Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#201

Post by dr-detroit » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:51 PM UTC

ShamelessC wrote: post #95

nickysielicki wrote: post #18

> 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…

I'm generally on Assange's side in all of this. I agree he shouldn't be charged and this is all a disgrace. Having said that, I once went to wikileaks and found a PDF of Steve Job's supposed STD test which claimed he was HIV positive. That was a surprise to me as my understanding was that he died of cancer. I looked into it and no one could corroborate the story and the general consensus seemed to be that it was fake…

Hes a terrorist he should face the laws and if you dont like the laws you should lobby for them to get changed.

Giving a free pass to your eCeleb friends is a TERRIBLE idea in all cases. Facebook culture is toxic we cant let it leak into criminal justice.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#202

Post by john4532452 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:51 PM UTC

tomalpha wrote: post #88

It’s not hard to work out what it means, but the headline should probably either be: “Julian Assange Charged...” or the original “Wikileaks Founder Charged...” The current half-and-half is a little strange (who founded Julian Assange?).

Thanks. I thought i am missing something fundamental in English Grammar.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#203

Post by xtracto » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:51 PM UTC

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #35

himinlomax wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the info false, or do you just object to the sourcing?

Yes the info was false. >A few hours later, the assessment worsened: a friendly source from CNAIPIC was telling them that some of the documents had been forged. One document number, when checked against CNAIPIC’s system, reportedly corresponded to a wholly unrelated matter. The remaining real documents didn’t seem to have come from CNAIPIC either. Instead, police were apparently investigating “a small IT company that…

You are very invested to discredit Wikileaks uh? I hate when throwaway accounts do these kind of things, it reeks as propaganda machine.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#204

Post by john4532452 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:53 PM UTC

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…

How is hiding information help. There will always be distracting news.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#205

Post by frabbit » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:54 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #100

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.

To be fair the Equador government helped him a great deal but apparently even them got tired of it. I think they did what they could given the circumstances.

It's a different government now. The previous leftist one was doing inconvenient things so the USA had to get rid of it. The current one is doing what it is told though, so everything is fine: https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/12/latin-america-neoliberali...

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#206

Post by pelliphant » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:54 PM UTC

peroporque wrote: post #193

nickysielicki wrote: post #18

> 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…

Also important to remember: the supposed "rape charges" turned out to have been fabricated by the swedish police. There never was an actual rape accusation against him.

That is not true.

The only valid point you could make here is that the swedish legal system defines a broad range of "non-consentual things related to sex" as rape, where it would get defined as something else in other countries.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#207

Post by SuoDuanDao » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:54 PM UTC

hobs wrote: post #128

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got to say, when I hear 'the whole Russia thing' I assume people mean that the Trump administration broke the law to co-operate with Russia. That is a very different question from whether Russia decided to throw it's weight behind a candidate. Doesn't look to me like a shifting of goal posts at all.

A reading of the actual facts seems to be in conflict with "The trump administration did not break the law" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Donald_Trump There's very little argument about whether trump broke the law (he did) - it was just a matter of whether his corrupt party would vote for impeachment (they didn't.)

The link you posted refers to the Ukraine aid scandal, not 'that whole Russia thing'. Do people honestly not remember that in 2016-2017 the smoking gun was thought to be 'Russian Collusion'?

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#208

Post by JamesBarney » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:55 PM UTC

k1m wrote: post #30

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.

Regarding the allegations, many do not believe they are credible. See for example this comment by the UN's Nils Melzer: > Surely, I thought, Assange must be a rapist! But what I found is that he has never been charged with a sexual offence. True, soon after the United States had encouraged allies to find reasons to prosecute Assange, Swedish prosecution informed the tabloid press that he was suspected of having raped…

From wikipedia. Two women did accuse him, one of taking off a condom during sex without her consent and the other for having sex with them while she was asleep.

> On 20 August 2010, two women, a 26-year-old living in Enköping and a 31-year-old living in Stockholm,[6][7] reported to the Swedish police that Assange had engaged in unprotected sexual activity with them that violated the scope of their consent, also because one woman was asleep in one case.[8][9] The police told them that they could not simply tell Assange to take an STD test, but that their statements would be passed to a prosecutor.[10]

> The next day, the case was transferred to Chefsåklagare (Chief Public Prosecutor) Eva Finné. In answer to questions surrounding the incidents, the following day, Finné declared, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape". However, Karin Rosander from the Swedish Prosecution Authority, said Assange remained suspected of molestation. Police gave no further comment at the time, but continued the investigation.[11]

> After learning of the investigation, Assange said, "The charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing".[12]

> The preliminary investigation concerning suspected rape was discontinued by Finné on 25 August,[13] but two days later Claes Borgström, the attorney representing the two women, requested a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate part of the investigation.[13][14]

> On 30 August, Assange was questioned by the Stockholm police regarding the allegations of sexual molestation.[15] He denied the allegations, saying he had consensual sexual encounters with the two women.[12][16][17]

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#209

Post by xtracto » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:56 PM UTC

henearkr wrote: post #10

I feel nausea... This and the new anti-encryption bills... I am happy to know the existence such a lot of great American minds, mathematicians, scientists, visionaries, because, else, with only the kind of ugly news such as above, my image of US would have been tainted for good. (*) I'm not American. I'm neutral about not being American, thanks to the existence of both plus and minus items. By the way of course you c…

As someone not from the USA as well I have always chuckled at the "Land of the free" sentiment that is there (how Americans really believe it when it is the complete opposite).

Fortunately there are places like Germany where things like CCC.de can exist and the Chaos Communication Congress can happen.

From my time living in UK, Germany, Mexico (where I am from) and travelling every 3 months to the USA, my [subjective] appreciation is that Germany is "freer" that the USA can ever aspire to be.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#210

Post by henearkr » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:57 PM UTC

ReptileMan wrote: post #191

henearkr wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand well, you are essentially saying "well done". Let us agree to disagree.

No. I mean if you spill Uncle Sam secrets and make a high ranking politician lose face - make sure you are in a country where USA cannot reach you.

UK was supposed to be such a place. At least UK's law was telling that.

Also, smearing shit on the face of prime ministers, presidents, all the highest ranking politicians you can imagine, is just the game of free press in a democracy. You are free to chose your government only because you are free to know what they did wrong (or right). The fact to retaliate violently against that is totally contrary to the fair game supposed by the establishment of democracy, and also it does not restore the lost face of the politician.

You are saying that was predictable. If you could do so, great, your guess was better than most people. Assange himself is quite paranoid yet he could not predict this trap.