Julian Assange arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

James Clapper would have sent him straight to Gitmo. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Thats the thing, its documented that he was unsuccessful in his attempts to help Manning crack the password, so really he is charged with Conspiracy to commit computer hacking (or whatever the actual charge is).

Just leaving this here...

WikiLeaks on Ecuador

A deal has likely been made between the Trump admin and Ecuador's president to make this happen.

a reply to: lightedhype

That link is broken.

No work-ee.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: lightedhype

That link is broken.

No work-ee.

If you copy and paste it into a DuckDuckGo search it pulled up a good reddit thread with many links for me. Reddit linky, with lots more links inside.

You scratch my back, I scratch yours

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: face23785

Seriously? I guess we can throw out the charges against those Russians Mueller filed then.

Apples and oranges... But you can throw those out anyways considering Russia laughs when we ask for extradition of their citizens.

That's not how the law works bro.

Personally I think he falls under the protection of journalists. If he did assist in hacking, he will probably get in trouble... But if all he did was release information given to him for the interests of journalism... He's safe (assuming the laws get followed).

Apples and oranges? Foreign nationals charged with crimes they allegedly committed outside the US. What's different?

Were they operating under the capacity of journalists? No.

that right there creates two completely different set of laws.

Also I was initially replying to your post of wanting him to get nailed to the wall for leaking classified information, which isn't illegal... He is being charged with attempting to hack into a US gov computer.

That's actually irrelevant to the subject I was responding to. The implication in the post I was responding to was that foreign nationals who are outside the US when they commit their crimes can't be charged with crimes in the US. That's obviously false. Whether he's protected under the law as a journalist is an entirely separate issue.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Try this one

defend.wiki..._leaks.org/2019/04/03/ecuador-twists-embarrassing-ina-papers-into-pretext-to-oust-assange/

Subtract the underscore because ATS censorship!

a reply to: face23785

You're trying to compare espionage with journalism.

Apples and oranges.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: face23785

You're trying to compare espionage with journalism.

Apples and oranges.

I'm actually not. What I'm doing is saying that implying he can't be charged because he isn't a US citizen and he was outside the US at the time is false. It was a direct reply to this post.

If that statement were true, it wouldn't matter whether you were a journalist or a spy, you couldn't be charged regardless. That's false. You're conflating two separate issues.

a reply to: face23785

I was replying to you when you said

Indiscriminate leaking of classified material is not protected. He needs to face the consequences.

That's not illegal for a foreign journalist to do if they didn't steal it.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: face23785

I was replying to you when you said

Indiscriminate leaking of classified material is not protected. He needs to face the consequences.

That's not illegal for a foreign journalist to do if they didn't steal it.

Which is precisely what he's accused of doing. That's still irrelevant to the singular point of whether the implication that non-citizens can't be charged with crimes they committed elsewhere is true or not. If that were true, your profession would matter precisely zero, hence my reference to the Mueller charges against Russians. You can't have it both ways. Foreign nationals are either immune to prosecution here or they're not. Whether he is entitled to protection as a journalist is an entirely separate issue.

Keep redd eye on it :-)

originally posted by: BlueAjah

This makes sense. The timing with the end of the Mueller investigation and the pending investigations of those involved in the Russia hoax is very interesting.

I really, really hope that they question him about what he knows about Seth Rich.

It would be great to hear any truth regarding Seth Rich, for sure.

And curiously enough a judge in London has just found Assange
guilty of breaching bail, and faces just 12 months for that.

He could be a free man in no time at all, then what?

It will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out, for sure.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: uncommitted

The fact that Manning is currently in solitary due to refusing to testify against WikiLeaks and now Assange has been arrested.

Fair point, but puzzled about what you mean by timing, that's all.

The indictment claims that Manning provided Assange with part of the password only after she “had already provided WikiLeaks with hundreds of thousands of classified records,” related to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Julian Assange Arrested in London After Ecuador Withdraws Asylum; U.S. Requests Extradition

The Forever War on ... err... for freedom strikes back!

#Lock Him Up
#Fck The UN
#Best Lenin Ever

Can I have a Q-tip for that? And an amen? No? C'mon!

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Interesting stuff there J&C.



a reply to: ManyMasks

He's been in a voluntary prison for 7 years yet if he gets convicted of his crime he's looking at upto 5 years, is he stupid or is there more to it.
I'm gonna say he's not stupid.

Very salient point there MM.

Since the time that Sweden dropped the charges against him,
he was only facing the known charge from the U.K. on bail.

It was said that he was afraid of being arrested by the U.S.
but strangely enough this grand jury thing with Manning
is just very recent. His attorney's would have known
that the skipping bail thing carried such a small sentence
of 12 months....really makes me wonder why he would have
self confined to a small room for seven years.

Math just doesn't add up...

a reply to: face23785

Apples and oranges? Foreign nationals charged with crimes they allegedly committed outside the US. What's different?

Nothing. Both cases violate the territorial princicple enshrined in international public law.
Unfortunately the US decided long ago to ignore it.
Read up on Alfred Zehe, a East German physicist sentenced to 8 years in prison in 1985 for espionage conducted in Mexico.

According to a BBC reporter who was at the court hearing Julian still had and was reading the Gore Vidal book during the hearing , it seems likely Julian was expecting the arrest and was prepared for it hence the book.

Its this that worries me more.

Ben Wizner, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Project on Speech, Privacy, and Technology, said any prosecution of Assange for WikiLeaks' publishing operations by the U.S. would be "unprecedented and unconstitutional" and that it would "open the door to criminal investigations of other news organizations. Moreover, prosecuting a foreign publisher for violating U.S. secrecy laws would set an especially dangerous precedent for U.S. journalists, who routinely violate foreign secrecy laws to deliver information vital to the public's interest," Wizner said in a statement.

Source

This just opens the door even more for the global cabal to keep people from the truth. The final nail in the coffin for journalistic freedom and truth for the public. I wouldn't be surprised if Snowden was next within a few years. One by one, gone...until all you'll have is state run news like it is in North Korea.

originally posted by: mightmight

a reply to: face23785

Apples and oranges? Foreign nationals charged with crimes they allegedly committed outside the US. What's different?

Nothing. Both cases violate the territorial princicple enshrined in international public law.
Unfortunately the US decided long ago to ignore it.
Read up on Alfred Zehe, a East German physicist sentenced to 8 years in prison in 1985 for espionage conducted in Mexico.

That's actually not true.

It's been established since the 20s that nations can enforce their law internationally under certain circumstances. Specifically if the action affect's a nation or its citizens.

The Lotus Case was a key court ruling on the territoriality principle. In 1926, a French vessel collided with a Turkish vessel, causing the death of several Turkish nationals. The Permanent Court of International Justice ruled that Turkey had jurisdiction to try the French naval lieutenant for criminal negligence, even though the incident happened beyond Turkey’s boundaries. This case extended the territoriality principle to cover cases that happen outside a state’s boundaries, but have a substantial effect on the state’s interests or involve its citizens.

Linky

Obviously assisting someone in hacking into a classified US system, as Assange is alleged to have done, has a substantial effect on the state's interests.