• MataVatnik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    He was not in trouble for leaking information. He literally helped Chelsea hack into classified files she didn’t have access to, he actively participated in breaching security inside the US military. Very illegal no matter where you stand.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      This is just blatantly false. Repeating government propaganda doesn’t make it true. He did not hack the military he told someone what a VPN is.

      • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        Alright it take it back, he tried to help crack a password, but he likely failed. Looks like he was still actively pushing Chelsea to gather more classified info. I’m sorry but this is not the behavior of a journalist

        In a pretrial hearing in Manning’s case, prosecutors presented evidence that Manning had asked Assange—who was instant messaging with Manning under the name Nathaniel Frank—if he had experience cracking hashes. Assange allegedly responded that he possessed rainbow tables for that, and Manning sent him a hashed password string. According to Thursday’s unsealed indictment, Assange followed up two days later asking for more information about the password, and writing that he’d had “no luck so far.” The indictment further alleges that Assange actively encouraged Manning to gather even more information, after Manning said she had given all she had.

        It’s not clear if Assange ever successfully cracked the password. According to the indictment, that password would have given Manning administrative privileges on SIPRNet, allowing her to pull more files from it while concealing the traces of her leaks from investigators.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You’ve got a giant nothing burger there don’t keep digging deeper.

          There’s a reason all serious journalists are defending Assagne and describing the case against him as a very dangerous precedent against press freedom.

          • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            The fact of the matter is that Assange’s policy of “leak everything” mainly only applied to the United States, which put united states assets (spies in authoritarian regimes) in danger and ended up in prison. And Assange did not extend the same courtesy to the Russians when documents were leaked from their end, and would redact and editorialize the leaks. Stack that on top conspiring to steal classified information and its not so much of a nothing burger as you call it. Yeah, let’s give blanket immunity to “journalists” who actively try to steal state secrets, leak it straight into a pipeline, and selectively put our -only- our allies in literally mortal danger while protecting that of our adversaries. Come on dude.

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Holy shit these libs defending war criminals because “muh Russia”.

              Did Russia claim to have freedom of speech?

              • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                What makes you think I’m defending the actions of the US? I remember watching the drone video when I was 18 years old, it was incredibly shocking and it forever changed how i saw the US military. Alternatively, do you support assange releasing the name of people in Authoritarian regimes who were working with the US? Who were imprisoned or possibly killed?

                What I’m pointing out is that assange is not your ally, despite him exposing the atrocities of the US, much less a journalist. There are codes of ethics that journalists follow (and laws they have to follow as well) and if he did that, it likely could left him in a better position legally. Instead he was cavalier, and possibly even malicious with his actions. He should have kept a lawyer that specializes in whistleblower law on staff. But he probably thought because he was in Europe he could do whatever the fuck he wanted without consequence.

                Did Russia claim to have freedom of speech?

                I’m done here, it almost seems you are missing the point on purpose. This case is very clearly not about freedom speech.

                • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  There’s no code of ethics for journalists. We just saw all our mainstream newspapers spread the blatant hoax that Hamas raped women and beheaded babies. And lied about having seen evidence. Which is now proven out doesn’t exist. On top of that they hired ex-israeli soldiers without any journalistic experience to write the propaganda story.

                  You’re enthusiastically painting Assagne in a bad light because he is receiving criticism. And bringing up examples from after him being prosecuted as retroactive justification.

                  Of course Russia would support his efforts. We do the exact same thing. When there’s an adversary in a country we don’t like, we support them. The Taliban and the Russians are a prime example.