12 ms·

What I've wanted for Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and if Obama would have done it before leaving office, it would have earned him infini

by blhack 8y ago

What I've wanted for Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and if Obama would have done it before leaving office, it would have earned him infinite respect: Try them, possibly even find them guilty of something, but also award them with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. What these people have done is probably illegal, but it is unquestionably about the most American, patriotic act you could commit. Speaking out against perceived tyranny with no regard for your own wellbeing, is an incredible act. It makes me profoundly sad how the world (or at least my world, mostly far left, liberal, educated, etc.) has turned so hard against Julian Assange. He's a hero in every sense of the word.

dmix 8y ago
There's no way Obama, or any mainstream president, would have done that. He loved the intelligence agencies even more than Bush as it gave the US the same power projection without any of the dirty business being under public scrutiny. The "polite societies" way of do much of the same which was highly criticized in the prior administration. Despite the convenient optics I don't see him being any more liberal on the matter than mainline political angle (which is solidly against Assange / Snowden / etc). The administration gave them tons of leeway (ie, ignoring the destruction of thousands of tapes of torture in the Thailand black site with zero repercussions for the agents involved) and made the strategic shift of the power/resources from the military towards the IC when he got in office. He also famously prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other president. Letting Manning go after 7rs in solitary confinement is the closest he got at trying to revise his history on the matter - at the last minute. So I don't see how such an action would make any sense in the context of his 8yrs of actions otherwise (rhetoric is another matter which people seem to value more in politics than action). Nor is this is not a partisan issue. Both establishment parties are fully in support of doing the IC's bidding.
- blhack 8y ago
  I know, and this is why it would have gained him so much respect in my eyes. I think it's possible to both recognize the importance of intelligence agencies, and recognize why whistleblowing should be discouraged, but at the same time recognize the patriotism required to do it anyway. Giving these people the Medal of Freedom, to me, would have been an acknowledgment of that. "Yeah, you shouldn't have done that, but you did it anyway, and you deserve to be recognized for that." "I disagree with what you're saying, but will defend to the death your right to say it" and all that.
  - res0nat0r 8y ago
    If Assange is going to get anything from the USA is extradited to it and charged with trading in knowingly stolen material to undermine the candidate of the 2016 election he didn't like. Based on what was in the last Mueller indictment we'll see what happens between the US and the UK.
    - scottmf 8y ago
      Yeah, Assange is no hero. His communications with Trump Jr and the leaked Wikileaks chats make that clear—as well as his meetings with people like Nigel Farage and Dana Rohrabacher. Assange has had a very clear agenda for some time now.
      - resters 8y ago
        If you were Assange and you were trying to convince Trump Jr to hand over documents to you, would you pretend to be indifferent about the outcome of the election? Assange wants to help reveal any secret information that will help fix the many problems stemming from secrecy and corruption of governments and institutions. Every one of his actions have supported that mission. The focus on Assange's alleged political views and his personal life are an attempt to "shoot the messenger". We should really be 99% concerned with the information that was leaked and at most 1% concerned with anything about Assange's personality.
        kej 8y ago
        WikiLeaks sat on Manafort's group sex and blood money texts, but released Podesta's emails less than an hour after the Access Hollywood tape was published. His agenda was more than an act to get on Don Jr.'s good side.
        malvosenior 8y ago
        Podesta’s emails had proof of the Clinton campaign colluding with the media. You can not compare that with details of Manafort’s private life. It’s clear why one would be in the public’s interest to learn about and the other is just gossip.
- smokeyj 8y ago
  > Both establishment parties are fully in support of doing the IC's bidding. It'a almost like we have a shadow government spreading Fake News. Trump may be an idiot but a broken clock is right twice a day.
- shanghaiaway 8y ago
  Obama is a war criminal
virtualadmin 8y ago
Obama unfortunately prosecuted the largest amount of whistleblowers. I doubt he would have done this. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowers-double-standard-obama-david-petraeus-chelsea-manning https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowe...
- squirrelicus 8y ago
  Hmm sample size is too low to draw conclusions. 3 vs 8 over several years? Ehh. But you're probably right for other reasons. He was a bit of an authoritarian despite talking like a cuddly bear. His relationship with the intelligence community is probably what allowed him to spy on the Trump campaign and more or less keep it on the down low for a while.
  - dbg31415 8y ago
    The gap between what he said and what he did was not small. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSDs3CJAwI4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSDs3CJAwI4
    - squirrelicus 8y ago
      I'm definitely not saying Obama was an ally of whistleblowers. It seems like he was just mostly average in this realm. I mean, 8 is still more than 3, but again, that might not be his fault, whistleblowing might have just more than doubled. Hard to tell.
nailer 8y ago
> least my world, mostly far left I'd be careful using that term, unless you're explicitly into violence towards anyone who disagrees with you.
briandear 8y ago
Just a curiousity, is “far left” and “liberal” even related? Seems like the far left and far right are two sides to the same totalitarian coin. Liberal implies a respect for the freedom of individuals while “far left” puts the collective over the rights of the individual. The word liberal has lost its meaning. The far left (and far right) is incompatible with freedom. Cases in point: Venezuela, Cuba, the Soviet Union. The far left closer to fascism than liberalism. http://thedailyjournalist.com/thethinker/fascism-is-far-left-not-far-right-on-political-spectrum/ http://thedailyjournalist.com/thethinker/fascism-is-far-left...
- a13n 8y ago
  It seems "left" and "right" can be used differently in different countries / times. In the US today, left is synonymous for liberal (typically democrat), and right for conservative (republican). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#Contemporary_usage_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_s...
- kmonsen 8y ago
  I think parent uses far left like far left in US politics or average European, not like Venezuela or Soviet Union. The latter two were of course incompatible to freedom just as the extreme right. I do believe that the "almost far left" are much more compatible with freedom (think Sanders on steroids) than the "almost far right" (I guess current GOP?). It could be that this is just incidental in that the public are currently more aligned with what the left wants so the right currently has to be anti-freedom if it wants to get elected. If public opinion shifts drastically maybe DNC would resort to trying to restrict voters instead of encouraging them?
- brbrodude 8y ago
  If you actually tried studying these topics instead of going behind shallow propaganda, you'd see how misguided you are. But actually liberals are not leftists, there's no left in USA.
- nyolfen 8y ago
  in the US, the left uses liberal institutions because being far left is tolerated by liberal society in a way that being far right is not
kev009 8y ago
This is such a contrasting comment I am curious if you remember how you consumed information back then to i.e. develop admiration for the whistleblowers, and retain the political operative narrative that Obama was somehow sympathetic and good to these causes.
- blhack 8y ago
  Obama was not sympathetic to these causes. That's why it would have gained him so much respect from me. I posted the quote in another reply, so sorry for repeating it, but: "I disagree with what you are saying, but will defend to the death your right to say it." This value is probably the most important to me, and it is something that I think is fundamentally American. I would have loved to see Obama exhibit it.
  - kev009 8y ago
    Ok, I can see where you're coming from. You are wishing a standing president would do a good thing. It's a nuanced way to form an argument or ideal because the leaders have become so politically charged (imagine trying to promote any idea to a left-wing audience and tying in Trump, most would shut their brains off and attack the messenger which isn't so different than what happened here).
  - dnautics 8y ago
    Can you give an example in Obama's political tenure when he had ever done anything consistent with that sentiment or that strategy? Politically, Obama's heroes are the progressives of the Wilsonian and Roosevelt era. Wilson jailed Eugene Debs for sedition, and ironically it took the era's conservative firebrand (H L Mencken) rabble-rousing about it in exactly that spirit and eventually Harding (not exactly a socialist) commuted Debs' sentence. For that matter: Can you think of an example when any politician or political figure in power in the US in recent memory has done something like that? I'm not comprehensively knowledgeable about US politics, but the only one I can think of is Clarence Thomas voting against the majority in Texas V Lawrence, where he said he was opposed to laws forbidding gay sex, but he didn't think the supreme court should rule on it, and he would vote to strike down the law if he were in the Texas State Legislature.
firasd 8y ago
It makes me profoundly sad how the world (or at least my world, mostly far left, liberal, educated, etc.) has turned so hard against Julian Assange. He's a hero in every sense of the word. If this Assange guy hadn’t gone all-in on supporting Trump, Russia, & co., he would still have a broad base of support among liberal Americans—many of the same people who lobbied for Chelsea Manning’s release. Epic bad strategy on his part. Also, beyond partisan alignment, another reason I view him more dimly than I used to is his habit of dumping entire inboxes. Compare to something like the Panama papers that was vetted by journalists...
- e40 8y ago
  It really shows the non-liberal bias here at HN that the above comment has more down than up votes. Because if you are liberal, there is statement concerning Assange that is more true.
- Pica_soO 8y ago
  Liberal America is a cult now, a church and assagne was found in heresy against its highest law: You shall not rape. They know very well, to manipulate those who decide what they stand for and upon with their feelings and not on principle.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    You're saying it was purely the sexual assault, and nothing to do with becoming a puppet of Putin?
    - Pica_soO 8y ago
      If you drive somebody out into the cold and he starts to carve himself a igloo in the snowman, what was there first? The Traitors, who shoved a good man into a hostile environment or the bad deal of someone who refused to die for principals, neither of us would risk his neck for. If you are hunted and stateless, you are breathing thin air - and cant choosy with your allies. Ideals are not calories, ideals dont warm at night, ideals are what got you into the trap in the first place. If you where selfless enough to throw away your social life, for ungrateful people, who wouldn't even protest for ideals, why not make a deal with the devil to at least not become a martyr?
travmatt 8y ago
I’m never going to understand the praise for Julian Assange. He may have started out with good intentions, but his turns towards Putin and subsequent actions are pretty unforgivable in my estimation. I can’t see how a moral person could stand by his decisions, honestly. I think Pussy Riot summer him up best: "But Julian Assange, he openly works with [Russia]," Nadya Tolokno told The Daily Beast in an interview Thursday. "It's not a secret. He's connected with the Russian government, and I feel that he's proud of it. "I generally support the work that WikiLeaks is doing, but I'm not that thrilled about his decisions that are unethical, in my view, concerning his connections to the Russian government." Tolokno said she visited Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London two years ago, saying their meeting convinced her WikiLeaks has ties to the Kremlin. "He couldn't deny it," said Tolokno, whose full name is Nadezhda Tolokonnikova. "He often works with the Russian propaganda machine, and he doesn't try to hide it. "Julian Assange doesn't try to hide that fact because he hosts at the Ecuadorian Embassy the editor-in-chief of the Russian propaganda team, Russia Today, and he has projects with them," she added. Tolokno added she confronted Assange about advancing Russian interests ahead of America's. "I understood his position: He's in a state of war with the American government," she said. "He's smart and charismatic and will use any means to destroy the American government. "And we had a conversation if it was really the ethical thing to do that with the hands of another government [Russia] which is, in fact, much worse and a real authoritarian government." [https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/303172-pussy-riot-member-assange-openly-works-with-russia%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-...]
- jumelles 8y ago
  Unfortunately I agree completely. Assange and WikiLeaks might have been on the 'right side' of things years ago, but things have changed since then. Siding with Putin is absolutely unforgivable.
  - meatbags 8y ago
    Why the assumption that Assange sided with Putin? Those of us watching the story closely know that no evidence has been presented of this. Co-aligned interests is not collusion. The source of the DNC leaks remains unknown. It's not even clear whether it was an external actor or a DNC insider. I feel like the blinding hate for Trump has eroded people's ability to think critically. The Russiagate hysteria is evidence of that. Edit: I'll soak up the downvotes. Keep em coming.
joering2 8y ago
Couldnt upvote this more. Imagine sitation in which you drive on highway and on the other side of median you see a car crashed with people burning inside. You drive by without stopping because pulling over on highway, leaving unatended cr and jaywalking across highway lanes is illawful. What kind of society one would live if we would never engage in any action because of blank asumption that eventual parsonal liability outweights our nobility.
- bootlooped 8y ago
  I don't see how this analogy works for Assange, since he's done everything he can do to avoid liability.
jumelles 8y ago
Assange now supports Vladimir Putin over the US, and there's no amount of whatabouting that can defend Putin's actions. (And I hope you're aware that Assange isn't American!)
dosy 8y ago
Are you so sure all these "leakers" aren't actually intelligence operations? Particularly Snowden. Didn't anyone else sense how stage managed it felt? I never bought the act, but it was a good act tho. Strategically I think the limited hangout / power projection has utility: you get to watch who reaches for encrypted apps once they know, selectors "self-select" has to increase signal/noise ratio; and you get to start a debate about "privacy" which ultimately ends up targeting the tech companies (which it is in state interest to have leverage on, but it also works for tech companies because they get to be the "saviours of the people" when of course they are also collection partners); and you get to say "our intelligence services have been crippled" and ask for more money and legislation, particularly through the secret courts. To me, "Operation Snowden" was about strengthening US intelligence capability/posture, not weakening it. But of course, for public consumption, he must be called a traitor. I think for that reason, because he sacrificed himself to this narrative, he truly is a patriot, but just not for the reason most people think. :) As for Assange, I think the guy is a fraud. Or at the very least an idiot who sacrificed what may have been a platform for reform / awareness for his own ego / sickness. Sad. A waste. That is all. :)
- garmaine 8y ago
  For what benefit?
  - acct1771 8y ago
    Didn't you read the comment? One blatant example: how do you think it'd benefit intelligence agencies to see who begins encrypting their comms after the news breaks? If it's a topic of talking head discussion on the news, and nobody picks up arms, that's implied consent. "Well, that's just normal operations, we've been doing that since 20xx!" Open secrets are ones you don't have to worry about leaking in ways you don't want. Being able to coordinate media reaction, social media reaction, and Gov officials' responses, is key, if this was indeed a limited hangout.
    - dosy 8y ago
      Thank you, for explaining it a second time to those who had trouble with the long sentences in the first comment. Another advantage I omitted (for fear HN would not comprehend it) was simply the bragging rights: look at this awesome spy tech we have, wouldn't it be a shame if someone - used it to advance their national interests. And while you're all gawking at it, don't none of y'all get to thinking that Murica got weak. We're talking to you, "allies."
lifeformed 8y ago
How do you reconcile your view of Assange with these facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russian_influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_between_WikiLeaks_and_Donald_Trump_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_betwe....
- bootlooped 8y ago
  That second link appears to just go to the Wikileaks Wikipedia page now, the section may have been removed? This article covers the same content: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
  - lifeformed 8y ago
    Some reason the period at the end of the URL gets deleted when I try to post it. It's supposed to go to the section right above the first link.
    - Buge 8y ago
      I assume so many people post a url then a period immediately after it to end the sentence, that HN strips off the period at the end of the url, assuming it's not part of the url and was instead meant to end the sentence. I can see that the period in your comment is not linkified, so HN considered it not part of the url. By doing this, HN is going against RFC 3986 which says that the period is an unreserved character and is valid in fragments (and paths) without being escaped. You can work around HN's behavior by escaping the period as %2e https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_between_WikiLeaks_and_Donald_Trump_Jr%2e https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_betwe...
micv 8y ago
You don't get a medal for being a Russian asset unless you're in Russia.
aerovistae 8y ago
Assange is a hero? Last I checked he was working with Russia to support the Trump campaign. Used to respect him a lot, lost all my respect for him and WikiLeaks when he got involved in trying to influence elections. That was not that site's mandate.
- undseg 8y ago
  Can you elaborate on that? Provide sources etc. Genuinely curious
  - jumelles 8y ago
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/26/assange-slams-incredible-politicization-media-covering-campaign.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/26/assange-slams-inc... "Assange also accused the Clinton campaign of stoking "a kind of neo-McCarthy hysteria" about Russia's alleged role in the DNC hacking and Moscow's purported links to the Trump campaign." Meanwhile a recent federal indictment has accused Russia of doing exactly that: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/13/rosenstein-says-12-russian-intel-officers-indicted-in-special-counsels-probe.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/13/rosenstein-says-1... The indictment is here: https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download More info here: https://www.2016activemeasures.org/#involved https://www.2016activemeasures.org/#involved
    - _up 8y ago
      Everyone can be accused. That in itself doesn't mean anything. Also, Ex FBI Director Comney testified that the FBI didn't get access to the DNC server. Instead, the DNC hired itself people to verify their claim that they were hacked. How can they be serious if they aren't even trying to secure the main evidence? It is also pretty clear that they are not on Trumps side by announcing this directly before the summit. https://www.c-span.org/video/?425087-1/fbi-director-investigating-links-trump-campaign-russia&start=18335 https://www.c-span.org/video/?425087-1/fbi-director-investig...
      - 8y ago
s73v3r_ 8y ago
You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. That's what happened to Assange. WikiLeaks did some good in the past. Then he became a Russian puppet, and tool of the Trump campaign.
mc32 8y ago
Here's my take. When you see your duty as a patriot to betray what's been entrusted to you because you think it's the right thing to do, you do it with the notion that you are "taking one for the team". And you pay the price. What you do may not be proven right within your lifetime, but if you are eventually proven right, you will have earned the respect posthumously. I don't think we can claim being a patriot is easy or comes free. Often times you have to pay a heavy price. Of course that's no consolation for Snowden (or Assange).
- misterhtmlcss 8y ago
  I can totally agree with that. At the end of the day if a patriot is a guy standing between you and your leader and taking a bullet or on a field of battle losing a limb or pulling what Snowden did it's all a risk you take for participating in that level of game. It just is what it is and fairness doesn't enter into the equation.
geofft 8y ago
> It makes me profoundly sad how the world (or at least my world, mostly far left, liberal, educated, etc.) has turned so hard against Julian Assange. He's a hero in every sense of the word. In my world, heroes don't run from sexual assault trials. Is he afraid of prison, or of the sexual assault prosecution being a sham to punish him for what he published? Chelsea Manning was prosecuted and sentenced and more-or-less tortured for the actual things she leaked. She's a hero - she did the right thing for the country even though she knew what it would cost her. She didn't run. She was sitting in solitary confinement while Assange was tweeting in an embassy and claiming political asylum. Someone who wants to change the world, who seeks prestige and power, and who gains fame from someone else's sacrifice can be many things (and perhaps many good things) - but I wouldn't call him a hero.
- Faaak 8y ago
  If you'd read the article, you'd know that the sexual charge was dismissed
  - danso 8y ago
    The investigation was dropped because Sweden gave up: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/19/swedish-prosecutors-drop-julian-assange-investigation https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/19/swedish-prosec... > “In order to proceed with the case, Julian Assange would have to be formally notified of the criminal suspicions against him. We cannot expect to receive assistance from Ecuador regarding this. Therefore the investigation is discontinued. > “If he, at a later date, makes himself available, I will be able to decide to resume the investigation immediately.”
  - geofft 8y ago
    Yes, I did read the article (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and it says that the investigation was closed (not that the charge was dismissed), because the prosecutors determined he had successfully run beyond their ability to prosecute them by claiming asylum for years, and they didn't see a point in keeping the case open. That's basically the opposite of justice. > In May, 2017, Swedish prosecutors announced they were closing their investigation into the sexual assault allegations due to the futility of proceeding in light of Assange’s asylum and the time that has elapsed. He is still wanted for what the article calls the "minor bail violation" of crossing multiple international borders to flee trial for those charges.
pvg 8y ago
By that logic, we'd have to give this dude https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey#NSA_domestic_wiretapping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey#NSA_domestic_wiret... the Presidential Golden Eagle of Infinite Liberty.
anonymous5133 8y ago
Turning yourself into a tyrannical government is the most unpatriotic thing you can do.
- pvg 8y ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/08/murong-xuecun-china-novellist-summoned-beijing-police-tiananmen-event https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/08/murong-xuecun-... And, you know, Gandhi.
syngrog66 8y ago
Assange is a Russian agent. Snowden most likely as well. They both deserve execution & infamy, not praise.
- jasonvorhe 8y ago
  The death penalty. How civil of you.
SN76477 8y ago
I agree, they are hereos, but leadership cannot award misbehavior as it undermines the system. We need better watchdogs.
ck2 8y ago
It is very, very simple to understand the difference between Assange vs Snowden/Manning Assange is an anarchist. He didn't use physical guns or bombs but rather selective release of information to selected parties at very selected times to cause as much damage as possible. Snowden & Manning on the other hand loved their country so much they were horrified to learn what was being done in our name so they exposed that information in the hope that someone, anyone, could make things right and prevent it from happening again. There was no scheme otherwise to their actions. So yeah they all dealt with exposing secrets but WHY is the very critical difference.
bootlooped 8y ago
Julian Assange does many things that seem to have the sole purpose of embarrassing the US. I don't see how he could be a candidate for any type of award from the US government. Any benefit Wikileaks has had on the US, primarily by helping spark a debate about domestic surveillance, is overshadowed by the harm they've done due to his radical anti-secrecy zealotry. Take the Vault 7 releases for example. What was the public good done by that information being published? Those are our weapons, in my eyes it is not much different than if Wikileaks had published the blueprints for the F-35. There is a legitimate interest in the US having secrets, and there is an interest in our global adversaries not having them. At least with the diplomatic cables and the DNC emails, there was some amount of public interest information in there, but why dump the whole set? To embarrass the US, and in the latter case, to affect the election. Are those noble goals worthy of the Presidential Medal of Freedom? As for his personal character, recall two things: he screwed over his supporters by jumping bail in England, and he reneged on a pledged to acquiesce to extradition if Manning was released. These are not the actions of a hero to be celebrated, they're selfish and dishonorable.
- resters 8y ago
  Since the US is the most powerful nation, of course it will be the target of some of the politically motivated leaks. With respect to Vault 7, once the secrecy of the tools was compromised they already had zero value to the US arsenal. In fact, I would not be surprised if the US Government leaked Vault 7 itself, to prevent the thief from being able to use them effectively. Consider the value of the Vault 7 tools if they were known only by a small group of hackers with a halfway decent budget. They'd be worth many billions of dollars. But once leaked, their value decreases substantially, since the zero days can be patched and the exploits mitigated. Any state actor who stole Vault 7 would have no interest in releasing it to Wikileaks. Even Russia would benefit more by knowing about it and leveraging that knowledge than by leaking it in its entirety. Also don't forget about the government hoarding zero days which put American firms at risk. Per your last point, let's not worry too much about Assange's personality or character. The important thing to focus on is the leaked information, not the messenger.
  - 8y ago
forapurpose 8y ago
Obama pardoned (or at least freed) Chelsea Manning. > He's a hero in every sense of the word. I think we can have an intelligent discussion of his conduct, but let's not waste time and attention with hyperbole. We all know that some people believe he is and some believe he's not; what substantiated, well-considered knowledge can we add?
api 8y ago
One of these is not like the others. Snowden and Manning seem genuine. Assange may have been genuine once but it's quite clear that in recent years he was either compromised, turned, or himself adopted some kind of rather loathsome fascist ideology.
oliwarner 8y ago
He fled from a second questioning about a rape allegation and then broke his bail conditions. Your benchmark for "hero" is different to mine.

by blhack 8y ago

dmix 8y ago

There's no way Obama, or any mainstream president, would have done that. He loved the intelligence agencies even more than Bush as it gave the US the same power projection without any of the dirty business being under public scrutiny. The "polite societies" way of do much of the same which was highly criticized in the prior administration. Despite the convenient optics I don't see him being any more liberal on the matter than mainline political angle (which is solidly against Assange / Snowden / etc). The administration gave them tons of leeway (ie, ignoring the destruction of thousands of tapes of torture in the Thailand black site with zero repercussions for the agents involved) and made the strategic shift of the power/resources from the military towards the IC when he got in office. He also famously prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other president. Letting Manning go after 7rs in solitary confinement is the closest he got at trying to revise his history on the matter - at the last minute. So I don't see how such an action would make any sense in the context of his 8yrs of actions otherwise (rhetoric is another matter which people seem to value more in politics than action). Nor is this is not a partisan issue. Both establishment parties are fully in support of doing the IC's bidding.

blhack 8y ago
I know, and this is why it would have gained him so much respect in my eyes. I think it's possible to both recognize the importance of intelligence agencies, and recognize why whistleblowing should be discouraged, but at the same time recognize the patriotism required to do it anyway. Giving these people the Medal of Freedom, to me, would have been an acknowledgment of that. "Yeah, you shouldn't have done that, but you did it anyway, and you deserve to be recognized for that." "I disagree with what you're saying, but will defend to the death your right to say it" and all that.
- res0nat0r 8y ago
  If Assange is going to get anything from the USA is extradited to it and charged with trading in knowingly stolen material to undermine the candidate of the 2016 election he didn't like. Based on what was in the last Mueller indictment we'll see what happens between the US and the UK.
  - scottmf 8y ago
    Yeah, Assange is no hero. His communications with Trump Jr and the leaked Wikileaks chats make that clear—as well as his meetings with people like Nigel Farage and Dana Rohrabacher. Assange has had a very clear agenda for some time now.
    - resters 8y ago
      If you were Assange and you were trying to convince Trump Jr to hand over documents to you, would you pretend to be indifferent about the outcome of the election? Assange wants to help reveal any secret information that will help fix the many problems stemming from secrecy and corruption of governments and institutions. Every one of his actions have supported that mission. The focus on Assange's alleged political views and his personal life are an attempt to "shoot the messenger". We should really be 99% concerned with the information that was leaked and at most 1% concerned with anything about Assange's personality.
      - kej 8y ago
        WikiLeaks sat on Manafort's group sex and blood money texts, but released Podesta's emails less than an hour after the Access Hollywood tape was published. His agenda was more than an act to get on Don Jr.'s good side.
        malvosenior 8y ago
        Podesta’s emails had proof of the Clinton campaign colluding with the media. You can not compare that with details of Manafort’s private life. It’s clear why one would be in the public’s interest to learn about and the other is just gossip.
smokeyj 8y ago
> Both establishment parties are fully in support of doing the IC's bidding. It'a almost like we have a shadow government spreading Fake News. Trump may be an idiot but a broken clock is right twice a day.
shanghaiaway 8y ago
Obama is a war criminal

virtualadmin 8y ago

Obama unfortunately prosecuted the largest amount of whistleblowers. I doubt he would have done this. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowers-double-standard-obama-david-petraeus-chelsea-manning https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowe...

squirrelicus 8y ago
Hmm sample size is too low to draw conclusions. 3 vs 8 over several years? Ehh. But you're probably right for other reasons. He was a bit of an authoritarian despite talking like a cuddly bear. His relationship with the intelligence community is probably what allowed him to spy on the Trump campaign and more or less keep it on the down low for a while.
- dbg31415 8y ago
  The gap between what he said and what he did was not small. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSDs3CJAwI4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSDs3CJAwI4
  - squirrelicus 8y ago
    I'm definitely not saying Obama was an ally of whistleblowers. It seems like he was just mostly average in this realm. I mean, 8 is still more than 3, but again, that might not be his fault, whistleblowing might have just more than doubled. Hard to tell.

nailer 8y ago

> least my world, mostly far left I'd be careful using that term, unless you're explicitly into violence towards anyone who disagrees with you.

briandear 8y ago

Just a curiousity, is “far left” and “liberal” even related? Seems like the far left and far right are two sides to the same totalitarian coin. Liberal implies a respect for the freedom of individuals while “far left” puts the collective over the rights of the individual. The word liberal has lost its meaning. The far left (and far right) is incompatible with freedom. Cases in point: Venezuela, Cuba, the Soviet Union. The far left closer to fascism than liberalism. http://thedailyjournalist.com/thethinker/fascism-is-far-left-not-far-right-on-political-spectrum/ http://thedailyjournalist.com/thethinker/fascism-is-far-left...

a13n 8y ago
It seems "left" and "right" can be used differently in different countries / times. In the US today, left is synonymous for liberal (typically democrat), and right for conservative (republican). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#Contemporary_usage_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_s...
kmonsen 8y ago
I think parent uses far left like far left in US politics or average European, not like Venezuela or Soviet Union. The latter two were of course incompatible to freedom just as the extreme right. I do believe that the "almost far left" are much more compatible with freedom (think Sanders on steroids) than the "almost far right" (I guess current GOP?). It could be that this is just incidental in that the public are currently more aligned with what the left wants so the right currently has to be anti-freedom if it wants to get elected. If public opinion shifts drastically maybe DNC would resort to trying to restrict voters instead of encouraging them?
brbrodude 8y ago
If you actually tried studying these topics instead of going behind shallow propaganda, you'd see how misguided you are. But actually liberals are not leftists, there's no left in USA.
nyolfen 8y ago
in the US, the left uses liberal institutions because being far left is tolerated by liberal society in a way that being far right is not

kev009 8y ago

This is such a contrasting comment I am curious if you remember how you consumed information back then to i.e. develop admiration for the whistleblowers, and retain the political operative narrative that Obama was somehow sympathetic and good to these causes.

blhack 8y ago
Obama was not sympathetic to these causes. That's why it would have gained him so much respect from me. I posted the quote in another reply, so sorry for repeating it, but: "I disagree with what you are saying, but will defend to the death your right to say it." This value is probably the most important to me, and it is something that I think is fundamentally American. I would have loved to see Obama exhibit it.
- kev009 8y ago
  Ok, I can see where you're coming from. You are wishing a standing president would do a good thing. It's a nuanced way to form an argument or ideal because the leaders have become so politically charged (imagine trying to promote any idea to a left-wing audience and tying in Trump, most would shut their brains off and attack the messenger which isn't so different than what happened here).
- dnautics 8y ago
  Can you give an example in Obama's political tenure when he had ever done anything consistent with that sentiment or that strategy? Politically, Obama's heroes are the progressives of the Wilsonian and Roosevelt era. Wilson jailed Eugene Debs for sedition, and ironically it took the era's conservative firebrand (H L Mencken) rabble-rousing about it in exactly that spirit and eventually Harding (not exactly a socialist) commuted Debs' sentence. For that matter: Can you think of an example when any politician or political figure in power in the US in recent memory has done something like that? I'm not comprehensively knowledgeable about US politics, but the only one I can think of is Clarence Thomas voting against the majority in Texas V Lawrence, where he said he was opposed to laws forbidding gay sex, but he didn't think the supreme court should rule on it, and he would vote to strike down the law if he were in the Texas State Legislature.

firasd 8y ago

It makes me profoundly sad how the world (or at least my world, mostly far left, liberal, educated, etc.) has turned so hard against Julian Assange. He's a hero in every sense of the word. If this Assange guy hadn’t gone all-in on supporting Trump, Russia, & co., he would still have a broad base of support among liberal Americans—many of the same people who lobbied for Chelsea Manning’s release. Epic bad strategy on his part. Also, beyond partisan alignment, another reason I view him more dimly than I used to is his habit of dumping entire inboxes. Compare to something like the Panama papers that was vetted by journalists...

e40 8y ago
It really shows the non-liberal bias here at HN that the above comment has more down than up votes. Because if you are liberal, there is statement concerning Assange that is more true.
Pica_soO 8y ago
Liberal America is a cult now, a church and assagne was found in heresy against its highest law: You shall not rape. They know very well, to manipulate those who decide what they stand for and upon with their feelings and not on principle.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  You're saying it was purely the sexual assault, and nothing to do with becoming a puppet of Putin?
  - Pica_soO 8y ago
    If you drive somebody out into the cold and he starts to carve himself a igloo in the snowman, what was there first? The Traitors, who shoved a good man into a hostile environment or the bad deal of someone who refused to die for principals, neither of us would risk his neck for. If you are hunted and stateless, you are breathing thin air - and cant choosy with your allies. Ideals are not calories, ideals dont warm at night, ideals are what got you into the trap in the first place. If you where selfless enough to throw away your social life, for ungrateful people, who wouldn't even protest for ideals, why not make a deal with the devil to at least not become a martyr?

travmatt 8y ago

I’m never going to understand the praise for Julian Assange. He may have started out with good intentions, but his turns towards Putin and subsequent actions are pretty unforgivable in my estimation. I can’t see how a moral person could stand by his decisions, honestly. I think Pussy Riot summer him up best: "But Julian Assange, he openly works with [Russia]," Nadya Tolokno told The Daily Beast in an interview Thursday. "It's not a secret. He's connected with the Russian government, and I feel that he's proud of it. "I generally support the work that WikiLeaks is doing, but I'm not that thrilled about his decisions that are unethical, in my view, concerning his connections to the Russian government." Tolokno said she visited Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London two years ago, saying their meeting convinced her WikiLeaks has ties to the Kremlin. "He couldn't deny it," said Tolokno, whose full name is Nadezhda Tolokonnikova. "He often works with the Russian propaganda machine, and he doesn't try to hide it. "Julian Assange doesn't try to hide that fact because he hosts at the Ecuadorian Embassy the editor-in-chief of the Russian propaganda team, Russia Today, and he has projects with them," she added. Tolokno added she confronted Assange about advancing Russian interests ahead of America's. "I understood his position: He's in a state of war with the American government," she said. "He's smart and charismatic and will use any means to destroy the American government. "And we had a conversation if it was really the ethical thing to do that with the hands of another government [Russia] which is, in fact, much worse and a real authoritarian government." [https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/303172-pussy-riot-member-assange-openly-works-with-russia%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-...]

jumelles 8y ago
Unfortunately I agree completely. Assange and WikiLeaks might have been on the 'right side' of things years ago, but things have changed since then. Siding with Putin is absolutely unforgivable.
- meatbags 8y ago
  Why the assumption that Assange sided with Putin? Those of us watching the story closely know that no evidence has been presented of this. Co-aligned interests is not collusion. The source of the DNC leaks remains unknown. It's not even clear whether it was an external actor or a DNC insider. I feel like the blinding hate for Trump has eroded people's ability to think critically. The Russiagate hysteria is evidence of that. Edit: I'll soak up the downvotes. Keep em coming.

joering2 8y ago

Couldnt upvote this more. Imagine sitation in which you drive on highway and on the other side of median you see a car crashed with people burning inside. You drive by without stopping because pulling over on highway, leaving unatended cr and jaywalking across highway lanes is illawful. What kind of society one would live if we would never engage in any action because of blank asumption that eventual parsonal liability outweights our nobility.

bootlooped 8y ago
I don't see how this analogy works for Assange, since he's done everything he can do to avoid liability.

jumelles 8y ago

Assange now supports Vladimir Putin over the US, and there's no amount of whatabouting that can defend Putin's actions. (And I hope you're aware that Assange isn't American!)

dosy 8y ago

Are you so sure all these "leakers" aren't actually intelligence operations? Particularly Snowden. Didn't anyone else sense how stage managed it felt? I never bought the act, but it was a good act tho. Strategically I think the limited hangout / power projection has utility: you get to watch who reaches for encrypted apps once they know, selectors "self-select" has to increase signal/noise ratio; and you get to start a debate about "privacy" which ultimately ends up targeting the tech companies (which it is in state interest to have leverage on, but it also works for tech companies because they get to be the "saviours of the people" when of course they are also collection partners); and you get to say "our intelligence services have been crippled" and ask for more money and legislation, particularly through the secret courts. To me, "Operation Snowden" was about strengthening US intelligence capability/posture, not weakening it. But of course, for public consumption, he must be called a traitor. I think for that reason, because he sacrificed himself to this narrative, he truly is a patriot, but just not for the reason most people think. :) As for Assange, I think the guy is a fraud. Or at the very least an idiot who sacrificed what may have been a platform for reform / awareness for his own ego / sickness. Sad. A waste. That is all. :)

garmaine 8y ago
For what benefit?
- acct1771 8y ago
  Didn't you read the comment? One blatant example: how do you think it'd benefit intelligence agencies to see who begins encrypting their comms after the news breaks? If it's a topic of talking head discussion on the news, and nobody picks up arms, that's implied consent. "Well, that's just normal operations, we've been doing that since 20xx!" Open secrets are ones you don't have to worry about leaking in ways you don't want. Being able to coordinate media reaction, social media reaction, and Gov officials' responses, is key, if this was indeed a limited hangout.
  - dosy 8y ago
    Thank you, for explaining it a second time to those who had trouble with the long sentences in the first comment. Another advantage I omitted (for fear HN would not comprehend it) was simply the bragging rights: look at this awesome spy tech we have, wouldn't it be a shame if someone - used it to advance their national interests. And while you're all gawking at it, don't none of y'all get to thinking that Murica got weak. We're talking to you, "allies."

lifeformed 8y ago

How do you reconcile your view of Assange with these facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russian_influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_between_WikiLeaks_and_Donald_Trump_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_betwe....

bootlooped 8y ago
That second link appears to just go to the Wikileaks Wikipedia page now, the section may have been removed? This article covers the same content: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
- lifeformed 8y ago
  Some reason the period at the end of the URL gets deleted when I try to post it. It's supposed to go to the section right above the first link.
  - Buge 8y ago
    I assume so many people post a url then a period immediately after it to end the sentence, that HN strips off the period at the end of the url, assuming it's not part of the url and was instead meant to end the sentence. I can see that the period in your comment is not linkified, so HN considered it not part of the url. By doing this, HN is going against RFC 3986 which says that the period is an unreserved character and is valid in fragments (and paths) without being escaped. You can work around HN's behavior by escaping the period as %2e https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_between_WikiLeaks_and_Donald_Trump_Jr%2e https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Correspondence_betwe...

micv 8y ago

You don't get a medal for being a Russian asset unless you're in Russia.

aerovistae 8y ago

Assange is a hero? Last I checked he was working with Russia to support the Trump campaign. Used to respect him a lot, lost all my respect for him and WikiLeaks when he got involved in trying to influence elections. That was not that site's mandate.

undseg 8y ago
Can you elaborate on that? Provide sources etc. Genuinely curious
- jumelles 8y ago
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/26/assange-slams-incredible-politicization-media-covering-campaign.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/26/assange-slams-inc... "Assange also accused the Clinton campaign of stoking "a kind of neo-McCarthy hysteria" about Russia's alleged role in the DNC hacking and Moscow's purported links to the Trump campaign." Meanwhile a recent federal indictment has accused Russia of doing exactly that: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/13/rosenstein-says-12-russian-intel-officers-indicted-in-special-counsels-probe.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/13/rosenstein-says-1... The indictment is here: https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download More info here: https://www.2016activemeasures.org/#involved https://www.2016activemeasures.org/#involved
  - _up 8y ago
    Everyone can be accused. That in itself doesn't mean anything. Also, Ex FBI Director Comney testified that the FBI didn't get access to the DNC server. Instead, the DNC hired itself people to verify their claim that they were hacked. How can they be serious if they aren't even trying to secure the main evidence? It is also pretty clear that they are not on Trumps side by announcing this directly before the summit. https://www.c-span.org/video/?425087-1/fbi-director-investigating-links-trump-campaign-russia&start=18335 https://www.c-span.org/video/?425087-1/fbi-director-investig...
    - 8y ago

s73v3r_ 8y ago

You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. That's what happened to Assange. WikiLeaks did some good in the past. Then he became a Russian puppet, and tool of the Trump campaign.

mc32 8y ago

Here's my take. When you see your duty as a patriot to betray what's been entrusted to you because you think it's the right thing to do, you do it with the notion that you are "taking one for the team". And you pay the price. What you do may not be proven right within your lifetime, but if you are eventually proven right, you will have earned the respect posthumously. I don't think we can claim being a patriot is easy or comes free. Often times you have to pay a heavy price. Of course that's no consolation for Snowden (or Assange).

misterhtmlcss 8y ago
I can totally agree with that. At the end of the day if a patriot is a guy standing between you and your leader and taking a bullet or on a field of battle losing a limb or pulling what Snowden did it's all a risk you take for participating in that level of game. It just is what it is and fairness doesn't enter into the equation.

geofft 8y ago

> It makes me profoundly sad how the world (or at least my world, mostly far left, liberal, educated, etc.) has turned so hard against Julian Assange. He's a hero in every sense of the word. In my world, heroes don't run from sexual assault trials. Is he afraid of prison, or of the sexual assault prosecution being a sham to punish him for what he published? Chelsea Manning was prosecuted and sentenced and more-or-less tortured for the actual things she leaked. She's a hero - she did the right thing for the country even though she knew what it would cost her. She didn't run. She was sitting in solitary confinement while Assange was tweeting in an embassy and claiming political asylum. Someone who wants to change the world, who seeks prestige and power, and who gains fame from someone else's sacrifice can be many things (and perhaps many good things) - but I wouldn't call him a hero.

Faaak 8y ago
If you'd read the article, you'd know that the sexual charge was dismissed
- danso 8y ago
  The investigation was dropped because Sweden gave up: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/19/swedish-prosecutors-drop-julian-assange-investigation https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/19/swedish-prosec... > “In order to proceed with the case, Julian Assange would have to be formally notified of the criminal suspicions against him. We cannot expect to receive assistance from Ecuador regarding this. Therefore the investigation is discontinued. > “If he, at a later date, makes himself available, I will be able to decide to resume the investigation immediately.”
- geofft 8y ago
  Yes, I did read the article (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and it says that the investigation was closed (not that the charge was dismissed), because the prosecutors determined he had successfully run beyond their ability to prosecute them by claiming asylum for years, and they didn't see a point in keeping the case open. That's basically the opposite of justice. > In May, 2017, Swedish prosecutors announced they were closing their investigation into the sexual assault allegations due to the futility of proceeding in light of Assange’s asylum and the time that has elapsed. He is still wanted for what the article calls the "minor bail violation" of crossing multiple international borders to flee trial for those charges.

pvg 8y ago

By that logic, we'd have to give this dude https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey#NSA_domestic_wiretapping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey#NSA_domestic_wiret... the Presidential Golden Eagle of Infinite Liberty.

anonymous5133 8y ago

Turning yourself into a tyrannical government is the most unpatriotic thing you can do.

pvg 8y ago
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/08/murong-xuecun-china-novellist-summoned-beijing-police-tiananmen-event https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/08/murong-xuecun-... And, you know, Gandhi.

syngrog66 8y ago

Assange is a Russian agent. Snowden most likely as well. They both deserve execution & infamy, not praise.

jasonvorhe 8y ago
The death penalty. How civil of you.

SN76477 8y ago

I agree, they are hereos, but leadership cannot award misbehavior as it undermines the system. We need better watchdogs.

ck2 8y ago

It is very, very simple to understand the difference between Assange vs Snowden/Manning Assange is an anarchist. He didn't use physical guns or bombs but rather selective release of information to selected parties at very selected times to cause as much damage as possible. Snowden & Manning on the other hand loved their country so much they were horrified to learn what was being done in our name so they exposed that information in the hope that someone, anyone, could make things right and prevent it from happening again. There was no scheme otherwise to their actions. So yeah they all dealt with exposing secrets but WHY is the very critical difference.

bootlooped 8y ago

Julian Assange does many things that seem to have the sole purpose of embarrassing the US. I don't see how he could be a candidate for any type of award from the US government. Any benefit Wikileaks has had on the US, primarily by helping spark a debate about domestic surveillance, is overshadowed by the harm they've done due to his radical anti-secrecy zealotry. Take the Vault 7 releases for example. What was the public good done by that information being published? Those are our weapons, in my eyes it is not much different than if Wikileaks had published the blueprints for the F-35. There is a legitimate interest in the US having secrets, and there is an interest in our global adversaries not having them. At least with the diplomatic cables and the DNC emails, there was some amount of public interest information in there, but why dump the whole set? To embarrass the US, and in the latter case, to affect the election. Are those noble goals worthy of the Presidential Medal of Freedom? As for his personal character, recall two things: he screwed over his supporters by jumping bail in England, and he reneged on a pledged to acquiesce to extradition if Manning was released. These are not the actions of a hero to be celebrated, they're selfish and dishonorable.

resters 8y ago
Since the US is the most powerful nation, of course it will be the target of some of the politically motivated leaks. With respect to Vault 7, once the secrecy of the tools was compromised they already had zero value to the US arsenal. In fact, I would not be surprised if the US Government leaked Vault 7 itself, to prevent the thief from being able to use them effectively. Consider the value of the Vault 7 tools if they were known only by a small group of hackers with a halfway decent budget. They'd be worth many billions of dollars. But once leaked, their value decreases substantially, since the zero days can be patched and the exploits mitigated. Any state actor who stole Vault 7 would have no interest in releasing it to Wikileaks. Even Russia would benefit more by knowing about it and leveraging that knowledge than by leaking it in its entirety. Also don't forget about the government hoarding zero days which put American firms at risk. Per your last point, let's not worry too much about Assange's personality or character. The important thing to focus on is the leaked information, not the messenger.
- 8y ago

forapurpose 8y ago

Obama pardoned (or at least freed) Chelsea Manning. > He's a hero in every sense of the word. I think we can have an intelligent discussion of his conduct, but let's not waste time and attention with hyperbole. We all know that some people believe he is and some believe he's not; what substantiated, well-considered knowledge can we add?

api 8y ago

One of these is not like the others. Snowden and Manning seem genuine. Assange may have been genuine once but it's quite clear that in recent years he was either compromised, turned, or himself adopted some kind of rather loathsome fascist ideology.

oliwarner 8y ago

He fled from a second questioning about a rape allegation and then broke his bail conditions. Your benchmark for "hero" is different to mine.