k1m

28 ms·

271.
by k1m 6y ago
You don't think of Assange as a journalist? Could you explain why?
272.
by k1m 6y ago
> A thing you've told somebody else, is just on a countdown to being public information. This wasn't just "somebody else", this was the senior Guardian investigative journalist David Leigh, who was working with Assang
273.
by k1m 6y ago
Please provide links to others who are at the hearing who are providing a very different picture.
274.
by k1m 6y ago
The Guardian has been very hostile toward Assange. I helped compile a list of its coverage a while ago: https://theguardian.fivefilters.org/assange/ As for its coverage of the case, the most important aspect, which Jon
275.
The US is using the Guardian to justify jailing Assange for life(jonathan-cook.net)
383 points by k1m 6y ago|157 comments
276.
by k1m 6y ago
No, lots of people are reporting on it, just not the corporate media. See here for links to people who are: https://shadowproof.com/2020/09/21/guide-to-journalists-assa... Craig Murray is providing the most t
277.
by k1m 6y ago
I disagree. This is clearly a hugely important case. It's not that day 17 isn't significant to the media, it's that the whole case has been treated with hardly any interest at all from day 1. Another HN commenter pointed out
278.
Assange Hearing Day 15(craigmurray.org.uk)
207 points by k1m 6y ago|47 comments
279.
by k1m 6y ago
> But the government's argument is that Assange was not a "journalist" in that he was actively involved in convincing people to leak Prosecution did try early on to paint Assange's work as something other than journal
280.
Assange Hearing Day 14(craigmurray.org.uk)
206 points by k1m 6y ago|66 comments
281.
by k1m 6y ago
Good point by Noam Chomsky and Alice Walker: > You've probably heard the refrain from well-meaning pundits: “You don't have to like him, but you should oppose threats to silence him.” But that refrain misses the point by reinfo
282.
Julian Assange is not on trial for his personality(independent.co.uk)
52 points by k1m 6y ago|18 comments
283.
by k1m 6y ago
Posted this in another thread about this issue recently: You don't see a problem when a legal hearing that's been criticised as "undermining of due process and the rule of law" by the International Bar Association only o
284.
by k1m 6y ago
Christian Grothoff explains that the material was already available online in encrypted form. By the time Wikileaks made them public, people had already decrypted them thanks to Guardian journalists revealing the password in their book. Bla
285.
by k1m 6y ago
This article from 2011 is an interesting read, about the publishing of the password to the Wikileaks file in a Guardian book: https://web.archive.org/web/20110925132344/http://nigelparry...
286.
Computer science professor Christian Grothoff testifies in Assange hearing(twitter.com)
55 points by k1m 6y ago|23 comments
287.
Assange Hearing Day 13(craigmurray.org.uk)
85 points by k1m 6y ago|8 comments
288.
Survivor of CIA Torture and Rendition Supports Assange at Extradition Trial(dissenter.substack.com)
301 points by k1m 6y ago|214 comments
289.
by k1m 6y ago
> I can't trust his reporting to be factual. We should find other sources. No major news source is covering this to the extent Craig Murray is. That in itself should be more worrying than Murray's views on other matters. His re
290.
by k1m 6y ago
I guess the International Bar Association calling the hearing a "serious undermining of due process and the rule of law" and having Amnesty International denied access to monitor it isn't all that surprising or newsworthy.
291.
by k1m 6y ago
Well, Amnesty do not think that their trial monitors should be treated as "public-at-large", otherwise I doubt they'd be concerned by this development. They've stated that they've observed trials before in other cou
292.
by k1m 6y ago
According to Amnesty, "Amnesty International monitors have gone to Guantanamo Bay, Bahrain, Ecuador, Turkey, and Hungary, among many others, to observe trials as officially recognized fair trial monitors." - https://twi
293.
by k1m 6y ago
You don't see a problem when a legal hearing that's been criticised as "undermining of due process and the rule of law" by the International Bar Association only offers a tiny number of hard-to-get seats to the public an
294.
by k1m 6y ago
> The proceedings will be broadcast live to members of he press in auxiliary room, where AI is apparently welcome. They are not welcome: "Denied both" - https://twitter.com/JuliaHall18/status/130623455
295.
by k1m 6y ago
I don't know what would be a good citation for you, but maybe the International Bar Association ("the global voice of the legal profession"): > With this extradition trial we are witnessing the serious undermining of due p
296.
by k1m 6y ago
Many people are concerned about the way this hearing is being carried out. For example, here's the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI): > The IBAHRI concurs with the widespread concern over the ill-t
297.
Amnesty International denied access to court in the Assange extradition hearing(twitter.com)
272 points by k1m 6y ago|59 comments
298.
by k1m 6y ago
Yes, will be interesting to see if it changes anything, but I doubt it will. As Murray suggests, it's probably becuase prosecution has seen so little media interest in the court case that they've now changed tack: > The purpose
299.
Assange Hearing Day 10(craigmurray.org.uk)
126 points by k1m 6y ago|47 comments
300.
Assange Hearing Day 9(craigmurray.org.uk)
97 points by k1m 6y ago|64 comments

More ›