Assange sentenced to 50 weeks in UK prison

a reply to: UKTruth

He's not a journalist. He is a hacker. Big difference.

a reply to: Goedhardt

Got to be better than the treatment he was receiving towards the end of his Ecuadorian Embassy escapade.

Don't think they will let his take his skateboard all the same.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

He's not a journalist. He is a hacker. Big difference.

What did he hack ?

a reply to: gortex

Did he not help someone else obtain a password or the like?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

He's not a journalist. He is a hacker. Big difference.

I dont care what he is.
If in any form Assange helped to show folks what Hillary was all about , Julian is OK in my book .
As he should be for any True US Citizen

Of course some folks have forgotten Mark Felt , Bob Woodward , and Carl Bernstein.

originally posted by: Gothmog
As he should be for any True US Citizen

Thought he is an Australian citizen, although he was also granted Ecuadorean citizenship. Not a US citizen.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: gortex

Did he not help someone else obtain a password or the like?

I don't know , perhaps a link would help.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Gothmog
As he should be for any True US Citizen

Thought he is an Australian citizen, although he was also granted Ecuadorean citizenship. Not a US citizen.

Gothmog didn't say he was a US citizen just that his efforts to expose government wrongdoing should be appreciated by US citizens , as it should by all of us who want to hold our governments to higher standards.

a reply to: gortex

Think i herd it on the NEWS.

Here you go through.

www.eff.org...

www.cyberscoop.com...

a reply to: andy06shake

Thanks for the links.

On top of that, as they have since the 1990s when they want to feed the “hacker madness” narrative, the prosecutors added unnecessary computer allegations to the indictment. The indictment mentions Manning’s use of the Linux operating system, darkly described as “special software . . . to access the computer file” that contained the password. It describes the use of a secure online chat service called Jabber. It even includes the fact that Manning used a “special folder” in Wikileaks’ cloud-based file transfer system. These facts are completely irrelevant to the single CFAA claim, but they, along with the Justice Department’s press release headline trumpeting Assange’s “hacking,” appear aimed at linking and even equating journalism and use of normal technical tools with the underlying crime.

From where we sit this prosecution feels sadly familiar. Just a few years ago this same statute was used by federal prosecutors to find something, anything, they could use to charge our friend Aaron Swartz. Swartz angered the government, first by downloading a bunch of judicial documents from the Pacer system and later, by downloading scientific journal articles from JSTOR. The government then continued the JSTOR prosecution even when JSTOR, the alleged victim, asked them to stop. Facing the CFAA’s draconian penalties, Swartz took his own life.
www.eff.org...

Seems like a spurious claim by the US to get Assange to me.

Julian is a journalist not a hacker , as evidenced in that article.

a reply to: gortex

This article is my favorite on the subject.

Glenn Greenwald used to be a constitutional lawyer, and along with Jeremy Scahill, broke the Snowden story.

Some highlights-

Most of the reports about the Assange indictment today have falsely suggested that the Trump DOJ discovered some sort of new evidence that proved Assange tried to help Manning hack through a password in order to use a different username to download documents. Aside from the fact that those attempts failed, none of this is new: As the last five paragraphs of this 2011 Politico story demonstrate, that Assange talked to Manning about ways to use a different username so as to avoid detection was part of Manning’s trial and was long known to the Obama DOJ when they decided not to prosecute.

Seeing as the Obama admin was one of the harshest admins to whistleblowers and journalists, that paragraph to me speaks volume.

Thus, even if one accepts all of the indictment’s claims as true, Assange was not trying to hack into new document files to which Manning had no access, but rather trying to help Manning avoid detection as a source. For that reason, the precedent that this case would set would be a devastating blow to investigative journalists and press freedom everywhere.

Journalists have an ethical obligation to take steps to protect their sources from retaliation, which sometimes includes granting them anonymity and employing technical measures to help ensure that their identity is not discovered. When journalists take source protection seriously, they strip metadata and redact information from documents before publishing them if that information could have been used to identify their source; they host cloud-based systems such as SecureDrop, now employed by dozens of major newsrooms around the world, that make it easier and safer for whistleblowers, who may be under surveillance, to send messages and classified documents to journalists without their employers knowing; and they use secure communication tools like Signal and set them to automatically delete messages.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

He's not a journalist. He is a hacker. Big difference.

actually, he didnt hack.. he published.

someone else hacked and leaked it to him..


thats the difference!

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: Agit8dChop

there is no way, after everything the US has said on the record.. that Julian Assange isnt destined for a US Court room.

He is not a US Citizen and is not subject to their laws. Would you be happy if your wife was handed over to an Islamic country for not wearing the head scarf? Do you want to be subject to every other countries laws?

This has always been nuts.

P

None of the prisoners on GITMO are US citizens either (well, 99%)... but they're destined for a US Courtroom

There's a new boss in town, I love Trump but this is horrible and he's made the wrong choice here.. but Trumps going to follow through and throw the book at Assange I now fear..

Na bro, you forget that the 'sides' have change, me thinks that Assange will become Trump's #1 supporter of various allegations, Assange was wanted by hitlary and co, and Trump's not playing for that team

"the enemy of My enemy is My friend" no?

a reply to: gortex

Gee you've sure drunk the MSM coolaid hey!

"hacker" lol

when? NOT during the past 25 yrs or more lol! Why don't You check your 'facts'?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

He's not a journalist. He is a hacker. Big difference.

and what exactly was the last thing he hacked?

your usernym is appropriate for that comment

a reply to: JohnnyJetson

Where did I say he is a hacker ?
Perhaps you should check your reading comprehension.

a reply to: gortex

Interesting to see where any extradition process leads all the same.

We did not give up Gary McKinnon to the U.S, but Assange is somewhat of a different kettle of fish, whether or not the charges he faces are trumped up or otherwise.

a reply to: andy06shake

Gary McKinnon had Asperger's on his side so couldn't be held responsible for his actions , Julian embarrassed the British and US governments by exposing their dirty little secrets so is a special case ripe for retribution.

I have no doubt Julian will be extradited as soon as he's finished his jail term here , I can't see how he can avoid it.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
actually, he didnt hack.. he published.

Isn't the central tenent of the current US extradition case based around Assanges assistance given to Chelsea Manning, in her attempt to hack, so that Manning could feed more secrets to Wikileaks. So, while he did not hack, he is alleged to have helped in attempts to hack.