Current Julian Assange arrested. Twice.

sprockets

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
3,230
Likes
3,918
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
#51
Sprocket:"I judge everything on its merits, 'everything's a conspiracy' isn't my go-to. The same can't be said of you.

Well it is a conspiracy ...legally, so I'm not sure why you are posting inflammatory statements.

There is no charge that Assange made any overt effort to help Manning crack any password to get into Defence computers, where do the charges say he did?

What they are left with is the evidence seems to suggest that Assange's "encouragement" may have involved little more than receiving Manning's stolen documents and requesting more.

If that's the case, Assange's greatest crime — at least under this indictment — is no worse than The New York Times publishing the Pentagon Papers, or The Washington Post repeating the words of Deep Throat. As Andrew McCarthy points out at NRO, the First Amendment protects reporters who publish even classified information.

But although the DOJ indictment lists an offer on Assange's part to crack the password, it doesn't charge Assange with actually making any overt efforts.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/45882/doj-charges-julian-assange-conspiracy-hack-emily-zanotti
Sure, the 'conspiracy' between Assange and Manning may be that, but his arrest doesn't seem to be, based on the evidence at hand from reputable sources. Best you learn to read and interpret and also, remember what happens when you play the man.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sprockets

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
3,230
Likes
3,918
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
#52
Not necessarily but if something leaks that's obviously in the public interest, then all good there rightly should be no consequence. That said, Manning knew what she was doing and that she'd do time because she did break the law and betrayed her position, eventually given clemency.

Their problem, not Assange's doing his job and not ours to then sit on it and pretend to be blind.
So you reckon it's ok for anyone to break into classified computers (or whatever), even if they don't know what's in there, and then make up their own mind/s (whether they're sane or not) as to what they should and shouldn't publish? BTW last I looked, Assange is a computer programmer, not a journalist. But then, anyone can call themselves anything in today's world I guess, depending on their agenda.

Apologies, lots of edits.
 
Last edited:

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #53
So you reckon it's ok for anyone to break into classified computers (or whatever), even if they don't know what's in there, and then make up their own mind/s (whether they're sane or not) as to what and what they should and shouldn't publish? BTW last I looked, Assange is a computer programmer, not a journalist. But then, anyone can call themselves anything in today's world I guess, depending on their agenda.

Apologies, lots of edits.
Assange didn't break into the US military's computers but if you're asking my personal opinion, in his position I'd probably have done the same thing but I wouldn't have done what Manning did.

Also, I disseminated some of the cables. Should they come for me too?
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,093
Likes
28,948
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
#54
I judge everything on its merits, 'everything's a conspiracy' isn't my go-to. The same can't be said of you.

This case has been in the offing for some 7 years now....Might be time for you to get your head around the facts of the case, rather than just rolling with the latest propaganda guff, just freshly squeezed out of the Western intel nexus, in order to attempt some justification for their bullshit.

The Ecuadorian President was both black-mailed & bribed in order to withdraw Assange's political asylum to the tune of 10 billion IMF $$$.....The British warrant is prefaced upon charges by the Swedes that have since been withdrawn.....And Assange has been cleared by a U.N court....All of which the British government - in cahoots & conspiring with the Yanks - have chose to ignore & turn a blind eye towards....Now there's your criminal conspiracy pal.

This is nothing but a blatant set-up to shut a truth teller up, who has exposed the Western powers that be, as war criminals, who ignore their own laws & crush human rights asunder, as & when it suits them.

As you say....Accord yourself with the facts before exposing your utter ignorance, which in this instance, is so blatant as to be palpable.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #55
"Julian Assange is no journalist: don't confuse his arrest with press freedom

Standing before a media scrum in London, Julian Assange’s lawyer Jen Robinson declared that his arrest on Thursday "set a dangerous precedent for all media and journalists in Europe and around the world".
If his extradition were allowed, she said, any journalist could face charges for "publishing truthful information about the United States".

Julian Assange arrives at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London.CREDIT:pA
As someone who has been imprisoned by a foreign government for publishing material that it didn't like, I have a certain sympathy with Assange. But my support stops there.
To be clear, Julian Assange is not a journalist, and WikiLeaks is not a news organisation. There is an argument to be had about the libertarian ideal of radical transparency that underpins its ethos, but that is a separate issue altogether from press freedom.

In the American extradition request, WikiLeaks is accused of conspiring with the whistleblower Chelsea Manning to publish a huge trove of military documents in 2010. The documents included the infamous "collateral murder" video filmed from the gunsights of two US Apache helicopters as they opened fire on a group of men in Baghdad, including two Reuters journalists, killing them all.

Other documents included the Afghanistan War Logs, the Iraq War Logs, and "CableGate" – a trove of classified diplomatic cables that contained some embarrassingly undiplomatic analysis of world leaders and their countries. So far so newsworthy.
But Assange went further. Instead of sorting through the hundreds of thousands of files to seek out the most important or relevant and protect the innocent, he dumped them all onto his website, free for anybody to go through, regardless of their contents or the impact they might have had. Some exposed the names of Afghans who had been giving information on the Taliban to US forces.
Journalism demands more than simply acquiring confidential information and releasing it unfiltered onto the internet for punters to sort through. It comes with responsibility.

To effectively fulfil the role of journalism in a democracy, there is an obligation to seek out what is genuinely in the public interest and a responsibility to remove anything that may compromise the privacy of individuals not directly involved in a story or that might put them at risk.

Journalism also requires detailed context and analysis to explain why the information is important, and what it all means.
When The Guardian and The New York Times got hold of the cache of files that Edward Snowden downloaded from the US National Security Agency in 2013, they spent months searching through it to pick out the documents that exposed the extent of the NSA’s surveillance operations. Then, the newspapers took months more to release those stories in a cascade that was as explosive as it was impressive.

In 2015, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists got hold of more than 11 million documents leaked from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. But the ICIJ did not simply publish and be damned. Instead, it compiled a team of journalists from 107 news organisations across 80 countries, who then spent more than a year going through that vast trove. They carefully dug out evidence that confirmed corruption, tax evasion and the evasion of international sanctions by some of the world’s most powerful business and political elites.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/javascript:void(0);

It was long, hard and expensive work, but it was also journalism at its finest, fulfilling its watchdog role by fearlessly holding the powerful to account and doing its best to protect the privacy of those who were doing nothing wrong.

Julian Assange did none of that, so he cannot claim to be a journalist or hide behind arguments in support of press freedom. The distinction matters because of the way the digital revolution has confused the definitions of what journalism is and its role in a democracy.
We at the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom are committed to restoring public trust in journalism, which can only ever happen if its practitioners work with responsibility and respect. It has never been about opening up a hosepipe of information regardless of the consequences.

Peter Greste is a founding director and spokesman for the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom, and UNESCO chair in journalism and communication at the University of Queensland."

https://www.smh.com.au/national/ass...rrest-with-press-freedom-20190412-p51di1.html
The man who wrote this article is a massive self promoting hypocrite imo.

https://twitter.com/4journofreedom?lang=en
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,093
Likes
28,948
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
#56
The man who wrote this article is a massive self promoting hypocrite imo.

https://twitter.com/4journofreedom?lang=en
Not to mention a nice big pay-cheque for his troubles.

Assange is merely a publisher, much like any of the other news outlets who published the released Manning documents & videos.....The charges are utter tripe & anyone with a single functioning independent brain-cell can see through it.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #57
Not to mention a nice big pay-cheque for his troubles.

Assange is merely a publisher, much like any of the other news outlets who published the released Manning documents & videos.....The charges are utter tripe & anyone with a single functioning independent brain-cell can see through it.
Essentially, what he's saying is there's no problem with receiving military leaks of classified documents but expects journalists to filter what the public should and should not see.
 

sprockets

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
3,230
Likes
3,918
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
#59
Assange didn't break into the US military's computers but if you're asking my personal opinion, in his position I'd probably have done the same thing but I wouldn't have done what Manning did.

Also, I disseminated some of the cables. Should they come for me too?
You'd be the first one they should come for! :p I don't know what cables you're talking about but do you know they're real or did someone just make them up?
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #60
.
"Julian Assange is no journalist: don't confuse his arrest with press freedom

Standing before a media scrum in London, Julian Assange’s lawyer Jen Robinson declared that his arrest on Thursday "set a dangerous precedent for all media and journalists in Europe and around the world".
If his extradition were allowed, she said, any journalist could face charges for "publishing truthful information about the United States".

Julian Assange arrives at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London.CREDIT:pA
As someone who has been imprisoned by a foreign government for publishing material that it didn't like, I have a certain sympathy with Assange. But my support stops there.
To be clear, Julian Assange is not a journalist, and WikiLeaks is not a news organisation. There is an argument to be had about the libertarian ideal of radical transparency that underpins its ethos, but that is a separate issue altogether from press freedom.

In the American extradition request, WikiLeaks is accused of conspiring with the whistleblower Chelsea Manning to publish a huge trove of military documents in 2010. The documents included the infamous "collateral murder" video filmed from the gunsights of two US Apache helicopters as they opened fire on a group of men in Baghdad, including two Reuters journalists, killing them all.

Other documents included the Afghanistan War Logs, the Iraq War Logs, and "CableGate" – a trove of classified diplomatic cables that contained some embarrassingly undiplomatic analysis of world leaders and their countries. So far so newsworthy.
But Assange went further. Instead of sorting through the hundreds of thousands of files to seek out the most important or relevant and protect the innocent, he dumped them all onto his website, free for anybody to go through, regardless of their contents or the impact they might have had. Some exposed the names of Afghans who had been giving information on the Taliban to US forces.
Journalism demands more than simply acquiring confidential information and releasing it unfiltered onto the internet for punters to sort through. It comes with responsibility.

To effectively fulfil the role of journalism in a democracy, there is an obligation to seek out what is genuinely in the public interest and a responsibility to remove anything that may compromise the privacy of individuals not directly involved in a story or that might put them at risk.

Journalism also requires detailed context and analysis to explain why the information is important, and what it all means.
When The Guardian and The New York Times got hold of the cache of files that Edward Snowden downloaded from the US National Security Agency in 2013, they spent months searching through it to pick out the documents that exposed the extent of the NSA’s surveillance operations. Then, the newspapers took months more to release those stories in a cascade that was as explosive as it was impressive.

In 2015, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists got hold of more than 11 million documents leaked from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. But the ICIJ did not simply publish and be damned. Instead, it compiled a team of journalists from 107 news organisations across 80 countries, who then spent more than a year going through that vast trove. They carefully dug out evidence that confirmed corruption, tax evasion and the evasion of international sanctions by some of the world’s most powerful business and political elites.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/javascript:void(0);

It was long, hard and expensive work, but it was also journalism at its finest, fulfilling its watchdog role by fearlessly holding the powerful to account and doing its best to protect the privacy of those who were doing nothing wrong.

Julian Assange did none of that, so he cannot claim to be a journalist or hide behind arguments in support of press freedom. The distinction matters because of the way the digital revolution has confused the definitions of what journalism is and its role in a democracy.
We at the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom are committed to restoring public trust in journalism, which can only ever happen if its practitioners work with responsibility and respect. It has never been about opening up a hosepipe of information regardless of the consequences.

Peter Greste is a founding director and spokesman for the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom, and UNESCO chair in journalism and communication at the University of Queensland."

https://www.smh.com.au/national/ass...rrest-with-press-freedom-20190412-p51di1.html
Marcus Strom, media adviser Sydney Uni and with the MEAA is opposing US extradition as it 'would set a disturbing global precedent for the suppression of press freedom.'

Read below the full text of the letter addressed to the UK High Commissioner Vicki Treadell, and copied to Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne and the Opposition Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs Penny Wong:

Your Excellency,

Re: Julian Assange

We write to convey concerns about the possible extradition to the United States of Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, and urge the UK and Australian governments to oppose extradition to that country.

Mr Assange is an Australian citizen and has been a member of MEAA’s Media Section – the trade union and professional association of Australian media workers – since 2007.

MEAA is concerned that Mr Assange is facing possible extradition to the United States regarding WikiLeaks’ publication of US government files nine years ago. We believe a prosecution of WikiLeaks’ personnel will have a chilling effect on the public’s right to know what governments do in the name of their citizens.

It is a principle of a free press that the media have a duty to scrutinise the powerful and to hold them to account. The media report legitimate news stories that are in the public interest.

WikiLeaks was established in a way to allow whistleblowers seeking to publicly expose wrongdoing to upload material anonymously and with no possibility of being traced. This is common practice among media organisations around the world – using technology that allows whistleblowers to submit material to a media outlet anonymously and confidentially.

On April 5 2010 WikiLeaks revealed US military gunsight video showing US military helicopters killing two Reuters war correspondents, Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen, in Iraq on July 12 2007.

The publication of US diplomatic cables in November-December 2010 was done with the full collaboration of numerous media outlets in several countries including the Sydney Morning Heraldand The Age in Australia, The Guardian in the United Kingdom, The New York Times in the US, El Pais in Spain, Le Monde in France and Der Spiegel in Germany. None of these media outlets have been cited in any US government legal actions as a result of the publishing they have done in collaboration with WikiLeaks.

In 2011 the WikiLeaks organisation was awarded the Walkley Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism – in recognition of the impact WikiLeaks’ actions had on public interest journalism by assisting whistleblowers to tell their stories. The judges said WikiLeaks applied new technology to “penetrate the inner workings of government to reveal an avalanche of inconvenient truths in a global publishing coup”.

Extradition of Mr Assange and prosecution by the United States would set a disturbing global precedent for the suppression of press freedom.

We welcome the provision of Australian consular assistance. We urge that he be provided with medical assistance if required. The Australian and UK governments should publicly oppose the extradition of Mr Assange to the United States.

Yours Sincerely,

Marcus Strom, federal president - MEAA Media

Paul Murphy, chief executive - MEAA


Anyhoo, his wiki has him as a journalist.
https://www.meaa.org/news/meaa-opposes-extradition-of-assange/
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,093
Likes
28,948
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
#63

Tulsi does an excellent job here of exposing government corruption in destroying press freedom & individual liberties.....That's what lies at stake here people....The very future & defence of our Democracy itself.

This is how corrupted the Trump administration is.

Governments only exist in order to serve their citizens.....It is citizens who must hold their governments accountable.....Not the reverse.
 

sprockets

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
3,230
Likes
3,918
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
#64
That she wasn't legally allowed to pass them on isn't the issue sprockets, this is the Julian Assange journalist thread.

Also, he isn't accused of hacking.
I just went to the source rather than just rely on media reports:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy

"The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures."

He's not charged with hacking, correct (not that I stated he was), he's charge with conspiracy to hack, pretty much.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,093
Likes
28,948
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
#65
I just went to the source rather than just rely on media reports:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy

"The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures."

He's not charged with hacking, correct (not that I stated he was), he's charge with conspiracy to hack, pretty much.

Trumped up crud, gotten after the Trump admin re-arrested Manning & began more torture.....Some CIA noobs idea no doubt....Wouldn't stand up in any court.

And if the British jurisprudence system works as it should, then he will never be extradited….Simple as that.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #66

Julians' lawyer Sir Geoffrey Robertson QC.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing. LOL at the Guardian rushing to respond when the left has generally been real slow to defend Assange. Disappointing actually, they've seemed unable or unwilling to put their dislike of the man aside to consider the wider ramifications.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,093
Likes
28,948
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
#67
Very interesting, thanks for sharing. LOL at the Guardian rushing to respond when the left has generally been real slow to defend Assange. Disappointing actually, they've seemed unable or unwilling to put their dislike of the man aside to consider the wider ramifications.

The Democratic party in the U.s have been even worse, in their continued portraying of Assange as a Putin spy....Absolutely indefensible bullshit....And after the big fat zero of 2 & a half years of their 'Russia-gate' farce, it's beyond a joke.

We all know the multi-nat corporations are heavily invested in wars in order to secure resources & maximise profits at humanities expense; & that the U.S military is their means to achieve this.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Posts
1,577
Likes
1,689
AFL Club
Fremantle
#69
Hillary wanted to strike him with a drone.
I wouldn't mind if he testified against Hillary and the Clinton Foundation etc, and wonder if he's got information on her selling weapons and covering up in the Benghazhi raids as well.

You don't want to annihilate someone with a drone strike for no reason do you?
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Posts
1,577
Likes
1,689
AFL Club
Fremantle
#70
I just went to the source rather than just rely on media reports:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy

"The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures."

He's not charged with hacking, correct (not that I stated he was), he's charge with conspiracy to hack, pretty much.
The allegation is that JA assisted Manning to crack a password but the federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.

The evidence being JA and Manning engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information.

There is no evidence that JA gave any assistance to Manning to crack any DOD passwords. Conspiracy to commit computer intrusion could include wikileaks publishing the information but this has happened in other similar instances in US, as I've mentioned with only plaudits.

The indictment was dated around a year ago. I'm curious that if this was so important why JA wasn't charged in 2013 when Manning was convicted?
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #71
.
The indictment was dated around a year ago. I'm curious that if this was so important why JA wasn't charged in 2013 when Manning was convicted?
Clearly hated his guts but the Obama administration chose not to pursue Assange over freedom of the press issues.

The Federal Grand Jury indictment was kept quiet likely while they secured a deal with Ecuador to throw Assange out then they pounced. I think what they might be doing now is rounding up and jailing everybody they think might have been involved in the hope they'll turn on Assange and keep building their case. Pressure is on Chelsea Manning to testify against, it's gutter rat low sending her back to prison for refusing but bravo she'll lead by example.

All that is making me think the US is confident of success with extradition, the big fat bullies. I was apathetic about the Trump administration before this, now I can't stand them. And I don't even like Julian Assange.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
5,833
Likes
8,559
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter Moderator #72
I wouldn't mind if he testified against Hillary and the Clinton Foundation etc, and wonder if he's got information on her selling weapons and covering up in the Benghazhi raids as well.

You don't want to annihilate someone with a drone strike for no reason do you?
Here's Hillary, post arrest saying Assange must answer for what he's done. IMO she just wants to know who leaked her emails to Assange, they say it was Russia Assange insists it wasn't and if they get him in the states won't be surprised to learn they've tortured the information out of him.

And here's Trump :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:

Despite hailing WikiLeaks as a “treasure trove” during the 2016 campaign, Trump feigned ignorance about the website and its activities in the wake of Assange’s arrest.

“I know nothing about WikiLeaks,” the president told reporters at the White House. “It’s not my thing.”

After WikiLeaks disseminated the hacked DNC emails in 2016, then candidate Trump infamously declared: “WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/12/hillary-clinton-julian-assange-arrest-wikileaks
 
Top Bottom