Hacker News Reader

Comment by jnord | Hacker News Reader

29 pointsjnord31 comments

He's free to leave the embassy. It's hard to have any sympathy for wikileaks and Julian given his recent behavior.

Can you be more specific? Not disagreeing here but genuinely curious what behavior you’re referring to.

I'd guess working as an arm of Russian influence in the 2016 election. Wikileaks was originally marketed as a place for people to share documents or whistleblow things like the Snowden revelations. It's since become more of a way to try and hurt the US backed by whoever will support it with Assange giving others plausible deniability/cover.

I don’t think leaking all of the US diplomatic cables did much in term of whistleblowing, and Snowden did the precise opposite of wikileaks, ie not leak the whole information in bulk to the general public, including information that provides no benefit to the public.

You mean the DNC leaks?

Ecuador denied a Human Rights Watch visitor, and Assange's lawyers.

To be fair the article could be also titled AssangeS Lawyers to Stand Up to Defend his Human Rights which would give a different impression than the current headline.

I'm not defending everything Assange has done, but I also don't agree with your characterization.

There's nothing magical about HRW, which is simply an NGO like any other. It seems plain that Ecuador is going to expect discretion about who they allow in their own embassy, and plain that they don't want Assange squatting in it anymore. What's not to understand about the situation?

Eventually, Ecuador is going to boot him out of the embassy. It's kind of remarkable that they showed 6 years worth of forbearance. Does anyone expect him to make it to 7 years in there?

Does granting asylum mean you have to host someone in your embassy in a particular manner?

I get that he feels he isn't free to leave without consequence, but I'm not sure that means they have to host him in a particular manner.... or that he is free from consequences for other things while hosted.

As a follow-up, does Equador have to keep him? Why would they continue to grant him asylum if he causes them problems?

He's an Ecuadorian citizen now.

Does Ecuador's constitution guarantee its citizens the right to reside in its embassies?

Does any country's constitution do that?

Yes, that is my point. Just because he is their citizen does not mean they have to keep him in the embassy. (Subject to whatever laws govern such things, and to the extent Ecuador even has laws) they could put him out the door and say, "See you when you get home."

I find the whole situation so hilarious because Ecuador's government has such a shitty record on . . . everything, and they tried to make themselves look good by giving Assange asylum. Definitely a "dog catches car" type of situation, because in the long run it did them no good, and now their government is made to appear even more inept by being forced to house this ungrateful fool. He's suing them because they told him in no uncertain terms to clean up after his cat. They thought they would tweak the US and Britain by putting him up for a few weeks and it's turned into a years long joke.

This is pretty much what I think, as well.

No good deed goes unpunished.

It’s desperation. They want to throw him out and he knows it. He’s a manipulator, never trust anything coming from Assange

But everything he's said turned out to be true.

The propaganda smear campaign against assange wouldn't be so great if what he was saying wasn't accurate.

Governments want him silenced because he's telling the truth. Sure he may have his agenda, but everyone has an agenda. What's important is if the information is true.

"The propaganda smear campaign against assange wouldn't be so great if what he was saying wasn't accurate."

That doesn't make sense.

For Christs sake Julian, just clean your room. It doesn't take that long, and there will plenty of time to overthrow The World Order later.

>The embassy did remove Mr Assange's internet connection in March, accusing him of "interfering in other countries' affairs".

Since all states are always "interfering in other countries' affairs" this is essentially communicating: 'you have yet to transcend into our privileged, political class, you have less rights to speech than the political class'.

You can make an argument about Assange's moral value but his right to speak should not be infringed.

> The right to voice one’s opinion and express one’s thinking freely and in all of its forms and manifestations.[0]

Ecudaoran's constitutional right to speech does not appear to ensure a platform will be provided, only that one may express their voice and opinion freely and in all its forms and manifestations. Your thoughts?

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#E...

If you create a forum then free speech extends to it. Does Ecuador and its embassies have internet?

Sadly I think the legacy of this generation will be how little we will (historically) have appeared to care about Assange and Snowden.

Snowden got his leaks out... there's not much else to do with him.

Historically speaking folks who leak data aren't all that noteworthy outside that event.

Assange is something else, he has a specific agenda, he has proven to be deceptive and leaks what suits him.

Don't conflate Assange and Snowden. Snowden was a patriot who did a really poor job of whistle blowing. Assange is a self aggrandizing asshole and a waste of oxygen.

Was it intentional that you refer to Snowden in the past tense and Assange in the present?

Probably because Snowden had his passport revoked while in Moscow and can't really travel anywhere besides Russia until he gains citizenship somewhere, which obviously points out that he's no longer walking into NSA facilities between 9 and 5 and can't smuggle any more documents out. He did his act, and he's done.

Assange is still an asshole.

I am genuinely interested to know why you think this about Assange. References?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Rus...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Promotion_of_consp...

I guess I will take it that this (or this sort of thing) is what you're all using to base your negative opinions of Assange on?

He wasn't cleaning up after his cat. Is that what this is all about?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com