Generational.EP40 Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: well said. He's going try, and he'll get lots of help too, to use a 1st amendment defence. But its not a free speech issue that he's going to be charged for, its likely going to be conspiracy related to breaking into a government computer by providing password hacking software and/or assistance. No journalist would ever get away with actively being part of theft of information like that. Its one thing to speak about things, or release a document that you received anonymously, its another to be part of the theft. Not only that, as you point out he helps whatever side is best for him. We have no idea what he's withheld either, so we all might have been played for years on what he chose to release or not. There's no hero here. The question becomes, is he worse than the politicians that get exposed that otherwise probably would never have? I think RupertKBD put it best. These criminal politicians have self serving laws in place to protect themselves from whistle blowers like this. That doesn’t make the laws perfect. They’re there and passed by those people to deflect from their own doings which is the real problem. I agree it is a grey area but don’t get these laws/politicians get the benefit of the doubt when they’re the ones who’ve done wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, Generational.EP40 said: The question becomes, is he worse than the politicians that get exposed that otherwise probably would never have? I think RupertKBD put it best. These criminal politicians have self serving laws in place to protect themselves from whistle blowers like this. That doesn’t make the laws perfect. They’re there and passed by those people to deflect from their own doings which is the real problem. I agree it is a grey area but don’t get these laws/politicians get the benefit of the doubt when they’re the ones who’ve done wrong. maybe in the court of public opinion. Not all politicians are scumbags, many actually do a good job. And we get to vote them out. Wikileaks isn't a democracy. They pick and choose what to release and have likely been involved in crimes to obtain information. I don't see how that makes them better than anyone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Just now, Jimmy McGill said: maybe in the court of public opinion. Not all politicians are scumbags, many actually do a good job. And we get to vote them out. Wikileaks isn't a democracy. They pick and choose what to release and have likely been involved in crimes to obtain information. I don't see how that makes them better than anyone. And what about the revelation of information that the US were engaged in illegal surveillance of citizens? Are we just going to disregard it because someone leaked the information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said: I might be in the minority on this, but I don't see this character as any kind of hero, or Snowden either. Assange was an information broker far more than a "journalist" imo, and Snowden was happy to release classified files that he admitted that he had no idea what was in them, which makes him a dangerous fool. I see Assange as a heartless info dealer, but I do think Snowden actually believed he was doing the right thing.......a fool, absolutely, but I don't think he had malicious intent. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 1 minute ago, stawns said: I see Assange as a heartless info dealer, but I do think Snowden actually believed he was doing the right thing.......a fool, absolutely, but I don't think he had malicious intent. thats probably true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, Dazzle said: And what about the revelation of information that the US were engaged in illegal surveillance of citizens? Are we just going to disregard it because someone leaked the information? No one said disregard the information, you have to do something with it once its out. But you can't justify criminal activity to be able to obtain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedestroyerofworlds Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Virginia FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, April 11, 2019 WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer. According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States. 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. During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange 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. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.” Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. G. Zachary Terwilliger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, John C. Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, and Nancy McNamara, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, made the announcement after the charges were unsealed. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kellen S. Dwyer, Thomas W. Traxler and Gordon D. Kromberg, and Trial Attorneys Matthew R. Walczewski and Nicholas O. Hunter of the Justice Department’s National Security Division are prosecuting the case. The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs. A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. Related court documents and information are located on the website of the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia or on PACER by searching for Case No. 1:18-cr-111. An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court. Attachment(s): Download assange_indictment.pdf Topic(s): Cyber Crime National Security Component(s): USAO - Virginia, Eastern Contact: Joshua Stueve Director of Communications joshua.stueve@usdoj.gov Updated April 11, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 The real question is will Assange now be used as a negotiating tool by the US similar to how I suspect the arrest of the Huawei CFO is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 59 minutes ago, Generational.EP40 said: The question becomes, is he worse than the politicians that get exposed that otherwise probably would never have? I think RupertKBD put it best. These criminal politicians have self serving laws in place to protect themselves from whistle blowers like this. That doesn’t make the laws perfect. They’re there and passed by those people to deflect from their own doings which is the real problem. I agree it is a grey area but don’t get these laws/politicians get the benefit of the doubt when they’re the ones who’ve done wrong. No he is not worse. BUT, as indicated below while at first his motives were entirely altruistic and in the manner of truth telling for the sake of the truth being told, it very quickly became a simple release of info to damage specific people while not releasing any potential info on others. As was also reported the leaked info leading up to the campaign was not part of the original trove of Manning/Assange but instead came from "other sources" as per id and digital address. Meaning while he was working for the better good once, he certainly became very self serving in short order 49 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: maybe in the court of public opinion. Not all politicians are scumbags, many actually do a good job. And we get to vote them out. Wikileaks isn't a democracy. They pick and choose what to release and have likely been involved in crimes to obtain information. I don't see how that makes them better than anyone. Exactly. Had they released all the data on everyone instead of picking and choosing who and when they wouldn't look so bad. I think the common person was entirely behind it at first but once a very clear bias was shown in regards to who the data was about and when it was released and why it was obvious that the genuine motives had shifted from exposing the truth for the people to exposing the truth of some for the betterment of other 47 minutes ago, Dazzle said: And what about the revelation of information that the US were engaged in illegal surveillance of citizens? Are we just going to disregard it because someone leaked the information? Absolutely not. That info was the godsend of the year and Assange did the world a favour showing everyone visible proof of what we already knew. The source is never as important as the message which is why it is so galling how simpletons mumble fake news or brush off a very clear story simply based on who is delivering it. Facts are facts, they don't care about bias 14 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Virginia FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, April 11, 2019 WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer. According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States. 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. During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange 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. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.” Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. G. Zachary Terwilliger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, John C. Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, and Nancy McNamara, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, made the announcement after the charges were unsealed. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kellen S. Dwyer, Thomas W. Traxler and Gordon D. Kromberg, and Trial Attorneys Matthew R. Walczewski and Nicholas O. Hunter of the Justice Department’s National Security Division are prosecuting the case. The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs. A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. Related court documents and information are located on the website of the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia or on PACER by searching for Case No. 1:18-cr-111. An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court. Attachment(s): Download assange_indictment.pdf Topic(s): Cyber Crime National Security Component(s): USAO - Virginia, Eastern Contact: Joshua Stueve Director of Communications joshua.stueve@usdoj.gov Updated April 11, 2019 I have serious issues with the bolded. If you leave your car unlocked, with keys inside of it, leave your home open for intrusion insurance companies will shrug their shoulders and say ya shoulda known better. Mannin didn't crack anything, he/she HAD access. They simply took the data that was there and passed it to a willing distributor. That being said, they also have to get Assange to America first. the UK and Sweden both have rights over him first although I am very much doubting Sweden cares about disproven rape allegations now that he is in custody 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 15 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said: The real question is will Assange now be used as a negotiating tool by the US similar to how I suspect the arrest of the Huawei CFO is? Unlikely, the US has little gain from the UK and with BREXIT being the mess it is the UK has little leverage in him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Tinfoil time: Assange's 'deadman switches' are being activated in order to bring down the US deep state. Obama and his entire administration appear guilty as all hell in this spying on Trump stuff. Arresting Assange assures a whole bunch of cans of worms are opened. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Get ready to hear a LOT more about this guy, btw. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 He'd better not get too close to Trump in that get up.... ...he'll be groped to within an inch of his life... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 40 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: He'd better not get too close to Trump in that get up.... ...he'll be groped to within an inch of his life... He's dead. Almost 100% chance he is the guy that sent the DNC data to Wikileaks. Won't say his name, will let you discover it for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Does mean the Russian urinating tapes will be released? Not that I'm interested in watching.....errrrr, I'm asking for a friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Does mean the Russian urinating tapes will be released? Not that I'm interested in watching.....errrrr, I'm asking for a friend. Probably not, but if your "friend" is that interested, here's an idea of what it might look like: 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butters Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 2 hours ago, Dazzle said: And what about the revelation of information that the US were engaged in illegal surveillance of citizens? Are we just going to disregard it because someone leaked the information? whatabouting - because the USA did bad stuff, that means we should overlook wikileaks doing bad stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butters Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 9 hours ago, Lancaster said: He will be "suicided" while in custody.... so I guess RIP to him. and when he isn't, your conspiratorial world view won't change at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: I have serious issues with the bolded. If you leave your car unlocked, with keys inside of it, leave your home open for intrusion insurance companies will shrug their shoulders and say ya shoulda known better. Mannin didn't crack anything, he/she HAD access. They simply took the data that was there and passed it to a willing distributor. That being said, they also have to get Assange to America first. the UK and Sweden both have rights over him first although I am very much doubting Sweden cares about disproven rape allegations now that he is in custody i have serious issues with your analysis if i have an employee who i let use a work vehicle and through fraud they sell it or use it to enact a crime how is that a serious breach by an employer? life always involves some degree of trust and risk otherwise your employee can never touch any of your gear/tools, vehicles, access your computers, etc that appears to be what you are suggesting? how would much meaningful work get done? Edited April 11, 2019 by coastal.view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 It's what happens when truth is spoken to power. Dangerous to reveal info on the MIC. Becoming a more Orwellian society by the day. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now