Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 02:35:08 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Assange has been arrested

Started by Fambo Number Mive, April 11, 2019, 10:40:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zetetic

Quote from: Urinal Cake on April 12, 2019, 09:40:49 PM
In the context of it seemed unlikely to be a honey-trap. It seems like an obtuse way to get Assange.
Plenty of opportunity to have done much the same thing but more aggressively in the UK for a start.

BlodwynPig



"Supreme Justice, it seems we have Bin Laden coming over the ether!"

"Now, we're not gonna talk about Juba, we're not going to talk about Juba at all"

greenman

Quote from: Hank Venture on April 12, 2019, 09:32:45 PM
Yeah. Not really sure who is left as an enemy now that Trump has gone over to the good side by arresting Assange. Maybe Glenn Greenwald ?

Apropos: https://vimeo.com/329855329

His interview with NPR. I love GG despite the many valid criticisms one probably could lodge about him.

Realistically though the extreme reaction to Trump wasn't really about Trump was it? it was about guarding against criticism of their/Hilary's failure and the potential loss of power that could/should(and hopefully will) have come with it.

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Zetetic on April 12, 2019, 09:56:38 PM
Plenty of opportunity to have done much the same thing but more aggressively in the UK for a start.

that's as may be, but the conference was in sweden. his predilection for groupies & condom-ripping may have been known to someone, & that may have been at the very least a way to damage some of the messianic image he had at the time. crude, but it seems to have worked, if the english press today is any indication.

I'll happily eat all this if it turns out that he actually did assault one or both of these women, but it seems like we'd be arguing over the colour of the smoke while the real fire just goes on burning.

Buelligan

IMO, the bastard squad flagged him up and combed him until something usable dropped out. 

I think the question that needs asking is why would someone choose to remain locked inside and embassy for seven years rather than face justice.  And the obvious answer is that we all know that justice was not on offer.  This was never about that.

Urinal Cake

The other difference is that from memory, at the time the sexual consent laws in Sweden were probably the strictest in the Western world.

But from the narrative given two women meeting in a bar, both realising that Assange pulled the same stunt, going to the police to track Assange down for a STD test, then the police saying we can't do that but have a talk with the prosecutor maybe there's another way and the prosecutor saying, 'Well under our laws that could constitute sexual assault.' It's a long-winded type of entrapment that could fall apart at any stage.




Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 12, 2019, 11:03:20 PM
his predilection for groupies & condom-ripping may have been known to someone, & that may have been at the very least a way to damage some of the messianic image he had at the time.
This is where the honeytrap theory falls. If he had any sort of a reputation for  ripping condoms then there was absolutely no need to engineer anything at all.

Buelligan

Well, except stronger condoms, there'd be a need for that.

Sin Agog

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 12, 2019, 08:30:45 PM
I was going to say 'lock the thread', since that about sums it up, but then...


there is plenty to read from plenty of sources.

I'm slightly troubled by the symmetry of the self-appointedness of whistle-blowers vs superpowers, in the sense that both parties seek to control the distribution of information. I'm not sure what wikileaks hoped to achieve by releasing (say) that helicopter footage of the two reuters guys & a bunch of innocent iraqis. it reminded me of any number of depictions of gung-ho american military types & I didn't find it at all surprising, & now of course I can't un-see it. but what am I supposed to do with the data? are we supposed to throw bricks at the US embassy or something?

but fair play- the stuff that's come out so far hasn't in & of itself done any more harm than good, & even reasonably well-read cynics like me can feel our opinions are somewhat justifiable... that we're not imagining these evils, but that they actually happen. so for that, st julian, thanks.

the thing in sweden seems to have been largely invented by a swedish prosecutor after one or both of the women who engaged in consensual sex with assange may or may not have tried to get him to submit to STD testing after condoms may or may not have been deployed &/or tampered with.
where assange is at fault here is that he seems to have an achilles' heel in this area, that he enjoys the company of "groupies", for want of a better word. everything else about these encounters is probably hearsay, but the weakness for adoring female fans is what got him into this mess.

he would've faced charges from the US anyway, & requests for his extradition from wherever he holed up, with or without the nonsense in sweden. the way it's being played now, though, is an insult to actual rape victims. his extradition seems inevitable, because USA. I think we're right to question it, & right to try to un-conflate the other (swedish) stuff, but I'm just not sure what it is he's actually achieved.

You don't think it's important, when the press is a privately-funded enterprise, to have other news sources which certainly have their own agendas but which at least aren't legacies passed down from generation to generation?  There are people so insanely credulous that seeing something in print in half-decent English with legible punctuation is tantamount to definitive proof that it's Truth.  Same goes for a lot of the audience of something like American Sniper.   

Smartphones make it harder for police to do what they like, and whistleblowers and a more open, information-hungry environment makes the engineering of a situation like Vietnam theoretically more difficult.  The 'masters of war' would like nothing more than being left to their own devices to cycle onto the next bad guys and the next.  The more aloof and apart we're kept from our supposed enemies and the army's grotty ins and outs, the easier it is to keep repeating the cycle.  As it is, I think information, particularly of the unfiltered, unmandated variety is why I probably won't see conscription again in my lifetime.

Urinal Cake

I guess Assange is serving a purpose. Wikileaks should roll on without him. If you're going to leak or publish you have to be a saint or martyr. Also probably have a ticket to Russia ready.

Absorb the anus burn

Quote from: Urinal Cake on April 13, 2019, 12:05:31 AM
I guess Assange is serving a purpose. Wikileaks should roll on without him. If you're going to leak or publish you have to be a saint or martyr. Also probably have a ticket to Russia ready.

Yep, he serving a purpose.... Reminding six billion people not to fuck with the American Military Industrial Complex.

List of material published by Wikileaks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_material_published_by_WikiLeaks

As you can see, dozens of countries were embarrassed and exposed by the Wikileaks document drops......

Sin Agog

Assange is part of this merging of celebrity and politics, where we make it way too much about the personalities and lives of the participants involved, to the point where the issues sometimes barely register.  This is useful to certain types in myriad ways: if someone in a position of power falls out of favour or gets caught doing something wrong, you can replace them but keep the operation running; identity politics can be used for misdirection, a la May claiming she's a feminist; and, obviously, anything in your life can be weaponised by the opposition, even growing vegetables in an allotment.

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Sin Agog on April 12, 2019, 11:33:54 PM
You don't think it's important, when the press is a privately-funded enterprise, to have other news sources which certainly have their own agendas but which at least aren't legacies passed down from generation to generation?..... As it is, I think information, particularly of the unfiltered, unmandated variety is why I probably won't see conscription again in my lifetime.

I think you're preaching to the choir here, chief. I'm still not sure what we're supposed to do with the data. it has fermented mistrust, in the same way that blair's alignment with bush did over iraq. I don't completely agree that unfettered access to this 'information' is a good thing. in madrid, where I spend a lot of time, they routinely show car accidents on the tea-time news. I'd like to think they know what they're doing with this editorial sensibility, but it doesn't make a lot of difference to how people drive. did we need to see the helicopter footage & hear those jocks laughing as they gunned people down? will it change anything to show that footage to everyone? dunno.

Quote from: Urinal Cake on April 13, 2019, 12:05:31 AM
I guess Assange is serving a purpose. Wikileaks should roll on without him. If you're going to leak or publish you have to be a saint or martyr. Also probably have a ticket to Russia ready.

yes, if he really believes in what he's doing, he'd let them nail him to the cross. something doesn't add up.

Buelligan

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 13, 2019, 12:22:59 AM
I think you're preaching to the choir here, chief. I'm still not sure what we're supposed to do with the data. it has fermented mistrust, in the same way that blair's alignment with bush did over iraq. I don't completely agree that unfettered access to this 'information' is a good thing. in madrid, where I spend a lot of time, they routinely show car accidents on the tea-time news. I'd like to think they know what they're doing with this editorial sensibility, but it doesn't make a lot of difference to how people drive. did we need to see the helicopter footage & hear those jocks laughing as they gunned people down? will it change anything to show that footage to everyone? dunno.

It wasn't an accident though was it, when they murdered those people and laughed?  I think taxpayers need to know what they're paying for.  I think voters need to know what they're voting for.  I think people need to know what their brave boys get up to.  Maybe take a bit of responsibility.

pcsjwgm

Contrary to Reports, the U.S. Gov. Can Add Charges After Assange Extradition

Quote
In "Julian Assange Arrested in London as U.S. Unseals Hacking Conspiracy Indictment," Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman and Eileen Sullivan of the New York Times state: "If Mr. [Julian] Assange is convicted on the conspiracy to hack offense alone, he could face up to five years in prison. The government could later seek to charge him with additional offenses, but because of extradition practices, any such superseding indictment would most likely need to come soon, before Britain formally decides whether to transfer custody of him."

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. His books include Foundations of World Order (Duke University Press).

He said today: "The New York Times report is wrong and understates the dangers to Assange. What it states is normally the case in extradition treaties, but it's not the case in the relevant U.S.-British extradition treaty.

"Once the U.S. government has Assange over here, they can concoct whatever charges they want to against him for anything and then ask the British to waive what's called the Rule of Specialty. That could add up to much more than the current five years Assange is facing. The British government will almost certainly consent, unless Jeremy Corbyn becomes prime minister.

"I'd expect that Assange's lawyers will try to use the European Court of Human Rights to stop the extradition and in any event, they would need to ensure that the British government receives assurance from the U.S. government that the death penalty will not be sought."
http://accuracy.org/release/contrary-to-reports-the-u-s-gov-can-add-charges-after-assange-extradition

Urinal Cake

Quoteyes, if he really believes in what he's doing, he'd let them nail him to the cross. something doesn't add up.
I don't know if you're being facetious but in the Watergate era and a bit after that you didn't have to be those things. Manning  and Snowden's sacrifice is probably from a realised fear of the security state while Assange was more carefree.

It's not the US military-industrial complex you have to be worried about it's any nation the US has leverage over. Greenwald must rightly be shitting himself.

Urinal Cake

#166
QuoteStanding 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.
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.

Advertisement

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.

RELATED ARTICLE
Collateral Murder and, inset, Julian Assange.
ASSANGE SAGA
From hacker to fugitive: Julian Assange's epic journey
Add to shortlist
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.

Advertisement

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.

RELATED ARTICLE
US President Donald Trump speaks while Moon Jae-in, South Korea's president, left.
ASSANGE SAGA
'Know nothing about WikiLeaks': Donald Trump
Add to shortlist
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.

Advertisement

Play Video

Justin Assange to face court in Britain
Play video
3:29

Justin Assange to face court in Britain

Australian Wikileaks founder Julian Assange was arrested and dragged out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

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.

RELATED ARTICLE
Julian Assange arrives at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London.
ASSANGE SAGA
Julian Assange 'won't get any special treatment': Scott Morrison
Add to shortlist
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.

Advertisement
https://www.smh.com.au/national/assange-is-no-journalist-don-t-confuse-his-arrest-with-press-freedom-20190412-p51di1.html?btis

A somewhat technical take by someone who you can't accuse of not walking the talk. Greste spent more than a year in Egyptian jail for damaging 'national security.'  The issue is that the risk to informants, soldiers etc never really eventuated wholesale. Further the due diligence he spoke of is just another layer of control to conserve the status quo. As well as protecting one's turf/livelihood.

a duncandisorderly

https://www.smh.com.au/national/assange-is-no-journalist-don-t-confuse-his-arrest-with-press-freedom-20190412-p51di1.html?btis

yes, that's refreshing after all the hysteria. I was being a little facetious, & I agree with the chap here who says it's not the act of a responsible journalist to just nick stuff from a server & dump it onto a less-secret server without context. in an ideal world, perhaps, people could help themselves to facts, absorb them & somehow by osmosis achieve some sort of enlightenment. that's not how it works, though, & neither is this the way to deal with the agendas & bias of the mainstream media.
does anybody know whether the guys in the helicopter faced any retribution for their attack?

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Buelligan on April 13, 2019, 12:30:03 AM
It wasn't an accident though was it, when they murdered those people and laughed?  I think taxpayers need to know what they're paying for.  I think voters need to know what they're voting for.  I think people need to know what their brave boys get up to.  Maybe take a bit of responsibility.

that's not what I meant. what I meant was more in the sphere of journalistic responsibility & the ability of the audience to deal with raw footage as distinct from a patient but detailed explanation. in fairness, what assange did was draw more attention to something (although not particularly surgically) that the reuters people already (obviously) knew about & had complained to the US Govt. about.

no, it's not the same as seeing a car-crash on tv, of course. but we know both things happen, & we don't need to be shown the disturbing images to be appalled by them. that's all I meant. this footage is on youtube, ffs. kids can see it. I don't want that in my house.

Buelligan

If you don't want it in your house, give a few moments thought to those who aren't seeing it via youtube. 

It's all very well living in a place of safety but if we're paying for the gunships and the staff, if we're voting for the politicians and medalling-up the murderers, don't you think we owe it to the victims to watch their deaths (even if there are ads on the channel)? 

In short, if this bothers you, do something about it rather than complaining about people like Assange making a bad noise.  How would you feel if it were your family under those helicopters?  It is always someones family.

Mr_Simnock

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 13, 2019, 06:26:17 AM
that's not what I meant. what I meant was more in the sphere of journalistic responsibility & the ability of the audience to deal with raw footage as distinct from a patient but detailed explanation. in fairness, what assange did was draw more attention to something (although not particularly surgically) that the reuters people already (obviously) knew about & had complained to the US Govt. about.

no, it's not the same as seeing a car-crash on tv, of course. but we know both things happen, & we don't need to be shown the disturbing images to be appalled by them. that's all I meant. this footage is on youtube, ffs. kids can see it. I don't want that in my house.


You should only watch things like that if your are psychologically ready for them, a kid watching that could be affected in a very long lasting and damaging way and no way should it be anywhere near you-tube or easy to get at.

Buelligan


Crisps?

At zero risk to himself Assange published material supplied by others (the real heroes, in real, serious danger) to expose what we've all known about the US anyway, since at least the 1960s.

Absolutely nothing changed, because as with US crimes exposed in previous wars, the victims of history's #1 white power aggressor1 are almost never white. (The real crime committed by the Nazis.)

Assange sucked up to the very state that carried out "Collateral Murder" and jailed Chelsea Manning to the laughable degree of begging his mate Donnie Jr for help in making him Australia's ambassador there.

Nobody should ever be extradited, directly or indirectly, to a police state with the worst human rights record in history, even people who want to be an ambassador to that police state, but otherwise fuck him.



1. You almost have to admire the unlimited depths of scumminess the US is capable of; I doubt even the Nazis would have the audacity to name the weapons used in a 240 year long global race war after victims of their previous genocides.

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Buelligan on April 13, 2019, 08:00:01 AM
if we're paying for the gunships and the staff, if we're voting for the politicians and medalling-up the murderers, don't you think we owe it to the victims to watch their deaths ...?

what an odd idea. no. bad enough we have murder being done in our name without it being put on youtube by irresponsible do-gooders like assange.

again- appropriating this data from a government server & then dumping it, unvetted, onto the internet does NOT make assange a great journalist. I'd rather the governments of the world didn't commit atrocities like this, of course, but what assange & wikileaks have done has made no difference to them. & comparing this material to porn is not helpful.

Twed

A terrible idea is living in a society that asks us to be complicit in evil atrocities and having a legally-enforce policy of hiding the ugly details from us. Nice war only, please.

Replies From View


Sin Agog

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 13, 2019, 08:54:03 PM
what an odd idea. no. bad enough we have murder being done in our name without it being put on youtube by irresponsible do-gooders like assange.

again- appropriating this data from a government server & then dumping it, unvetted, onto the internet does NOT make assange a great journalist. I'd rather the governments of the world didn't commit atrocities like this, of course, but what assange & wikileaks have done has made no difference to them. & comparing this material to porn is not helpful.

Maybe vet your tykes' internet useage to the best of your ability, and then just hope that they don't go searching for helicopter snuff videos when you're not around.  And if they do, sit down and explain to them that we're all part of the geo-political landscape, and every time we lounge around at a cafe eating over-priced muffins while much of the drying-up world is engaged in desert warfare, we are making a political decision.  Developing an interest in the world outside their career and immediate family will likely serve them well in the future.

Also maybe teach them how it's wrong to shoot the messenger.

a duncandisorderly

Quote from: Sin Agog on April 13, 2019, 09:25:25 PM
Maybe vet your tykes' internet useage to the best of your ability, and then just hope that they don't go searching for helicopter snuff videos when you're not around.  And if they do, sit down and explain to them that we're all part of the geo-political landscape, and every time we lounge around at a cafe eating over-priced muffins while much of the drying-up world is engaged in desert warfare, we are making a political decision.  Developing an interest in the world outside their career and immediate family will likely serve them well in the future.

Also maybe teach them how it's wrong to shoot the messenger.

patronising & naive.

Buelligan

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 13, 2019, 08:54:03 PM
what an odd idea. no. bad enough we have murder being done in our name without it being put on youtube by irresponsible do-gooders like assange.

again- appropriating this data from a government server & then dumping it, unvetted, onto the internet does NOT make assange a great journalist. I'd rather the governments of the world didn't commit atrocities like this, of course, but what assange & wikileaks have done has made no difference to them. & comparing this material to porn is not helpful.

Why is it an odd idea?  I was actually comparing it in response to Simnock's fatuous post, but anyway if you're going to say it's not helpful, why not elaborate, why isn't it helpful?

And why is it cigs to murder people on the taxpayer's dime but Assange is bad because he's irresponsible (and a do-gooder to boot - what a cunt - a do-gooder, those are the absolute worst)?  How irresponsible is it to contribute to a multi-billion dollar war machine that's murdering families and just want it brushed under the carpet?

Sin Agog

Quote from: a duncandisorderly on April 13, 2019, 09:40:20 PM
patronising & naive.

Sorry. Was getting a bit piqued by the Helen Lovejoy stuff, but you're allowed to have your priorities.