According to Julian's lawyers it's a violation of international law. [1]
[1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1127706444185448449
[1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1127706444185448449
Or investigative journalism in general, often in dangerous conditions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daphne_Caruana_Galizia
What is the value of dissent and all the prestensions around democracy and human rights when people are being openly persecuted, it seems only dissent in non western countries is valid at which point europe, the free press, ngos and academics will line up with drums and megaphones to lecture everyone on the importance of 'freedom, democracy and dissent'. This is a fall and complete loss of moral highground to continue these kind of charades in future.
What message does this persecution and demonization of Assange, Manning and Snowden send to future dissentors? This virtually guarantees that even those with the tremendous courage that it takes to stand up to power may need to think twice as they are simply not safe in democractic regimes and the law and process will be used against them while the public are indifferent and others cheer on.
I just want to point out that this is really about the UK here, since this is where this is happening, and the UK really isn't like the rest of Europe at all, something they made quite clear when they voted for Brexit.
It is only British politicians who want to jump into bed with the US at every available opportunity. Not because they are British, but despite it.
And unlike here in the US where the Presidential race is so important and that position has excessive power compared to the legislative branch, yet is determined with an archaic method that lately awards the post to someone who didn't win the popular election, in Britain there's multiple parties sharing power (I guess you guys have approval voting?), and the PM is elected from the party in Parliament with the most seats. I really don't think you can make a valid claim that the politicians don't represent the people.
And finally, with Brexit, that was voted for with a popular referendum, and a (narrow) majority chose to leave.
The people of Britain are getting the government they deserve, and that they voted for.
The lawyer is doing his job, and is mainly referring to the unprecedented case of Ecuador just handing over personal possessions to the US -- a country that is trying to extradite him on the most tenuous of claims.
> There's no way that having security cameras in your own embassy is an "illicit operation"
If they're focused on and used for recording an individual granted asylum, how can that possibly be compatible with even the vaguest principles of privacy?
Was that the purpose? Were there no security cameras before? If this was a new installation, was he aware of it? Did the placement of the new cameras take privacy into consideration (e.g. avoiding sleeping quarters, toilets, etc.)?
For what it's worth there were also allegations of microphones being used to record private conversations.
The release of footage from the embassy to the international media seemed a particularly bizarre way to announce to the international community that your government has pure contempt for human rights.
This government does appear to have pure contempt for due process and human rights.
Just like the US.
This is absolutely something that has been almost consistent amongst US leaders going back as far as I can remember.
Human rights and due process seem to be a stick with which to (selectively) beat other nations. They don't apply to the US or its cronies.
we will never know what exactly happened on this one. that is for sure.
The only thing he's being extradited for is trying to hack into US gov computer systems, something which he literally admitted to in a chat message with Manning. https://www.wired.com/story/julian-assange-arrest-indictment...
This whole wikileaks debacle has really shaken my faith in comment quality on HN. Gone are the well informed insightful comments that give you a unique insight into the topic matter, and in with knee jerk comments that appeal to HN's overall political direction.
I don't want to dive into the comments section to have my opinion reinforced by the chorus, I want to be challenged and maybe have my opinion changed in an intellectual way; and it just doesn't feel like this site is good for that anymore.
be the change you want to see in the world! begin by not selectively ignoring the false allegations that brought him disrepute. Then you can gain some "insight" from the concept that the US could level much more serious charges against him after he lands on US soil from the relatively minor "hacking" charge. From there you can challenge yourself to respect the temerity required to expose war crimes committed by the most powerful nation in the world. You can do it; my faith in you isn't as easily shaken!
It sounds like an open and shut case then.
So why does the US want his possessions? The US should have no interest in his possessions if they are genuinely not on a fishing expedition.
Why is Chelsea Manning's testimony required? Why is she back in prison? It seems an open and shut case.
Maybe the media are telling you it's not a fishing expedition, but it sure looks like one.