, but proof is a slightly different game. It would be nice, for example, to have a clear motive for why Russia might have poisoned the man. According to the wiki article the Russian justice system had sentenced him to 13 years in a penal colony in 2006, and then handed him over in a prisoners exchange in 2010. What happened to upgrade that to a death sentence in 2018 that the GRU didn't know about in 2006-2010?

Evidence should be a high bar. We might suspect the Russians, but lets not pretend there is any clear public evidence beyond government say-so. The government can be wrong, just like the rest of us.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#30

Post by dragonwriter »

drinchev wrote: post #9

> The move came after Assange tweeted on Monday challenging Britain’s accusation that Russia was responsible for the nerve agent poisoning of a Russian former double agent and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury earlier this month. So it's actually not so wrong to think that Russia is not >proven I doubt that here, on HN, most of us would go so deep with conspiracy, but rational thinking did not lead me to…

> Also, why would the UK-Ecuador relations be in danger of a tweet of a fugitive?

Because the fugitive is occupying a Ecuadorian diplomatic facility in the UK and using it inconsistently with it's diplomatic function, which, if permitted by Ecuador, is a violation by Ecuador of Article 41, Paragraph 3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Post reply on HN