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

Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

stundin.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 334 posts

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#221

Post by sneak »

stordoff wrote: post #57
sneak wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. The UN's human rights department has found it to be so: from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/02/521632-wikileaks-founde... > The founder of the WikiLeaks website, which published confidential diplomatic information, has been arbitrarily detained by Sweden and the United Kingdom since his arrest in London in December 2010, as a result of the legal action against him by both Governments, the United Nation…

> not skipping bail means you get extradited to a country that will torture you via extended solitary confinement An extradition request which has so far been denied, in part due to the conditions he will face in the US, FWIW. I'm not sure that it can be taken as given that an earlier request (to the UK or Sweden) would have been successful: > Faced with conditions of near total isolation and without the protective f…

He's now been in HMP Belmarsh, a notoriously hard and high security prison, for two years without a trial.

It's very hard to make a case that this isn't arbitrary detention at this point.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#222

Post by Taniwha »

the_optimist wrote: post #204

What an absolute joke. FBI/CIA recruits a child molester to lie about Assange. https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/09/25/siggi_the... Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

To be fair we don't know whether he's telling the truth now - but it certainly creatges reasonable doubt

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#223

Post by the_optimist »

jacobolus wrote: post #217
the_optimist wrote: post #204

What an absolute joke. FBI/CIA recruits a child molester to lie about Assange. https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/09/25/siggi_the... Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

I guess “I and most of my associates (including the ones who provided evidence against me) are pathological liars and criminals” is one kind of defense Assange can mount, but it doesn’t exactly build sympathy from at least this disinterested third-party reader.

Well, you invented the “most of my associates” part which is the substance of your smear, so you seem a bit disingenuous.

As for this fellow, intel agencies don’t get to both conjure lies AND claim guilt by association--with 5-year gap in the timing to boot--though surely they are not beneath trying. Surely the ends justify the means, right?

Quite the contrary to your misguided assertions, way back in 1993, Assange consulted for the Victoria Australia police to apprehend child molestors and pornography distributors.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#225

Post by BLKNSLVR »

anothernewdude wrote: post #203
rendall wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a badly uninformed opinion

Look to cryptome for what it would've looked like if it wasn't an engine for Assange's ego. The people who just wanted to host leaks left more than a decade ago. The org admitted to pushing it's own political positions. No idea why people defend the thing. All they publish now is the result of Russian hacks. And he's not a journalist.

Accusing them of pushing political positions and the saying they're not journalists feels like conflicting arguments in this day and age.

It's also difficult to appear politically neutral when publishing truths that are (or should be, but aren't) existentially inconvenient to any particular person or group.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#226

Post by jude- »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #127
stefan_ wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean after an "actual journalist" put the password for the cache of all unredacted cables that "actual journalists" received in his book?

To this day, The Guardian refuses to admit that it released the unredacted cables to the public, and blames WikiLeaks for the release. One of The Guardian's own journalists used the decryption key as a chapter title in his book about WikiLeaks. The Guardian's excuse is that they thought the decryption key was temporary. I don't know if people at The Guardian really are that misinformed about how encryption works, or…

That's because Julian Assange reused the same password on multiple files. At best, it's terrible opsec on his part. At worst, it was deliberate on his part, so he could plausibly claim no responsibility for the fallout. Either way, unless you can prove malicious intent on The Guardian, they have nothing to admit and Julian has some explaining to do.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#228

Post by jude- »

Dah00n wrote: post #160
jude- wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the reason why I don't feel too bad for Julian Assange, and why I don't refer to him as a "journalist." Not redacting PII is such a rookie mistake that I can't see it as anything other than journalistic malpractice.

You don't feel bad for him because you have misunderstood what actually happened? Wikileaks had an encrypted file but it was a Guardian journalist that published the key to decrypt it. What you are suggesting is that Wikileaks should censor the source files before journalists got them . That is not how proof works. Redacted files isn't proof but tampered evidence. The fault is 100% on the person that leaked the decry…

Saint Julian reused the same password on multiple different files. Ask yourself why he might commit such a slipshod error.

> Wikileaks should censor the source files before journalists got them.

WikiLeaks, like anyone, should take prudent steps to avoid doxxing people. If you can't understand why doxxing people is bad, then I have nothing to say to you.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#229

Post by djrogers »

belorn wrote: post #125
lbwtaylor wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has the US tried to extra judicially murder Assange?

Do the US need to extra judicially murder Assange in order to make an example of him? I can imagine what would happen if Russia tried the same tactic as the US and used diplomatic channels in order to successfully influence the legal systems in countries like the UK and Sweden.

> Do the US need to extra judicially murder Assange in order to make an example of him?

No, but they’d at least need to attempt it to be tossed in the same bucket as Russia re: Navalny.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#230

Post by jacobolus »

the_optimist wrote: post #223
jacobolus wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess “I and most of my associates (including the ones who provided evidence against me) are pathological liars and criminals” is one kind of defense Assange can mount, but it doesn’t exactly build sympathy from at least this disinterested third-party reader.

Well, you invented the “most of my associates” part which is the substance of your smear, so you seem a bit disingenuous. As for this fellow, intel agencies don’t get to both conjure lies AND claim guilt by association--with 5-year gap in the timing to boot--though surely they are not beneath trying. Surely the ends justify the means, right? Quite the contrary to your misguided assertions, way back in 1993, Assange c…

As they take Assange to court, they’ll have to mount credible legal arguments, present convincing evidence, and deal with counter-evidence / cross examination from the defense. As I said, “these witnesses who worked with my client have admitted to being liars” can sometimes be a good legal argument. But as a third party observer, it doesn’t seem like the slam-dunk vindication of Assange that some here are implying.

For better or worse, when bringing legal action against criminals, law enforcement sometimes needs to use evidence from other criminals and various kinds of unsavory characters.

Post reply on HN