[HN Gopher] The Assange Case Is Collapsing - But It Remains a Tr...
___________________________________________________________________
The Assange Case Is Collapsing - But It Remains a Travesty of
Justice
Author : thinkingemote
Score : 160 points
Date : 2021-07-25 20:06 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (tribunemag.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (tribunemag.co.uk)
| lmilcin wrote:
| The point isn't really to have a believable case.
|
| The point is to use legal system to ruin one person to scare any
| people from running similar actions against US government.
|
| US is loosing more and more of its standing when it comes to
| "spreading" democracy. You can't go and try to preach democratic
| values to, say, Belarus, and then do exactly the same in your own
| country.
|
| Principles aren't really principles if they are being tossed
| aside when they become uncomfortable.
| [deleted]
| bronzeage wrote:
| Maybe it's because the US isn't really a democracy:
| https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
|
| Maybe the reason for that is that the US electoral system is
| ripe for fraud by election officials, with opaque processes
| like mail ballots and electronic voting.
|
| The US spreads only one thing: capitalism. If your democratic
| government decided to nationalize the oil fields, don't be
| surprised if the US turns you into a dictatorship (see the Iran
| coup of 1953.)
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| >The point is to use legal system to ruin one person to scare
| any people from running similar actions against US government.
|
| Source please?
| lmilcin wrote:
| Would you like me to find a link where US Government
| officially admits to pressuring foreign countries and abusing
| justice system to prevent people from publishing materials
| showing US Government wrongdoing?
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Unlikely but that doesn't make your claim true.
|
| Tangentially- what do you think about whistleblower
| protections where you are protected by law for reporting
| govt wrongdoing?
| salawat wrote:
| Those are all fine and good when you're an employee. When
| you're not affiliated directly with the United States at
| all, and we're a means to an end though is where the
| consternation comes in, and where the U.S. really gave
| themselves a black eye with Assange.
| lmilcin wrote:
| They are as good as separation between judicial and
| executive branches.
|
| When your judicial branch does what executive wants then
| there is no protection
| guilhas wrote:
| Every link pointing to the story of any USA whistleblower
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Nope.
| bamboozled wrote:
| It's funny, when it comes to something like, vaccines, we're
| supposed to trust "government institutions".
|
| Then I wake up to this and I wonder, why should I t trust the
| government ?
| craftinator wrote:
| If "trusting the government" is the reason you are taking a
| vaccine, you don't know enough about history, current events,
| or medicine. Any government, as a whole, is stupid and slow.
| But even stupid institutions can get things right when they
| are obvious enough. When they do, it doesn't mean you should
| start trusting them.
|
| Simple understandings of biology and medicine should inform
| you that taking a vaccine to the worst pandemic in living
| memory is the right course of action.
| lmilcin wrote:
| When it comes to vaccines, you don't necessarily have to
| trust government institutions.
|
| If you are normal, adult, educated person you don't need to
| "trust" the government for everything. You should hopefully
| be able to think for yourself and be able to evaluate when
| the story checks out and where it doesn't.
|
| Trust knowledge that has been gathered over decades,
| statistics and research that has been gathered by many
| research institutions (unless you can claim all of them are
| in collusion). Vaccines _do_ work and we desperately need
| everybody to get vaccinated. Every country that has
| implemented vaccinations vigorously has seen immediate, large
| drop in cases. People who are going to hospital at the moment
| are almost exclusively unvaccinated.
|
| A person or institution or government that shows it is not
| trustworthy in one area undermines itself in other areas and
| so it is understandable that it may sow confusion. But you
| should still have ability to think for yourself and use it to
| make rational decisons.
| version_five wrote:
| There are two separate ideas here. Believing in the concept
| of a vaccine as an effective disease prevention mechanism,
| and believing the current narrative that all demographics
| need a covid vaccine, the risk reward calculus always shows
| it does more good than harm, etc (I'm not trying to
| faithfully summarize, but more make the point that there is
| a distinct and political covid vaccine push that's not the
| same as just saying a vaccine works)
|
| I personally had to suspend my mistrust of the government
| in order to decide it was worth getting vaccinated. A good
| rule of thumb is that the more someone tries to push you to
| do something, the more you should question their motives.
| And governments that have mismanaged and lied about
| everything else they do, like you say, have no reason to be
| trusted on this one thing, even if its generally popular.
|
| So it's not surprising that people who do believe that
| vaccines work (which is really not up for debate) may not
| agree with the putative urgency of getting this vaccine.
|
| Should just add that I don't really think there is anything
| we can do about this mistrust this time around. You get
| credibility by acting like you have people's interests in
| mind, and like you know what you're doing, so it would take
| a long spell of that before folks have any real reason to
| take what we are told at face value.
| lmilcin wrote:
| > A good rule of thumb is that the more someone tries to
| push you to do something, the more you should question
| their motives.
|
| It is a rule of thumb. Not a universal law.
|
| I hope you are not questioning the motives for having
| traffic rules. Or motives of your wife asking you to
| avoid a particularly dangerous place when coming back
| from work.
| version_five wrote:
| > traffic rules
|
| I think you're probably trying for one of those moral
| relativism fallacies (why don't we just go around killing
| people?) but you actually picked a ridiculously easy
| target that supports my point. How many instances are
| there of speed limits being set to create speed traps
| rather than to actually promote safety? Or set based on
| oil embargoes in the 70s and just left there? Or rules
| based on nimbyism and not wanting traffic in certain
| neighborhoods? Or lights timed to catch people at red
| light cams. This is all off the top of my head, I'm sure
| I could go on, but we should definitely be skeptical that
| many traffic rules are made "for our safety" and not for
| some other agenda, good point!
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > How many instances are there of speed limits being set
| to create speed traps rather than to actually promote
| safety?
|
| I don't know. How many are there?
| peter422 wrote:
| The apolitical government agencies lie a lot less than
| you are implying.
|
| You also seem to be implying if the government is pushing
| something than it is safer to do the opposite. Go outside
| during tornado warnings? Spend all day outside if they
| forecast extreme heat? Ignore a mandatory evacuation if a
| hurricane is coming? Keep your seat belt unbuckled? Fly
| on an unlicensed airline?
|
| Exactly when should you ignore the gov't and when should
| you listen?
| christophilus wrote:
| Vaccines that have been through clinical trials and
| approved by the FDA generally work. I'm fully vaccinated,
| but you have to admit that there's a difference between the
| COVID vaccine and other vaccines-- not just in terms of
| development and deployment speed, but also in terms of
| underlying technology, at least in some cases. Skepticism
| is a reasonable default stance for most things, emergency
| measures included.
| lmilcin wrote:
| Everything in life is a tradeoff.
|
| If you remember, vaccines were developed under enormous
| pressure and every day of delay meant literally tens of
| thousands of people dying across the world.
|
| So the uncertainties about these vaccines must be
| weighted against the situation in which they came to be.
|
| Fortunately, the doubt against vaccines seems to be
| largely unfounded and it is easily evidenced by drops in
| death rates in all countries that implemented
| vaccinations.
| threeseed wrote:
| > but also in terms of underlying technology
|
| AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Sinovac, Sputnik etc all
| use existing vaccine approaches.
|
| And collectively represent the most widely used vaccines.
| 13415 wrote:
| Using your brain to differentiate between completely
| unrelated topics helps.
| cartoonworld wrote:
| Given the thousands of US Mil installations all across the
| globe, foreign intervention and police actions, geopolitical
| intrigue, etc it is unfortunately looking more and more like a
| Pax Romana -- a troubling sign, depending on your perspective.
| indymike wrote:
| > Given the thousands of US Mil installations all across the
| globe
|
| There are only 750-800 US military installations around the
| world. Most of these are small. This number has been reduced
| by about 1000 since the peak in the 1980s (cold war era). The
| majority of large installations are in the US.
| mixedCase wrote:
| "only" is an interesting choice of word. Which other
| countries have comparably sized deployments (with numbers)?
| indymike wrote:
| >Which other countries have comparably sized deployments
| (with numbers)
|
| "only" was used because the op said "thousands".
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Yes even going back to Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt
| rewrote his drafts of his speech to obscure the fact that the
| Philippines, a major site of the attack, was also a US
| colony.
|
| "How to Hide an Empire", Daniel Immerwahr
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaKOOqXDnqA
| cartoonworld wrote:
| Interesting, thanks.
|
| I just read this post on Popehat[0] recounting an event
| while Ken White was working for an LA federal judge back in
| the day. He was brought to a ceremony conducted by Judge
| Ronald S.W. Lew where numerous, VERY elderly Filipino WW2
| veterans were granted US Citizenship. This was promised to
| them in addition to veteran's benefits by FDR in exchange
| for recruitment into the war effort, and after the war
| quietly swept under the rug by the congress.
|
| [0] - https://www.popehat.com/2020/07/04/the-fourth-of-
| july-rerun/
| fungiblecog wrote:
| Indeed the whole point of principles is that you keep them when
| it isn't to your immediate benefit.
|
| That's why "Corporate Values" are so empty. They get tossed as
| soon as they conflict with the profit motive. Google's "don't
| be evil" being the classic example.
| lmilcin wrote:
| It is a universal law, known and understood subconsciously in
| many different ways.
|
| Here in Poland we have a saying "you get to know a real
| friend in bad (times)" (Prawdziwego przyjaciela poznaje sie w
| biedzie).
|
| When you feel the values or friendship will not stand the
| test you will not invest yourself in it and it becomes empty
| words.
|
| Just as democratic values that are set aside when it doesn't
| exactly align with profit or power goals.
|
| People will not stand for something they believe to just be
| empty words and that's why things like Assange case are so
| damaging to democracy.
| sebow wrote:
| The damage has been already done, when "push came to shove", the
| 'MSM & buddies' were covering for the exposed governments(might
| aswell call them 'globalists' since we're talking about 4
| continents or more) and the people swallowed it down pretty
| effortlessly.
|
| Despite appearances, the world is very, very different from ~10
| years ago, and I'm personally sure it's for worse.I doubt people
| will get the courage and guts to make some noise and raise their
| voices, there are systems that can be tyrannical as they are
| "useful" for whatever minuscule concern the citizens have
| disguised as public/nation safety.
| kaliali wrote:
| Listen up peasants, this is a prime example of why you can't
| trust the government.
|
| For all of you leftists out there, I hope you get the same
| treatment or worse as Assange got for voting in authoritarianism.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I, for one, disagree that it has been a travesty of justice. The
| only travesty is that Assange has not stood trial.
| hkt wrote:
| I really wish the West wasn't so hypocritical. Between Assange,
| Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, we show all the wrong people what to do.
| A pity and a shame. I hope Assange is freed soon and can get on
| with his life.
| markx2 wrote:
| The Guardian (UK), which made much of Assange's revelations
| currently has these two phrases as part of it's campaign to raise
| funds.
|
| "With the funding of more than 1.5 million readers in 180
| countries, the Guardian remains open to all and fiercely
| independent, and can continue chasing the truth." (Front page
| promo)
|
| "Because of our independence, we are able to investigate boldly,
| putting the truth ahead of the agenda of an owner, investors or
| shareholders. And because we are reader-funded we have been able
| to keep our journalism open for all to read, so when important
| stories like this come along, everyone gets to read them."
| Katherine Viner - Editor-in-Chief
|
| Katherine Viner is a liar.
| brokenengineer wrote:
| >Katherine Viner is a liar.
|
| Am I missing something here?
|
| After reading the article I've been unable to see how this
| relates (or necessarily is correct, but that's another matter)
| to the link.
|
| Could you please elaborate?
| mandmandam wrote:
| Glad to see I'm not the only one who finds those taglines
| galling.
|
| Lost my last shred of respect/hope for the Guardian when they
| did their level best to smear Corbyn in favour of BJ.
|
| Around 2015 they got suddenly and noticably (even) worse, axing
| Pilger and others like him.
|
| Even before that, their ME coverage was savagely lacking.
| Natsu wrote:
| I think a document was leaked somewhere that said they'd move him
| from country to country to face charges, making the process
| itself the punishment rather than letting the cases conclude. I
| doubt he'll ever be free again.
| landemva wrote:
| Much like USA does in federal prison to harass certain inmates.
| This was named "diesel therapy."
| https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/08/15/the-federal-pr...
| theknocker wrote:
| If you agree with the treatment of Assange, it's because you're
| either a literal fascist or because you let fascists tell you
| what to think. Those are the options.
| holoduke wrote:
| Nah. Ignorance is what it is. The US is a lying country with
| lots of hidden agendas. Not sure there are better alternatives.
| landemva wrote:
| A good start would be to defund 1/2 the federal government.
| They have too much money, so they create worldwide problems.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Those are the options_
|
| No, they're not. One can disagree with his treatment and
| disagree with his conduct.
| christophilus wrote:
| Agreed. I have no opinion on his conduct, but his treatment
| is appalling-- criminal, even-- by any reasonable standard.
| jpgvm wrote:
| He never said anything about agreeing or disagreeing with his
| conduct.
|
| I disagree with his conduct but I could never condone his
| treatment because yes, fundamentally the actions of the US
| government here are as close to fascism as we see in the
| modern age.
|
| It's putting international justice to shame.
|
| If they don't have a sound case then he shouldn't be
| persecuted until such time they do. If he truly committed a
| crime there must be evidence, they should find it and bring
| proceedings against him in a fair manner.
|
| Unfortunately there is little evidence to suggest the US
| government is interested in a fair trial and much more that
| they are just being punitive to trying make an example of
| him.
|
| It's disgraceful and we should demand better.
| lhnz wrote:
| What happens when the US government's whole case against Assange
| collapses? Presumably they will find another unreliable witness
| to lie for them?
|
| It's incredibly worrying that this he has been trapped in this
| situation for so many years, with the prosecution seemingly
| having the upper hand despite supporting their case with lies.
| [deleted]
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _What happens when the US government 's whole case against
| Assange collapses?_
|
| He walks a free man. Problematic as the American justice system
| is, Assange's isolation was a function of his fugitive status.
| Nothing about U.S. detention _per se_.
|
| It's high time, either way, for both sides to be heard in
| court.
| himinlomax wrote:
| His current isolation has nothing to do with being a fugitive
| and everything to do with the US extradition request.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > It's high time, either way, for both sides to be heard in
| court.
|
| This is one of those positions that is designed to sound
| reasonable by appealing to "the middle ground" for its own
| sake.
|
| It's not time for both sides to be heard in court. It never
| was. To bring someone into court, you need to make the case
| that they did something wrong _first_.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _To bring someone into court, you need to make the case
| that they did something wrong first_
|
| I'm not a fan of our espionage laws. But they are,
| indisputably, laws. There has been a lot of evaluation of
| the questions of jurisdiction and standing. Barring wild,
| new evidence, I don't see good reason to question that
| string of precedence.
| jessaustin wrote:
| Espionage is a political crime, so it is not a valid
| justification for extradition from a civilized nation.
| pydry wrote:
| It _is_ a little awkward that your "espionage" laws give
| free reign to the state to punish journalists in a
| different country for doing journalism.
|
| The laws that do this are indisputably laws, as you say.
| a1369209993 wrote:
| Espionage laws are void (per the first amendment), and
| hence not relevant to _legitimate_ court cases
| (regardless of how much existing practice fails to
| respect that). One could perhaps argue that he incited
| Manning to violate employment-related nondiclosure
| agreements, but in addition to being iffy on the face of
| it, AFAIK no has actually _made_ such a argument
| separately from the anti-free-press-laws argument.
| ramtatatam wrote:
| I am not following this case to the tiniest detail but I
| remember, when Assange was originally extracted from the
| embassy it was advertised that primary charges are around
| some sexual assault - if I remember correctly these
| charges had been dropped..
| supergirl wrote:
| the CIA probably has a deck of "witnesses". I bet next theme of
| accusations will be something related to Russia
| supergirl wrote:
| Assange will die in prison. it's ridiculous that he is still in
| prison waiting for US to appeal. the previous trial was in his
| favor but he is still in prison awaiting the US gov to appeal.
| it's like the US typed in cheat codes.
| shapefrog wrote:
| He did skip out on bail the last time he was released. Fool me
| once ...
| lielielielie wrote:
| Oh yes because the reason Assange gave for not going to
| Sweden was to avoid extradition to the US, something HN said
| was 'conspiracy theory', now proven conspiracy fact.
|
| These people know nothing of justice, only power and
| violence.
| pydry wrote:
| Remember when he repeatedly said he'd happily face the
| charges if he could be given assurances he wouldn't be
| extradited to the US for spying once he got there?
|
| And Sweden was like "uhmmmm.... nope, we need to leave that
| option open" and people made fun of him for being paranoid.
|
| Correa gave him asylum for a reason. It's too bad Moreno
| decided to cancel the asylum to score some points with the
| US.
| firebaze wrote:
| German press stays silent on this, again. Even magazines known
| for investigative stories just don't mention Assange in the
| context of the recent developments ([1], [2], [3]). This is so
| frustrating.
|
| [1] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-
| b-d&q=site%3Asp...
|
| [2] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-
| b-d&q=site%3Aze...
|
| [3] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-
| b-d&q=site%3Ata...
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _German press stays silent on this, again_
|
| It's not pertinent. The journalistic draw of a years-old case
| and judicial mechanics. Everyone has a pet agenda that seems
| irresponsibly ignored by the media and the public. Procedural
| developments are rarely big news.
| pydry wrote:
| They thought Navalny's 45th birthday was news.
|
| They'd assuredly have thought this was news if it were about
| Navalny.
|
| Sometimes media outlets have an agenda.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > Sometimes media outlets have an agenda.
|
| No. They _always_ have an agenda. And that agenda,
| overwhelmingly, is pro status quo. Not left, not right, not
| up or down. Just "things are basically OK except for a few
| problems here and there which we'll tell you about, though
| not in much depth".
| firebaze wrote:
| Just focusing on Assange alone, it's not pertinent, sure. But
| Assange (and wikileaks, and anything behind it) in this (my?)
| frame of reference is not an individual, but serves as a pars
| pro toto for the freedom of press and the judicial system as
| a whole.
|
| To me, the coverage he gets in the far-reaching magazines is
| a little bit underrepresented, to stay polite. This includes
| U.S. press, UK press and german press.
| detaro wrote:
| DW was the most mainstream coverage I saw:
| https://www.dw.com/de/hoffnungsschimmer-f%C3%BCr-julian-assa...
| firebaze wrote:
| Yes, DW is among the few who mostly report fairly. On the
| other hand, DW in germany is almost non-existent for ~95% of
| the populace.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| Two somewhat related pieces of recent UK news:
|
| > _How a proposed secrecy law would recast journalism as spying_
| [1] (20/07/21, Guardian)
|
| > The Home Office now wants harder and more extensive secrecy
| laws that would have the effect of deterring sources, editors and
| reporters, making them potentially subject to uncontrolled
| official bans not approved by a court, and punished much more
| severely if they do not comply. In noisy political times, a
| government consultation issued two months ago has had worryingly
| little attention. Although portrayed as countering hostile
| activity by state actors, the new laws would, if passed, ensnare
| journalists and sources whose job is reporting "unauthorised
| disclosures" that are in the public interest.
|
| > Endorsed by the home secretary, Priti Patel, the consultation
| argues that press disclosures can be worse than spying, because
| the work of a foreign spy "will often only be to the benefit of a
| single state or actor".
|
| > Calling for parliament to consider "increased maximum
| sentences", the Home Office claims that there is now not
| necessarily a "distinction in severity between espionage and the
| most serious unauthorised disclosures", including "onward
| disclosure" in the press. Journalism could even create "far more
| serious damage" than a spy. Yet the 66-page document does not
| mention "journalism" once, and refers only to "onward disclosure
| ... without authorisation".
|
| -----
|
| > _Priti Patel is urged to spare a billionaire dubbed 'Britain's
| Bill Gates' from a 'grotesque and unjust' extradition to US_[2]
| (25/7/21, Mail Online)
|
| Interesting for the plea made by Conservative ex-cabinet-minister
| David Davis on behalf of the beset billionaire, in terms which
| (though he would never allow it) could just as well be applied to
| Assange:
|
| > America has a ferocious legal system with a 97 per cent
| conviction rate, where prosecutors, not judges, set the
| sentences. Defendants, too, are subjected to coercive plea
| bargaining. For example, people are encouraged to admit an
| offence and get a lesser jail sentence rather than continue to
| plead innocence and, if convicted, get a much longer term.
|
| and later:
|
| > He ended up in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day in a
| Pennsylvania penitentiary, without a clock and thus unable to
| know what time of day or night it was.
|
| > He and his co-charged were treated like criminals long before
| any trial began - placed in chains, frog-marched and strip-
| searched.
|
| > It is now up to the Home Secretary to decide whether Dr Lynch
| should stay in this country or be sent to a US cell.
|
| > I, and many others, urge Priti Patel not to submit to this
| grotesque and unjust process. She must wait for the outcome of a
| separate High Court trial examining the fraud allegations against
| Dr Lynch.
|
| I'd love to see just one member of the British Government stand
| up for Assange like that, but I guessing he is lacking the PS8B
| collateral of Dr. Lynch.
|
| 1:
| https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/20/propos...
|
| 2: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9822229/Priti-
| Patel...
| supergirl wrote:
| shameful that his home country is doing nothing for him. imagine
| he was a US citizen who leaked Australia's dirty doings. he would
| be free after 1 month.
| morelieslies wrote:
| Yeah because Snowden and Chelsea Manning are free US
| citizens...
|
| People on HN are so full of propaganda and lies, it's shameful.
| Delete me, you're all empty slaves.
| [deleted]
| 0110101001 wrote:
| Chelsea Manning is indeed a free US citizen.
| jessaustin wrote:
| In some sense, so is Snowden.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-25 23:01 UTC)