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

Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 465 posts

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#351

Post by Meph504 »

paulddraper wrote: post #340
thatoneuser wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how exactly would you have the people informing themselves? We just sit and wait for the benevolent government to tell us what it deems is good for us to know? We don't need to make a whole new set of legal principles where people automatically get off for claiming journalism. In this case the people (here and around the world) were able to learn a lot of valuable information. Assanges actions are justified.

Are you proposing a double-standard? Can cops be justified breaking into your house without a warrant, so long as they find evidence of a crime?

Actually if a cop finds evidence of a crime without a warrant when one is required,(or any illegal means) it won't be admissible, so I'm not sure where you are coming from.

Nor do I see how you are suggesting what I'm talking about is some sort of proposal for a double standard.

I'm not saying out legal framework is perfect, and certainly not saying that injustices don't happen because there are bad people, doing horrible shit to innocent people.

I'm saying that you can't abandon the rule of law, just because someone did something that you see as a net positive.

I'm also against this train of thought when the government attempts to use this logic with eminent domain cases for example.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#352

Post by swish_bob »

number6 wrote: post #266

Julian Assange would not need the first amendment rights if - with according to international laws - he would not be extradited to a country where he could face torture or the death penalty.

He is not being extradited under charges that could lead to the death penalty. If he were, British law is very clear that he could not be extradited.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#353

Post by fit2rule »

lostjohnny wrote: post #349
fit2rule wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it a coincidence that almost all Wikileaks cables are about the US, and never anything about Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and so on? Perhaps it makes Americans feel bad about themselves to hear this, but there are people in the world who feel that America and its 5-eyes allies are actually doing more harm to the world than Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and "so on" - by way of endless, illegal, heinous wars wherei…

> When Russia and/or China have invaded and destroyed as many sovereign stats as the USA has It's already happened.

"As many sovereign states as the USA has".

The #'s are not in Americas favour. Also: war crimes being covered up/suppressed.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#354

Post by StanislavPetrov »

belltaco wrote: post #3

What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins? Or is the reasoning that the law should give him special treatment and exemptions not given to others? Also, is the 1st amendment protection even applicable to foreigners on foreign soil?

>What part of the first amendment exonerates knowingly attempting to crack NTLM keys of US military logins?

The whole First Amendment, which explicitly exists to defend the freedom of the press. What sort of person thinks that its legal, desirable, or consistent with a free society for the government to tell individuals at the point of a gun what they are allowed to do or say? What sort of sick society do we live in where a significant portion of the populace thinks that its acceptable that government claims of secrecy are sacrosanct and beyond question? The whole case against Assange is based on Wikileaks' exposure of US war crimes via the Bradley/Chelsea Manning leak almost a decade ago. None of the war criminals exposed by those leaks have been prosecuted - only those who exposed their crimes. Anyone who isn't absolutely outraged and disgusted by this is a blot on society and a moral failure in every way.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#355

Post by StanislavPetrov »

arduanika wrote: post #226
pytester wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's being prosecuted for allegedly extracting a password from a hash value on behalf of Manning and encouraging him to leak more information (Obama's DOJ refused to make this charge because it's something all journalists do).

Because all journalists encourage sources to leak, or all journalists extract a password from a hash value?

Both. If a journalist gets a story on French, is it a crime if they publish it in English? Should it be a crime to decode information you possess?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#356

Post by Meph504 »

fuzzbuzz wrote: post #348
paulddraper wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you proposing a double-standard? Can cops be justified breaking into your house without a warrant, so long as they find evidence of a crime?

Since USA invaded a country because they blamed that country had weapons of mass destruction, does that mean I can "invade" anyone on false accusations? There is a huge difference between the state and the poeple. And they should be trated respectively. What Julian Assange did was for the best of all poeple, not for the state. It also follows that the state are made of the poeple, for the poeple. So anything that is…

I can't tell if you are trolling me, or just willfully being contrary. Nothing you are saying here holds up under even the most basic logical scrutiny.

If your justification is that regardless of his actions the net result was "good" for the people. You run into an undefended slippery slope.

If we murder everyone in the US, that has deadly communicable diseases, or hereditary genetic disorder and we wipe the diseases out, that's "good" for the people, and the harm when compared to the whole is trivial as long as you kill less than say 30 million people. We can never hold ourselves to this sort of standard and claim we have any form of justice.

On the other hand, the law is far to ridge without the human factor, and hence the jury, a jury can nullify a case if they so choose, and simply agree that this person violated the law, but did it for a reason that his peers felt they deserved no punishment.

I'm not saying that Assange, so go to jail, I'm simply suggesting that he has to have his day in court, if what the state is saying is to be show through evidence to be true, or false. And that if his group of peers feels that after hearing all the specific details of the case from both sides, determine if what he did is right or wrong.

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#357

Post by kushti »

I dunno how to handle this situation for those who are unlucky to live under US war-criminal regime. For others, I would like to propose to consider the following:

- convert your USD savings into other assets (e.g. EUR)

- sell US-related stocks

- boycott US-produced goods and services if there are replacements

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#358

Post by peter_retief »

Whistle blowers almost always pay a huge price for uncovering corruption. Let me give a quick example, the two people who uncovered massive international racketeering in an expose now known as guptaleaks http://www.gupta-leaks.com/ had to flee their homes and country, paid for by "private money", to protect them from government. I have huge sympathy for Assange

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#359

Post by shard972 »

scarmig wrote: post #165
overgard wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because he prefers revealing truths about one side over another (which -- presumably a lot of entities are like that) doesn't mean those truths aren't important to reveal. Yeah it's a political act, but it's an extremely important one and one that deserves protection. Was Snowden obligated to reveal information about 3rd party hackers to make it fair for the NSA? You seem to be under the impression that he's obl…

What value to the public came of his targeted weaponizing of information? Nothing illegal or particularly surprising was revealed in the 2016 emails; the only illegal act involved here was (presumably) Russian hackers committing several federal felonies in order to get access to those emails. Yes, they were embarrassing, but any political organization, or indeed any organization at all, will have mundane communicatio…

So your entire point hinges on you "reckon" the RNC emails would have been juicer?

Re: Julian Assange Deserves First Amendment Protection

#360

Post by jonathanstrange »

ausbah wrote: post #173
doe88 wrote: post #139

I tell you what, I'm moderate, some might say a bit coward, tonight I will sleep as usual, tomorrow I won't protest, never been in a single protest in my life. But I nonetheless think there is something wrong in our current western democracies. Instead of prosecuting people committing murders in a video, these are the men and women revealing these facts that are hunted down, for years. Meanwhile, these same people do…

>Instead of prosecuting people committing murders in a video what..?

The collateral murder video showed how US military killed innocent unarmed civilians from the air and then shot other innocent and unarmed civilians who were trying to give first aid to the victims and get them to a hospital.
Post reply on HN