11 ms·
Ecuador has begun giving the US some of Julian Assange’s possessions
- zunzun 7y agoBecause the official currency of Ecuador is the US Dollar, and the US Government can print all of the US Dollars it wants, then printing Ecuadorian currency for bribes is not counterfeiting.
- enriquto 7y agothis is quite a jerk move. Even if Mr. Assange was charged of some crime, shouldn't his personal possessions at least go to his family?
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y agoOr to the British police surely, they're who've arrested him and it is Britain that will decide where he goes next.
- astazangasta 7y agoYes, but then how would Ecuador secure its IMF loans?
- Veen 7y agoAssange is definitely charged with a crime, namely refusing to surrender to the UK police when released under bail.
- superkuh 7y agoYou're not wrong. But that crime is on false foundations given that it only exists because of US pressure and influence in Sweden to create the extremely disproportional response to his "crimes" there.
- sschueller 7y agoRight but then the UK should have his belongings not the USA.
- lallysingh 7y agoIt's a mercy. Nobody wants the cat.
- Roark66 7y agoAnd all of this could've been avoided if only he cleaned after his cat...
- wallace_f 7y agoI find it funny that out of all the smears and false accusations that failed, and even small countries like Iceland were kicking out squads of FBI agents sent to frame Assange(1), that the one thing that stuck to him in the media was this cat accusation. 1- https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/iceland-a-nexus-for-us-wikileaks-investigations-new-york-times-says/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/iceland-a-nexus-...
- Someone1234 7y ago> FBI agents sent to frame Assange(1) Your link doesn't say anything about "framing" anyone.
- astazangasta 7y agoNot frame, but find dirt on: >In addition, “A young online activist, Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson (known as Siggi), told a closed session of Iceland’s Parliament this year that he had been cooperating with United States agents investigating WikiLeaks at the time of the FBI’s visit in 2011,” the New York Times wrote. >According to former Wikileaks member Birgitta Jonsdottir, who is now a member of Iceland's Parliament, Thordarson had been going back and forth visiting Assange in England, where Assange had been under house arrest at the time, and during that time the FBI tried to get Thordarson to wear a wire. Some fellow activists suggested that Thordarson had worked as a double agent for Assange in this capacity, but ultimately, the US investigators' presence left a mark on the Wikileaks members back in Iceland.
- Veen 7y agoAn alternative way of expressing "find dirt on" is "investigate" which is exactly what the FBI is expected to do.
- quotz 7y agoEcuador has a puppet government obviously, and the US is trying to censor journalists ala China and the Middle East. How to best make a journalist shut up if not by jailing him?
- EduardoBautista 7y agoStealing documents and releasing them to the public irresponsibly does not make you a journalist.
- Synaesthesia 7y agoWikileaks has an impeccable record. They’ve never had to retract a story. They’re also doing a duty to the public in uncovering government and corporate secrets, exactly what a journalist should be doing.
- gamblor956 7y agoIf by impeccable you mean they have released a ton of forged documents without any attempt to verify their veracity, you would be correct. Journalists don't simply parrot their sources, they use discretion in determining what is appropriate to release.
- philliphaydon 7y agoWhich documents have been refuted? As far as I know, none...
- gamblor956 7y agoOut of the DNC document dump? At least a quarter were confirmed to be outright forgeries (with fingerprints implicating Russia), and of the remainder almost all had at least some changes from the originals. There was also the documents related to the DNC aide who was murdered, all of which were demonstrated to be forgeries. And that's just the US political stuff...
- qosys 7y agoI'm surprised Julian Assange hasn't committed suicide. In my life from what's observable, I doubt anyone believes the law is upheld by the current generation of people in power. People of authority will just ignore the rights when convenient and honour them when an agenda is being pushed. I think Assange has his past to thank for how his life situation panned out. In his younger age people actually cared about honouring the rights of the accused more so than today.
- nkassis 7y ago"I think Assange has his past to thank for how his life situation panned out. In his younger age people actually cared about honouring the rights of the accused more so than today." That's a pretty naive view of the justice system. I don't think it was better in the past at all.
- mikestew 7y agoIn his younger age people actually cared about honouring the rights of the accused more so than today. I'm older than Assange is, and I can tell you that is laughably wrong. I have grown up with the idea that if The Man(tm) wants to stick you with something, they'll find something that will stick, and I'm rarely disappointed. I'd bet a paycheck that one could find examples going back a thousand years. I know the phrase "don't poke the bear" has been around a lot longer than either Assange or I.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- sschueller 7y agoAccording to Julian's lawyers it's a violation of international law. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1127706444185448449 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1127706444185448449
- sigmar 7y agoThis lawyer is grasping at straws. There's no way that having security cameras in your own embassy is an "illicit operation"
- dpwm 7y ago> This lawyer is grasping at straws. The lawyer is doing his job, and is mainly referring to the unprecedented case of Ecuador just handing over personal possessions to the US -- a country that is trying to extradite him on the most tenuous of claims. > There's no way that having security cameras in your own embassy is an "illicit operation" If they're focused on and used for recording an individual granted asylum, how can that possibly be compatible with even the vaguest principles of privacy?
- delinka 7y ago>If they're focused on and used for recording an individual granted asylum... Was that the purpose? Were there no security cameras before? If this was a new installation, was he aware of it? Did the placement of the new cameras take privacy into consideration (e.g. avoiding sleeping quarters, toilets, etc.)?
- ggg2 7y agogreat questions. how do you expect to have answers if even the reason for the main event, the hand over of Assange, is surrounded with disinformation ranging even from literal shit on the walls? we will never know what exactly happened on this one. that is for sure.
- dpwm 7y agoA lot of people seem to have a very narrow idea of privacy. For what it's worth there were also allegations of microphones being used to record private conversations. The release of footage from the embassy to the international media seemed a particularly bizarre way to announce to the international community that your government has pure contempt for human rights.
- ujoh1 7y agoHello, see how you can start making a good daily living incomes profits from virta stock trading http://www.virtatrade.com/index.php http://www.virtatrade.com/index.php. without risk and 100% profits making guarantee. This how virta stock trading work, You buy your virta stock from this modern company at the current market price and You will receive the next sales price you will use to sell your virta stock to make your instant profit. Once the virta stock market price rise up to meet your next selling sales price, you will sell your virta stock and make your instant profit. No RISK TRADING. You can withdraw your profit daily from a minimum of $1 and above. THE BUYING AND THE SELLING OF A VIRTA STOCK IS 100% PROFIT MAKING GUARANTEE WITHOUT RISK Virta stock trading does not involve risk trading where traders need to trade with either to loss or gain. All you do is to sell your virta stock and make your instant profits. I make a good daily profits incomes from the buying and the selling of virta stock as my extra source of incomes to my bitcoin wallet every week. I recommend this trading platform to every one. Visit and register with the company here website http://www.virtatrade.com/index.php http://www.virtatrade.com/index.php to start earning your steady daily and weekly income profit to your bitcoin wallet now.
- skilled 7y agoIt's pretty appaling to read comments in this thread trying to imply Assange is in all this trouble because of a 'cat'. What are you trying to convey?
- sgift 7y agoThey follow the narrative that the reason for Assange being handed over to GB is not cleaning up after his cat. This was brought up by Ecuador. You can decide for yourself which of these explanations you think is most likely: - Ecuador wanted an IMF loan (and got it after handing over Assange) - Wikileaks leaked documents about corruption of Ecuadors president - Assange didn't clean up after his cat and that offended his hosts All options have been brought up at one time or another. Or maybe it's something else. For lack of mind reading we'll never really know. At least not until Wikileaks provides documents about that too.
- dev_dull 7y agoIt’s amazing to me that leaking the tax return data for a sitting president is “journalism”, even without any evidence of a crime. Yet Wikileaks is considered criminal for exposing actual crimes to the US public?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- staunch 7y agoI know he published U.S. government secrets (CIA files, that Iraq military video, etc). But what U.S. government crimes did he expose? I think Assange is mostly a sleazy guy who allowed himself to be a tool for Russia in 2016. But I still think he should be protected from U.S. charges by the First Amendment, regardless of whatever minor "assistance" he provided to Chelsea Manning. Snowden on the other hand is a hero that acted perfectly ethically and exposed clearly criminal violations of the U.S. Fourth Amendment. He should be protected as a whistleblower.
- sgift 7y ago> But what U.S. government crimes did he expose? Google, "Collateral Murder" You're welcome.
- staunch 7y agoI referenced that video so I'm clearly aware of it. Assange putting "murder" in the title doesn't actually make it illegal homocide. That's not how any legal system works. IMHO that incident is unfortunate because some of those people were innocent, and it is legally questionable, but there's also a strong argument that it was legal. A very far cry from exposing something clearly illegal like the My Lai Massacre or Abu Ghraib torture. So all he's done is expose one legally questionable incident from 2007 by a single military unit during the Iraq war? I suppose I'm not forgetting anything then.
- metalens 7y ago
- pseingatl 7y agoEvidence that is turned over to law enforcement by a non-governmental entity may be used at trial. This is called the "silver platter" doctrine. So, your roommate went into your locked room and gave police the kilo of cocaine and firearm you always keep on the nightstand. Tough luck. The police are prohibited from directing private individuals to seize evidence that could not otherwise be seized. Another problem is that correspondence between Assange and his defense team--in other words, his defense--is contained in these materials. Giving the prosecutor access to this material must not be analyzed solely under a 4th Amendment search and seizure analysis, but under a 5th Amendment right to counsel analysis. The silver platter doctrine would not apply to a 5th Amendment analysis. Parenthetically, cops and journalists are two professions that go undercover. Both lie in order to maintain the act. I have read multiple comments about how Assange tried to help Manning, e.g., that Assange tried to break encryption but failed. But no one knows this. It may very well be that Assange told Manning that he did these things, but did not for any number of reasons, not the least of which would be to keep Manning invested in looking for more material. There is no proof--though there may be in these seized materials--that Assange did anything of the sort. Journalists lie to their sources all the time. Also, could someone explain why Manning simply didn't leave the country upon being released from jail? There are no criminal charges against Manning--there is merely a civil subpoena which Manning is resisting. He was under no obligation to remain in the United States.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- pjc50 7y ago> She was under no obligation to remain in the United States. It's quite difficult to immigrate somewhere else when you're a convicted criminal; most places will bin your application immediately. Claiming asylum would also have made returning to the US impossible. Perhaps Manning wanted to see her family?
- arcticbull 7y agoHey, there's always Svalbard :P
- ionised 7y agoNote for the future; Asylum granted by Ecuador is worthless, regardless of how much of a shitty house guest you are.
- yrbeigbrnwshd 7y agoAssange news on HN? Well this got thrown off the top page in a hurry. When will the average HN reader fully appreciate the lengths their Western government will go to propagandize their population.