No. He doesn't do that. He is only the front man.Quote:
Originally Posted by MickS
Printable View
No. He doesn't do that. He is only the front man.Quote:
Originally Posted by MickS
He's a convicted hacker.Quote:
Originally Posted by disco2hse
Oh, I see your logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by MickS
He did in that case, therefore he did in this case. But, your logic is flawed,
:angel:
[In 1987, after turning 16, Assange began _[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_%28computer_security%29"]_hacking under the name "Mendax" He and two other hackers joined to form a group which they named the International Subversives. In 1992, he pleaded guilty to 24 charges of hacking and was released on bond for good conduct after being fined AU$2100.]
Only Stoopid ones :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MickS
Martyn
Lol smart arse!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushie
Yep, that would be me though!!!
Oh I'm sorry..maybe I didn't type slow enough for the kiwis :D. He is a convicted hackerrrrrrrrrrrrr.Quote:
Originally Posted by disco2hse
There was no suggestion in my post that he has done that in the case of wikileaks. Others have. That's others have.....
Apology accepted.
Ned Kelly was a murderer. And your point is???Quote:
Originally Posted by MickS
My 2c worth:
Irrespective of the info revealed, Assange has not done this for 'transperancy' or any other noble reason but for personal agrandisment in the hacker/internet world (just like most hackers etc).
The US might eventally get him, but as he was the 'publisher' of the info and not the 'thief', he can claim 1st amendment rights and thus any prosecution would fail.
As to the rape allegations, maybe they're false, but 1) there's better countries than Sweden for the US to try this sort of trick in to guarantee extradition; and 2) after listening to the girl's lawyer, it appears to be a 'removal of consent' issue and therefore something that needs to be argued. If you're trying to nail someone with trumped up charges, why not try something more solid?
Most of the info simply embarrases the pollies/diplomats and will probably lead to less transperancy rather than more.
Certain newspapers will make a lot of money out of it (and probably a few lawyers too).
Assange is only the figure head for a group of people who are Wikileaks. Do we prosecute Rupert Murdock for everything News Limited or Fox News say - NoQuote:
Originally Posted by Jamo
Julian Assange is an Australian Citizen - he has no US first amendment rights, that is only bestowed upon US Citizens or US companies.
As far as I am aware, the only time he was convicted of computer hacking was 19 years ago in Australia. He pleaded guilty and was fined $2,100. The prosecutor’s words, according to Wikipedia, were "there is just no evidence that there was anything other than sort of intelligent inquisitiveness and the pleasure of being able to—what's the expression—surf through these various computers". Is there any evidence that he has hacked into computers during the last 19 years?Quote:
Originally Posted by MickS
Is Assange a hero? Certainly not by some peoples standards as well illustrated by Mick's examples of his heroes. Is he a hero to me? The simple answer is no, I lean in Mick's direction. However, he is a lot closer to being a hero to me than someone who has that title bestowed on them just because they win a medal at the Olympics!
Assange, whether you agree with his actions or not, is trying to make the world a better place. He may or may not be right in what he is doing. We all have different views on that. But I believe Assange's intent is an admirable one.
Cheers
KarlB
:)