4 ms·

Just the other day I asked people on here if they are afraid of commenting on Assange on HN incase the FBI break down their doors. to my astonishment quite a f

by demarq 6y ago

Just the other day I asked people on here if they are afraid of commenting on Assange on HN incase the FBI break down their doors. to my astonishment quite a few were convinced this is exactly what happens. TF?

luckylion 6y ago
Why wouldn't they be? Assange is an enemy of the state. Not "of the administration", but "the state", in total. The FBI is known to keep lists on and engage in attacks against what they perceive as enemies of the state. It's logical to assume that they might still do so. They probably won't break down your door for commenting on Assange though. They'll have some other pretense, an anonymous tip about drugs maybe.
- whatshisface 6y ago
  There are probably too many people commenting about Assange for them to do that, although ironically if enough people assume without evidence that they'll get swatted for talking about assange, then that will no longer be true.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    That's true, but that's true for any and all issues of that kind, isn't it? Had everyone under Stalin stood up to him, nobody would've been murdered in the Gulags.
    - whatshisface 6y ago
      Well, it was pretty obvious that Stalin was murdering people, so in that case it was fear of the known, instead of fear of the speculated. That fear due to speculation would be what allows the speculated fear to come to pass, is the particular irony I am highlighting.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- pmarreck 6y ago
  Assange being an enemy of the state is sufficient proof for me that Trump is not as dangerous as the left says he is. I mean, Assange basically had 2 nukes, one with Clinton's name on it and one with Trump's name on it and released only the Clinton one because he had personal beef with her. This likely resulted in Trump's election. Until that election, I was a Wikileaks fan. Now, I think Assange can go f* himself in prison for the rest of his life. What he did is almost unforgivable. https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange-donald-trump-jr-hillary-clinton/ https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange...
  - alehander42 6y ago
    So people like Assange are useful only when they serve your favorite political party ? Not very objective
    - josefresco 6y ago
      I believe he's suggesting that Assange should have released both sets of data, not just one because of his personal vendetta.
      - fwklein 6y ago
        Two sets? There is no source that Wikileaks or Assange ever been in posession of any RNC leaks. This is disinformation.
  - thinkingemote 6y ago
    That's one way to get your username off the FBI's list!
  - fwklein 6y ago
    >Assange basically had 2 nukes, one with Clinton's name on it and one with Trump's name on it and released only the Clinton one because he had personal beef with her. What are you talking about? There's no source that Assange or WL had any information on Trump, which they held back. Your cited article only writes about the twitter DMs, in which the WL account asked Trump Jr. to leak his fathers tax returns. It doesn't mean they ever posessed them.

by demarq 6y ago

luckylion 6y ago

Why wouldn't they be? Assange is an enemy of the state. Not "of the administration", but "the state", in total. The FBI is known to keep lists on and engage in attacks against what they perceive as enemies of the state. It's logical to assume that they might still do so. They probably won't break down your door for commenting on Assange though. They'll have some other pretense, an anonymous tip about drugs maybe.

whatshisface 6y ago
There are probably too many people commenting about Assange for them to do that, although ironically if enough people assume without evidence that they'll get swatted for talking about assange, then that will no longer be true.
- luckylion 6y ago
  That's true, but that's true for any and all issues of that kind, isn't it? Had everyone under Stalin stood up to him, nobody would've been murdered in the Gulags.
  - whatshisface 6y ago
    Well, it was pretty obvious that Stalin was murdering people, so in that case it was fear of the known, instead of fear of the speculated. That fear due to speculation would be what allows the speculated fear to come to pass, is the particular irony I am highlighting.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pmarreck 6y ago
Assange being an enemy of the state is sufficient proof for me that Trump is not as dangerous as the left says he is. I mean, Assange basically had 2 nukes, one with Clinton's name on it and one with Trump's name on it and released only the Clinton one because he had personal beef with her. This likely resulted in Trump's election. Until that election, I was a Wikileaks fan. Now, I think Assange can go f* himself in prison for the rest of his life. What he did is almost unforgivable. https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange-donald-trump-jr-hillary-clinton/ https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange...
- alehander42 6y ago
  So people like Assange are useful only when they serve your favorite political party ? Not very objective
  - josefresco 6y ago
    I believe he's suggesting that Assange should have released both sets of data, not just one because of his personal vendetta.
    - fwklein 6y ago
      Two sets? There is no source that Wikileaks or Assange ever been in posession of any RNC leaks. This is disinformation.
- thinkingemote 6y ago
  That's one way to get your username off the FBI's list!
- fwklein 6y ago
  >Assange basically had 2 nukes, one with Clinton's name on it and one with Trump's name on it and released only the Clinton one because he had personal beef with her. What are you talking about? There's no source that Assange or WL had any information on Trump, which they held back. Your cited article only writes about the twitter DMs, in which the WL account asked Trump Jr. to leak his fathers tax returns. It doesn't mean they ever posessed them.