Stella Assange, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s wife, said the “world is watching” her husband’s extradition appeal hearing Tuesday. “We have two big days ahead. We don’t know what t…
  • JoeKrogan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    147·
    10 months ago

    He’ll lose unfortunately, as he’s been designated an enemy of big daddy US and the UK will bend over backwards to make sure that happens. The whole thing is ridiculous, he’s been held for years now

  • PugJesus@kbin.social
    2721·
    10 months ago

    Yep, watching to see if fame can still get you out of consequences for your crimes.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    51·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    They have to know they can’t get away with this,” Stella Assange said at a protest outside of the Royal Courts of Justice in London, in a clip highlighted by Mediaite.

    Julian Assange has been attempting to avoid extradition to the U.S. for more than a decade, where he has been indicted on 17 charges including espionage and computer misuse.

    He assisted U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in stealing diplomatic cables and military files, which would later be published on WikiLeaks, American prosecutors allege.

    “He is being prosecuted for engaging in ordinary journalistic practice of obtaining and publishing classified information, information that is both true and of obvious and important public interest,” Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s lawyer, said in court, per The Associated Press.

    “Assange and WikiLeaks were responsible for the exposure of criminality on the part of the U.S. government on an unprecedented scale,” Fitzgerald said in written submissions, according to the AP.

    The WikiLeaks founder’s lawyers have also said that, if convicted, he risks facing up to 175 years in prison, but American authorities have disagreed and said his sentence will probably be shorter.

    The original article contains 300 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 38%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • xor@infosec.pubEnglish
      129·
      10 months ago

      he’s not a crook… however, i question your morality

    • Adanisi@lemmy.zipEnglish
      52·
      10 months ago

      I’d argue the crooks are the ones who’ve committed war crimes that are very upset they got leaked.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.worldEnglish
      25·
      10 months ago

      The fact that you’re being downvoted tells you a lot of people only got information of this Russian agent from wikileaks and other russian leaning sources.

      Downvote me fanboys. He’s a political activist sitting on info to use when it’s most politically damaging, not acting quickly as possible to stop suffering. If he really gave a damn about anything but being an information broker he would have exposed all of Russias crap they did in Ukraine and Georgia since 2014, instead he was hyper focused on making the west look bad.

      Edit: Oh look, the downvoted didn’t start till almost 7AM Moscow Time, surely that’s just a coincidence!

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2214·
      10 months ago

      How is he a Russian spy?

      Wiki leaks are published for all to view, not just Russia.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.worldEnglish
        334·
        10 months ago

        I wouldn’t characterize him as a Russian spy, more of an asset. Wikileaks selectively released information rather than being the safe harbor for all intelligence leaks that they purported to be.

      • n2burns@lemmy.caEnglish
        14·
        10 months ago

        I don’t agree with the root comment, but Wikileaks has repeatedly ignored leaks of Russian classified info and many of their sources appear to be Russian Intelligence.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
            43·
            10 months ago

            Lmao. I wasn’t born yesterday. There’s been years of news on this. That’s an extremely poor attempt at gaslighting.

            • XIIIesq@lemmy.worldEnglish
              32·
              10 months ago

              There’s been years of propaganda on this.

              A guy embarrasses the richest and most powerful people in the world by telling you the dirty secrets they were hiding from you. And when they tell you that it’s the messenger who’s the enemy, you believe them SMH.

              If you’re against wikileaks, you’re against the rights of journalists and you’re opposed to the freedom of information.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
                31·
                10 months ago

                Nope. If NYT wants to publish stuff about warrantless wiretapping that’s fine. More power to them.

                WikiLeaks edited video and text content from day 1. The US Army caught them out several times by just releasing the full video. They didn’t even try with the DNC emails, they put sensational headers on them had nothing to do with what was written in the email. Then there’s the revelations of the GOP and RUS hacks which somehow have yet to see the light of day.

                So yeah after that fumbling attempt at creating propaganda it wasn’t exactly a surprise to find out the Russian GRU were essentially running the site by the mid 2010’s. Assange went beyond journalism and into foreign agent territory when he edited his stuff out of truthfulness and selectively released documents to influence American politics.

                So no you don’t get to tie him to investigative journalism like the Panama Papers.

    • anlumo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      712·
      10 months ago

      How much does the US pay for working as one of their propagandists?