Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#211

Post by tehjoker » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:59 PM UTC

Let's not forget that the Obama administration refused to prosecute Assange because they couldn't find a way to do it that wouldn't criminalize ordinary journalism (talking to sources, encouraging them to give you more info, telling them how to stay safe). The current administration is perusing this case precisely because they would like the power to criminalize investigative journalism, the only kind that's actually valuable. Without it, everything that appears in the news is just stenography of state propaganda.

"As the Obama DOJ Concluded, Prosecution of Julian Assange for Publishing Documents Poses Grave Threats to Press Freedom" by Glenn Greenwald

https://theintercept.com/2018/11/16/as-the-obama-doj-conclud...

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#212

Post by dijit » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 2:59 PM UTC

dx87 wrote: post #149

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.

There's this from the top level comment. > Stand up for journalists. Real journalists. I wouldn't think that "Real journalists" would selectively choose what to report based on who their friends are.

I want to downvote this for having loaded controversial commentary, but I can't as it's a direct reply.

"who their friends are" is an uncharitable interpretation of the situation. You might not like that they didn't report on some information that was Russian, but to assume it's due to friendly relations and not fear of reprisal is spinning a narrative. Just as asserting the exact inverse is also spinning a narrative.

I don't claim to know everything and people seem really emotive about this so it's common to see people finding things that please their current mindset and presenting it as if its evidence of whatever they believe.

Please attempt removing your emotions and coldly look at the facts, try to consider an alternative theory for what happened or is happening, especially if you're American because Americans seem to be _especially_ heated when it comes to Assange.

Whatever your beliefs on the subject, a lot more has happened due to wikileaks stories; over something like NYT or bloomberg stories, which are highly regarded news outlets. So a charitable interpretation is that they're doing "real journalism" because they're digging in to things in the public interest.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#213

Post by fit2rule » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:02 PM UTC

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #49

nickysielicki wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A one-off tweet from a wikileaks twitter account about some other organization publishing something questionable is not at all the same as the document dumps that wikileaks publishes and puts their name behind. I'm obviously talking about the latter. I think it says something that this is the best you can come up with.

>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…

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

Ask yourself this: why is it so important to leak information that is being held in secrecy by a state that is committing war crimes at an alarming rate?

The answer is: because the 5-eyes War Coalition is committing war crimes at an alarming rate. It literally started what it hoped to conflagration into World War 3, by invading Iraq illegally and on false pretences in 2003. And every day since that invasion, the world has been on fire.

The world has not forgotten the victims of these wars. Millions of innocent people have been massacred by the USA and its War Coalition in an utterly dire conflagration. The sheer SCALE of the war, of which the Western public are indeed extremely ignorant, is staggering.

If you had two criminals in the room, one of them was thieving the cutlery and the other was burning a pile of dead bodies in the corner, which would you want to deal with, first?

The USA and its War Coalition has a lot of criminal activity going on. Like, a lot. And every twenty minutes for twenty years, it has been dropping bombs - mostly on innocent people - for its own economic purposes.

That is a fire that the leaks will put out.

(The leaks will continue, because the crimes are huge.)

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#214

Post by tssva » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:04 PM UTC

stormdennis wrote: post #165

caymanjim wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It very much was around in the 1970s, and you have no idea what his sex life was. But none of this is any of our business.

Given that the first recognised death from AIDS was in the 80s, I'd dispute your saying that it was very much around in the 70s. I don't know what his sex life was like but as far as we know he wasn't a prostitute, a I.V. drug user or gay, so yeah he wasn't in any of the demographics hardest hit.

The AIDS might have been identified by the CDC in 1981 but testing of remains shows that the virus was in the US and killing people well before then.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#215

Post by DavidVoid » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:04 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.

If you're going to make such grand accusations against the Swedish police then at least cite a damn source. With all the baseless claims this thread almost reads like /r/conspiracy ffs.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#216

Post by bitexploder » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:06 PM UTC

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…

Wait. Are you taking these accusations at face value and saying that is okay here? Or are you contending that the accusations are false? I think it is a pretty big deal if you ask a hacking group to hack for you.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#217

Post by mint2 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:06 PM UTC

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 hope people don't forget that Wikileaks has never published anything that has been proven false.

This talking point is frankly irrelevant. Actually it itself illustrates how only cherry picking info to reveal is as deceptive as out right lies, but even more difficult to combat.

Want a clear example of how showing only true information is deceptive? Google Mormon bubbling. Yes the example is distasteful but it’s a very clear illustration of how easy it is to use selective information to deceive perception and make people appear to be doing something they are not, potentially hurting them.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#218

Post by empath75 » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:09 PM UTC

LockAndLol wrote: post #3

The judgement was made long before Assange even set foot in the US. This is just a show to try and deter other people from exposing their dirty secrets. If they could get Snowden, he'd be treated in the same manner for exposing their misdeeds. It's a rigged game.

Snowden undoubtedly committed a crime, I don't think even he disputes that.

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#219

Post by DiogenesKynikos » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:09 PM UTC

thatlongthrow1 wrote: post #47

raxxorrax wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>The whole Russian story was a scam. Tell that to Adrian Chen or anyone that has actually investigated Russia's meddling in foreign affairs: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html This was reported before the election detailing the agency that would go on to be fingered by the state department and others in their role in US election meddling. This involved actual reported places, actual employees…

Adrian Chen actually complained about how people were exaggerating and misusing his reporting on the Internet Research Agency.[1]

> The thing is, I don't really want to be an expert on the Internet Research Agency and Russian online propaganda. I agree with my colleague Masha Gessen that the whole issue has been blown out of proportion. In the Times Magazine article that supposedly made me an authority, I detailed some of the Agency's disturbing activities, including its attempts to spread false reports of a terrorist attack in Louisiana and to smear me as a neo-Nazi sympathizer. But, if I could do it all over again, I would have highlighted just how inept and haphazard those attempts were.

Adrian Chen also gave an interview with Chris Hayes on the Internet Research Agency, in which he made the point that it was an unsophisticated marketing campaign, staffed by around 90 people with a poor grasp of the English language, American politics and culture.[2]

1. https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/a-so-cal...

2. https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/inside-the-russian-troll-...

Re: Julian Assange charged in superseding indictment

#220

Post by oblongx » Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 3:11 PM UTC

rorykoehler wrote: post #171

aka1234 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too am shocked that Wikileaks would publish tabloidish material with little public value. Next thing you know, I'll hear that Wikileaks posted private emails of a government official talking about pizza. Emails which spawned ridiculous conspiracies about satanic child abuse cults headquartered in the basement of a pizza shop that doesn't have a basement. That would never happen. Not at an august, hard-hitting journ…

Still waiting for a valid explanation of what pizza is code for because they certainly aren’t talking about pizza the food in those emails.

Don't forget the 65K in hot dogs.