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

Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

wsws.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 321 posts

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#291

Post by dang »

iblamedang wrote: post #248
aldoushuxley001 wrote: post #207

I forgot that HN is a place of massive censorship, so unfortunate that people have gamed HN to censor views they don't like. I don't blame dang or anyone like that, it's just the way HN works and has been gamed, but it really shows the limits of reasonable discourse on this platform.

Id find it easier not to blame dang if he wasn’t largely at fault. “I’m only doing my job” and “defending the ethos of HN” don’t work for me. I don’t buy it. Peter Thiel’s involvement ended any doubt for me. The arcane word games and hoops you had to concoct to say the above without having your comment removed would be hilarious if they weren’t so necessary :/

Peter Thiel has zero involvement with HN. What a strange thing to say.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#292

Post by peteretep »

forgetfulusr wrote: post #283
peteretep wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point and the publication of Snowden’s material by the mainstream media can’t both be true

For some reason I thought that Snowden went to a UK publisher because the US outlets were not interested. Once the Guardian agreed, were the outlets here expected to ignore it?

Snowden went to two US journalists, Glenn Greenwald, and Laura Poitras.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#293

Post by droithomme »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #77
danabrams wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The allegations against him (and there is evidence to support this) is that he didn’t just coordinate to publish, but provided instructions and technical training to Manning on how to steal them.

This is not true. The allegations are that he attempted to crack a password on a different Windows account so that the documents would not he tied to Manning. And most of the charges against him are related to publishing.

Manning leaked the info proving US war crimes and lying, including the "collateral damage" video. She got these leaks using her own access, and sent them to wikileaks.

There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to.

She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access and tried to crack the password, but was unsuccessful. She then sent the hash to wikileaks, not something wikileaks asked for, along with a request for help. There was no response.

Later she was in a chat with someone using a known wikileaks chat account. The identity of this person has not been established. She asked if they had been able to crack the password hash and that person said no they had not cracked it. They did not say they tried to crack it or they approved of cracking it. They answered the question factually, no, they had not cracked it.

Manning never hacked the system, but did try to. There's no evidence Assange attempted to hack the system. There's pretty solid evidence someone at wikileaks told Manning that they had not cracked the hash she had sent them, but none that they had attempted to do so. As far as the leaks that were published, none of these involved hacking, they were obtained using Manning's granted access. They were however unauthorized exfiltration of state secrets documenting war crimes.

This is the case alleging he actively assisted a leaker in hacking crimes.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#294

Post by droithomme »

droithomme wrote: post #290
threeseed wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Craig Murray's statements are highly disputed and some of them are just plain ridiculous e.g. you can't transfer data to Russian servers at > 6MB/s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Murray

Murray was citing the findings of a forensics team comprised of veteran members of the intelligence community. There's two aspects to the time stamps. One is that based on the time stamps, the emails were all copied on Nov 7 2016 at rates of up to 49.1 megabytes per second.* This is fairly high for internet transfers. The other aspect is that the last modified timestamps of all emails and attachments were quantized t…

I retract several of my above claims. The version of the files I analyzed was a much later copy with new time stamps.

The veteran members of the intelligence community, including NSA whistleblower William Binney, analyzed a set of DNC emails released by Guccifer 2.0 which consisted of 1,976 megabytes of data that were downloaded or copied over a period of 87 seconds on July 5 2016.

https://www.salon.com/2017/08/15/what-if-the-dnc-russian-hac...

I don't have that original leak and therefore can not verify their claims.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#295

Post by boomboomsubban »

droithomme wrote: post #293
boomboomsubban wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. The allegations are that he attempted to crack a password on a different Windows account so that the documents would not he tied to Manning. And most of the charges against him are related to publishing.

Manning leaked the info proving US war crimes and lying, including the "collateral damage" video. She got these leaks using her own access, and sent them to wikileaks. There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to. She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access and tried to crack the password, but was unsuccessful. She then sent the hash to wikileaks…

>There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to. She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access

This is where this breaks down. The account in question was a generic local Windows admin account, and she already had the same level of access as the desired account. It was only attempted to hide her identity.

This is clearly laid out as what happened in Assange's indictment.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#296

Post by foldr »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #295
droithomme wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manning leaked the info proving US war crimes and lying, including the "collateral damage" video. She got these leaks using her own access, and sent them to wikileaks. There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to. She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access and tried to crack the password, but was unsuccessful. She then sent the hash to wikileaks…

>There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to. She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access This is where this breaks down. The account in question was a generic local Windows admin account, and she already had the same level of access as the desired account. It was only attempted to hide her identity. This is clearly laid out as what happened in…

>It was only attempted to hide her identity.

This makes no difference, legally speaking. Assange was still helping her to gain unauthorized access to a computer system.

This is like giving bank robbers ski masks in full knowledge that they're going to use the ski masks to hide their identities during a robbery. You're still an accessory. It's no defense to say "Oh, I wasn't helping them to gain access to the vault, I was just helping them to hide their identities".

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#297

Post by noname120 »

aldoushuxley001 wrote: post #240
seattle_spring wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Faultless record? Absolutely not. They will support /r/conspiracy's lunacy at all costs as long as it somehow ties to Hillary Clinton. This one[1] was the most ridiculous claim they supported, but I'm sure someone who cares more could find dozens or even hundreds more claims made by WikiLeaks that are nothing more than deranged Dale Gribble-esque rants. [1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/san-francisco-tech-assange…

Disregarding the fact that Snopes is a very disreputable organization (e.g. there's a reason Facebook fired them as fact-checkers), your reference doesn't even back up what you say. Is it possible you're the one engaging in conspiracy theories?

The official narrative is that they withdrew from the program[1]. If you have contradicting evidence, please provide it when making such a claim. This community doesn't like broad claims without evidence.

[1] https://www.snopes.com/2019/02/01/snopes-fb-partnership-ends...

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#298

Post by boomboomsubban »

foldr wrote: post #296
boomboomsubban wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There were additional files she was interested in leaking that she did not have access to. She then obtained the password hash of an account that did have access This is where this breaks down. The account in question was a generic local Windows admin account, and she already had the same level of access as the desired account. It was only attempted to hide her identity. This is clearly laid out as what happened in…

>It was only attempted to hide her identity. This makes no difference, legally speaking. Assange was still helping her to gain unauthorized access to a computer system. This is like giving bank robbers ski masks in full knowledge that they're going to use the ski masks to hide their identities during a robbery. You're still an accessory. It's no defense to say "Oh, I wasn't helping them to gain access to the vault, I…

>This makes no difference, legally speaking. Assange was still helping her to gain unauthorized access to a computer system.

Yes, it does. It is the duty of the press to try to protect their sources, and the rights of a free press can not be infringed upon. While the act may be considered illegal by some other law, that law is unconstitutional.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#299

Post by zepto »

Lammy wrote: post #288
zepto wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really - we don’t have to accept a false framing. If they mean no retractions, they can just say no retractions. ‘Faultless record’ is a deliberate overgeneralization to make it sound like WikiLeaks is more reputable than it actually is. Consider that Donald Trump has an equally ‘faultless record’ based on this criterion , and yet many people consider this to be sociopathic behavior, ‘No retractions’ is not a mea…

We're saying the same thing! A supporter of Trump or any other politician might think "their guy" is faultless, and I would probably disagree, but I wouldn't sit there arguing with them about how and why they _should_ find fault. The original comment framed their personal definition of 'faultless' by following it immediately with their definition (no retractions). You or I don't have to agree with that, and it just d…

I know a lot of completely Republican trump supporters. None of them think trump is faultless.

And yes, the poster is trying to have people accept heir framing of of faultless which is why they are meeting resistance.

This is not an equation. It is a conversation.

Re: Julian Assange “slowly dying” and “often sedated” in Belmarsh prison

#300

Post by MiroF »

refurb wrote: post #281
anongraddebt wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to be a fairly strong supporter of our military. Not blanket support (since there are always exceptions to anything), and I wasn't super enthusiastic/patriotic like some are, but in general I had a pretty positive view. My uncle is a general in the Air Force, all three of my grandfathers fought in WW2 (my Dad's biological father was killed by a drunk driver when he was 7), etc etc. I have pictures of my grandf…

I assume you’re talking about this video. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,_2007,_Baghdad_airst... Reading the Wikipedia entry seems to indicate the Apache’s has reason to believe they were hostile forces. Indeed, some of the men with the journalists had weapons and were in the same spot as harassing fire had come from earlier.

Have you watched the video itself?
Post reply on HN