Julian Assange arrested

awpitt

Main Streeter
Well, it's about time..............

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was carried out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London in the arms of British police and arrested Thursday, a dramatic scene that ended Assange's nearly 7-year stay at the embassy and left the world watching to see if the anti-secrecy site would retaliate.

Moments before the stunning arrest, Ecuador announced it had withdrawn Assange's asylum for “repeatedly violating international conventions and protocol.”
https://www.foxnews.com/world/ecuador-withdraws-asylum-from-julian-assange-arrested-by-uk-police
 

TCROW

Active Member
I remember he mentioned he has a dead man’s switch which he promised would be released in case of his arrest. I wonder if we shall get to see those goodies.

Sure did take them a long time to manufacture another crime when the Swedish feminists who made up the sexual assault story at the behest of the CIA didn’t work out.
 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
Chelsea Manning appears to be a player in the govt case. Since Obama pardoned Chelsea, should Trump to pardon Julian?
 

Yooper

Socket 1, Intel 80486
PREMO Member
I remember he mentioned he has a dead man’s switch which he promised would be released in case of his arrest. I wonder if we shall get to see those goodies.
👍 MeToo.

Sure did take them a long time to manufacture another crime when the Swedish feminists who made up the sexual assault story at the behest of the CIA didn’t work out.
👎 Not MeToo.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. He's not an AmCit and didn't reside in the U.S., so what will be the real charge? Are we going to make this about Assange and his alleged sexual issues (in which case, what's the U.S.'s interest) or WikiLeaks (I'm not sure WikiLeaks per se is a problem) or what?

What do y'all think the issue/issues will be? 'Cause this seems awfully weak...

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was charged Thursday with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for aiding Chelsea Manning in the cracking of a password to a classified U.S. government computer in 2010, the U.S. Justice Department announced hours after Assange's arrest in London.
--- End of line (MCP)
 

TCROW

Active Member
👍 MeToo.


👎 Not MeToo.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. He's not an AmCit and didn't reside in the U.S., so what will be the real charge? Are we going to make this about Assange and his alleged sexual issues (in which case, what's the U.S.'s interest) or WikiLeaks (I'm not sure WikiLeaks per se is a problem) or what?

What do y'all think the issue/issues will be? 'Cause this seems awfully weak...



--- End of line (MCP)
When you say this seems awfully weak are you referring to the actual charges of hacking? Or are you saying that because he’s not a US citizen charged with hacking is the weakness?

Because “hacking” (put in quotes because hacking is not an actual charge but a term most non-tech people understand) is a very serious crime and is prosecuted robustly as a matter of routine. And against non-US persons too. Going to post the actual indictment in a separate comment to this thread.
 

Yooper

Socket 1, Intel 80486
PREMO Member
When you say this seems awfully weak are you referring to the actual charges of hacking? Or are you saying that because he’s not a US citizen charged with hacking is the weakness?

Because “hacking” (put in quotes because hacking is not an actual charge but a term most non-tech people understand) is a very serious crime and is prosecuted robustly as a matter of routine. And against non-US persons too. Going to post the actual indictment in a separate comment to this thread.
Good thoughts. Thanks.

I guess what I mean is that I didn't think/assume Assange put Manning up to it, nor do I think/assume Assange and Manning were active collaborators. Just that Assange was the recipient of Manning's goods.

I'm also not familiar with the law wrt non-AmCits coming into receipt of U.S. classified intel while not in the U.S. How could U.S. law apply? I get he could be extradited, but this all seems like pretzel logic to me.

And full disclosure, I was more focused on Manning's treachery rather than Assange's part in the whole thing (as protecting that sort of stuff before it got away was closer to what I did back in the day). So I'm learning.

Also, I don't necessarily see WikiLeaks as a bad thing. It does become problematic in that it is able to post more from open societies than closed ones and as a result closed regimes stand to gain more (intel by sub-contracting, as it were). The one upside for me is that WikiLeaks - hopefully - has caused folks to do a better job at safeguarding materials (and by folks, I don't mean the HRC, Sandy Berger, David Petraeus level of "folks"; they suck at it...).

Thanks, too, for the indictment post. Perhaps some of my comments will be answered and rendered irrelevant/dumb/under the bridge/etc.

--- End of line (MCP)
 

TCROW

Active Member
Good thoughts. Thanks.

I guess what I mean is that I didn't think/assume Assange put Manning up to it, nor do I think/assume Assange and Manning were active collaborators. Just that Assange was the recipient of Manning's goods.

I'm also not familiar with the law wrt non-AmCits coming into receipt of U.S. classified intel while not in the U.S. How could U.S. law apply? I get he could be extradited, but this all seems like pretzel logic to me.

And full disclosure, I was more focused on Manning's treachery rather than Assange's part in the whole thing (as protecting that sort of stuff before it got away was closer to what I did back in the day). So I'm learning.

Also, I don't necessarily see WikiLeaks as a bad thing. It does become problematic in that it is able to post more from open societies than closed ones and as a result closed regimes stand to gain more (intel by sub-contracting, as it were). The one upside for me is that WikiLeaks - hopefully - has caused folks to do a better job at safeguarding materials (and by folks, I don't mean the HRC, Sandy Berger, David Petraeus level of "folks"; they suck at it...).

Thanks, too, for the indictment post. Perhaps some of my comments will be answered and rendered irrelevant/dumb/under the bridge/etc.

--- End of line (MCP)
Thanks for the additional commentary.

The reason I think the scope here is so narrow is because the US has to be careful not to prosecute anything that could be associated with Assange’s journalistic endeavors because of 1st A issues.

Furthermore, I’m fairly certain that the UK would not agree to extradition if they weren’t satisfied that a death penalty or torture or some other egregious type of treatment wouldn’t be used.

What I don’t know is if there could be another sealed indictment that could be unsealed once Assange is in US possession and that the UK would have never agreed to extradite had they been presented with that one.
 

Yooper

Socket 1, Intel 80486
PREMO Member
What I don’t know is if there could be another sealed indictment that could be unsealed once Assange is in US possession and that the UK would have never agreed to extradite had they been presented with that one.
A "hot take," I think. As there certainly is a game being played here.

I wonder if part of the Assange process will be a deal to turn WikiLeaks toward U.S. intel interests. Getting him and his org as U.S. sub-contractors....

Just musing.

--- End of line (MCP)
 

Yooper

Socket 1, Intel 80486
PREMO Member
I wonder if part of the Assange process will be a deal to turn WikiLeaks toward U.S. intel interests. Getting him and his org as U.S. sub-contractors....

Just musing.
Interesting. Scott Adams (the Dilbert guy) just released his latest blogcast a few minutes ago where he wonders/muses about this very sort of thing (like exactly like my comment above, but very similar).

Hmmm.

--- End of line (MCP)
 

TCROW

Active Member
I wonder if part of the Assange process will be a deal to turn WikiLeaks toward U.S. intel interests. Getting him and his org as U.S. sub-contractors....
I’ve always reckoned that wikileaks was a CIA mouthpiece, but never been sure of their long game. So anything is possible.
 
Top