Hacker News Reader

Comment by qrendel | Hacker News Reader

Considering they recently chose to completely ignore the UN opinion on his "arbitrary detention," on top of everything else in the past - false rape accusations, ignoring his asylum status - I don't see what more he really has to lose. What are the odds he possibly gets out of this without torture, assassination, or life in prison?

They've done everything possible to turn him into an actual enemy, rather than the editor of a site facilitating responsible disclosure by whistleblowers. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if that affects the manner in which future leaks are released as well.

View on HN

Exactly. He has nothing to lose, so he is doing this now. For himself. The timing is obviously coordinated around his personal motives, not those of wikileaks the organization. In fact it's unclear how much of an "organization" really even exists outside of Assange. So perhaps his personal strategy remains inextricably linked to the wikileaks strategy, precisely because Julian Assange and wikileaks are effectively a single entity.

And what are his personal motives? Provide some sources.

I don't know what they are. But do you think it's a coincidence that after a dull two years of leaks, this leak occurred in the same month the UK ignored the UN ruling in his favor?

He's playing his next card. I have no idea what his motives are, do you?

Try reading your comments out loud.

I do. They fuel my narcissism. Thanks for reading.

Please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN, and please don't conduct flamewars here.

Great, you know they're false accusations! I'm assuming you weren't there, so you must have some good evidence. I hope you've handed it over to the defence team.

Go read the actual timeline of the allegations against him. The entire thing is so one-sided in favor of Assange that it's effectively government propaganda to even pretend he's anything other than a political prisoner. The prosecutor originally in charge of the case actually stated that "the conduct alleged ... disclosed no crime at all and that file would be closed." The woman he's accused of raping said, quote, she was "railroaded by police and others around her" and that "it was the police who made up the charges." Among loads of other evidence in his favor.

It's disingenuous to pretend like we're all just in the dark about what really happened, that he might have actually committed rape and that's what any of this is about.

The Supreme Court says otherwise, and ruled that the accusations would be considered a crime in the UK. I am not a lawyer. You may be, I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that you're less qualified to rule on what is a crime than the UK Supreme Court.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com