Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london-shoot-out-inside-the-ci-as-secret-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html

by greatgib • 5 years ago

402 219 5 years ago

news.yahoo.com

h2odragon• 5 years ago

Wasn't Wikileaks supposed to have been the means by which Russia took the election from Clinton? Why would the Trump administration be so unhappy with them? Were they perhaps continuing the previous administrations' "sweetness and light" approach?

phpnode2• 5 years ago

Why would they have any loyalty towards wikileaks? What is a useful idiot that has outlived it's usefulness?

michaelt• 5 years ago

Even if Trump had warm feelings towards Wikileaks, the directors of the CIA, NSA etc clearly didn't. So it depends on how inclined they were to lock antlers with each other.

And from Trump's perspective, he may like seeing his rival taking a bullet - but that doesn't imply he'd feel protective of the spent shell casings on the ground.

ipaddr2• 5 years ago

By killing him you close the loop?

In reality hawks in the miliary have wanted him since the video release showing that bombing at the wedding.

He made enemies of both sides.

If you think about it both sides play for the same team. Any powerful voice uncontrolled needs silencing. Hence why he is inprison and why laws were broken to get him in jail.

thinkingemote• 5 years ago

Seems like the article answered this question somewhat. Basically it's that the president wasn't consulted in some questions as there was a loophole and that the Intelligence services do not change at all when a president changes and they have long memories and wanted revenge.

krona• 5 years ago

Wikileaks owes no loyalty to Trump. Trump had nothing to gain from defending him, strategically.

Basic Realpolitik.

dehrmann3• 5 years ago

Russia took the election from Clinton?

Clinton's sense of entitlement and both parties' history of not supporting the working class lost her the election.

hktntbvuvu• 5 years ago

While we are at it, is Biden going to pardon Snowden?

phpnode2• 5 years ago

What possible advantage would there be in doing so? Biden would gain nothing but criticism, be accused of supporting a traitor and so on. Doing the right thing is rarely politically sensible.

ipaddr2• 5 years ago

Biden seems to be clearing up older issues. Reminds me of someone closing out bugs in jira without looking to see if the work has been done. I could see him closing another chapter of history.

willcipriano• 5 years ago

Honorable people do the right thing even when they personally do not benefit.

account-52• 5 years ago

Traitor? Was he ever a US citizen?

thepasswordis• 5 years ago

Joe Biden had an innocent father and his 7 children killed as a way of distracting from his horrible, disinterested withdrawal from Afghanistan. He has yet to acknowledge this in any way other than calling it an “mistake” via his press bureau.

He has spent his life lying about his credentials, and then selling the influence he gains in the us government to foreign countries.

No, I don’t think Biden will be pardoning Edward Snowden.

Drone strike: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/us/politics/pentagon-dron...

Disinterested: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/25/fac...

Joes plagiarism: https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiaris...

More lying about law school credentials: https://apnews.com/article/cd977f7ff301993f7976974ba07c5495

Selling influence: https://news.yahoo.com/independent-source-confirms-authentic...

ch4s33• 5 years ago

Don't forget that he wrote the bill that became the Patriot Act.

belter• 5 years ago

Can it be worst, that enemy number one, consider you so incompetent, that would tell his followers was not even worthwhile threatening you?

"In the letter dated May 2010, the al Qaeda 9/11 mastermind wrote he had no assassination plots against Biden because he deemed him “totally unprepared” to lead the United States."

"Bin Laden warned in 2010 letter that Biden would ‘lead US into crisis’"

https://nypost.com/2021/08/20/bin-laden-warned-in-2010-lette...

jeroenhd3• 5 years ago

As an outsider, I don't expect the American government to ever pardon people like him. Presidents come and go but they all play nicely with the military powers that remain after their terms. When presidents promise to do things the rest it the government doesn't like, those promises only get broken. Trump didn't complete his wall, Obama didn't close Guantanamo Bay, and so on. Presidents aren't kings, their actions will follow them and have consequences even after leaving office.

Biden might pardon Snowden at the end of his term, but don't count on it. I haven't seen a single sign that Biden (or any American presidential candidate for that matter) would side with anyone for leaking government secrets. The government is sitting on many more juicy details that'd upset the global political balance and transparency is not in the USA's interests.

PartiallyTyped• 5 years ago

I wouldn't count on Biden administration to do anything remotely close. The whistleblower of the drone strike that killed 7 kids and 3 adults, all innocent, was convicted [1].

[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/leaker-of-drone-secrets-ge...

appleflaxen• 5 years ago

Didn't deep throat get a pardon?

seaourfreed• 5 years ago

Establishment Democrats hate Assange. Assange published things that hurt the Hillary / 2016 Democrat elections.

atatatat• 5 years ago

"rest of the government"

No need to steer away from "deep state" so hard you go hyperbolic.

Maybe use "Multiple competing power cabals", if you prefer?

truffdog• 5 years ago

Chelsea Manning got her sentence commuted to 0, which is almost like a pardon.

pixel_tracing• 5 years ago

That’s short term thinking and a failure of government. Working WITH Snowden will benefit the country more than working against.

If it wasn’t Snowden it would have been someone else, matter if time.

Here’s what the gov should do:

1.) Pardon Snowden publicly 2.) Work with Snowden as public front, to build a better (more privacy conscious) surveillance network and win back the public’s trust

Will this ever happen? Probably not

2OEH8eoCRo06• 5 years ago

I hope not.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/15/494157921...

The committee unanimously voted to endorse the report, and all members signed a letter to President Obama urging him not to pardon Snowden.

vorpalhex2• 5 years ago

It would be almost negligent to not draft and forecast the scenario. Intelligence work has to operate from worst case assumptions.

Obviously the plan was never executed. I am sure that was a choice based on risk factors and not just professional ethics.

throwawayay02• 5 years ago

What is the worst case scenario of Assange being a free man, exactly?

jeroenhd3• 5 years ago

Signalling that you can get away leaking embarrassing secrets to the outside world, mostly. I'd reckon there'd be a lot more Snowdens, Assanges and Mannings out there if the American government didn't grossly abuse its power to make their lives a living hell.

vorpalhex2• 5 years ago

That Assange is indeed compromised by foreign intelligence but is still able to receive exfiltrated American intelligence.

codedokode2• 5 years ago

Some senior officials inside the CIA and the Trump administration even discussed killing Assange, going so far as to request “sketches” or “options” for how to assassinate him.
One of those officials said he was briefed on a spring 2017 meeting in which the president asked whether the CIA could assassinate Assange and provide him “options” for how to do so.

I don't understand how this can be legal. Cannot such a request be considered a conspiracy to commit a murder? Or some people are "more equal" and the law doesn't apply to them?

1cvmask3• 5 years ago

There is a fancy name for kill lists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix

croes• 5 years ago

Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred “at the highest levels” of the Trump administration, said a former senior counterintelligence official. “There seemed to be no boundaries.”

No idea why Assange feared to be extradited from Sweden to the USA./s

ben_w2• 5 years ago

The “to the USA” part is separate from the “from Sweden” part. He’s currently fighting an attempt to go to the USA from the UK, so it’s not like the country of origin is making much difference IMO.

blitzar4• 5 years ago

I remember the Assange fangirls back in the day claiming that he couldnt be extradited from the UK to the US which is why he had to fight so hard ... a little inconvenient that the UK loves to extradite people to the US like the good little lapdogs they are.

slim2• 5 years ago

My "holy shit" moment was this :

  received “sketches” of plans for killing Assange and other Europe-based WikiLeaks members

CIA planned to kill some of my friends

capableweb• 5 years ago

I think at this point, if you haven't had any US government entity trying to come up with plans to hurt you, you've probably done something bad (beneficial to the US government). They seem to frequently want to be on the wrong side of history, so if you're on their list/been on their list, you're doing something right.

8note• 5 years ago

They likely keep the plans up to date, and have one for you too, if they're your friends.

sydthrowaway• 5 years ago

Assange needs to keep going. The Mandela moment is only a couple of political cycles away.

throwawaybutwhy• 5 years ago

Nah. He has no uMkhonto we Sizwe behind him, nor a nation state financing, training, and arming his comrades, nor a wave of public opinion nor a wide international boycott of his enemies. Just a lonely guy rotting in prison.

baybal2• 5 years ago

Nah. He has no uMkhonto we Sizwe behind him,

You can change that

gatvol• 5 years ago

MK was spectacularly ineffective

1cvmask3• 5 years ago

It depends what you mean by a couple of political cycles away.

The Democrats and Bill Clinton considered Mandela a terrorist.

It was George W Bush who in 2008 lifted Mandela from the terrorist watch list - although he waited till the end of his second term and for Mandela to approach the age of 90.

https://www.france24.com/en/20080702-us-drops-mandela-terror...

chrischen• 5 years ago

The Democrats and Bill Clinton considered Mandela a terrorist.
He explained that the original purpose of the law, introduced during the 1980s while Ronald Reagan was president, was to fight terrorism. "So we're pleased that we could make this correction to what is otherwise a good and important piece of legislation," he said.
> Their original placement on the list occurred during the Reagan admininstration.

slim2• 5 years ago

  Sowing discord within the group seemed an easier route to success

2017 fits the period in which one hacker of the group was publicly accused of sexual harrassement by a female employee of the Tor project

nyolfen• 5 years ago

i went back and checked and it looks like this took place in 2016; appelbaum had two accusers, one of whom later accused a bitcoin core dev of sexual assault and was sued, which i believe settled out of court for an apology. afaict appelbaum has completely dropped off the net in the years since

nullc3• 5 years ago

This is the definitive reporting on the subject: https://github.com/Enegnei/JacobAppelbaumLeavesTor/blob/mast...

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

Weren't two guys removed from Linux kernel development that uncovered the NSA trying to put a backdoor in it multiple time?

That is why you need some fervent believers in some arbitrary COC. Worked for the church, why shouldn't it work for intelligence agencies. Just get some crazy something to stick it to the patriarchy. You always find tools like that.

CodeGlitch2• 5 years ago

Couldn't read the article as Yahoo news is such a cluster-f*k of mess on-screen.

Too many distractions, bad layout, autoplaying videos.

...and this is with heavy ad blocking.

As it was my first visit to Yahoo news, it gave me the options on which kind of cookies/tracking I want to accept. Obviously I select "none". I shudder to think what would happen if I had selected "accept-all".

Sorry for the rant - but I can see why Yahoo is in decline if this is what they offer. No idea if the article's content is actually any good - I feel bad for the people who wrote it.

dehrmann3• 5 years ago

Looks good in reader mode.

CodeGlitch2• 5 years ago

Nice - I had to install an extension to add a reader mode in Brave:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/reader-view/ecabif...

This extension apparently uses Mozilla's open-source Readability implantation.

photochemsyn5• 5 years ago

The real reason they were so pissed off at Assange seems to be in two parts: 1) The Chelsea Manning State Department cables. The video was all the hype, but just dig through the 'SECRET' cables on Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc.

2) Those Vault7 CIA leaks are incredibly embarrassing, it's like so closet criminal organization - and with a program to run cyberwarfare attacks using Russian/Chinese signatures in the code to hide atttribution? That's kind of insanely deceptive and criminal I think.

All told, those revelations make the State Dept. and the CIA look more like some kind of organized white-collar mafia outfit in the service of Wall Street shareholders than anything else. That kind of raw exposure makes the corrupt insiders in the US government very sad.

I'd guess they've got a lot more to hide, and are most worried about further eruptions of embarrassment.

marcinzm• 5 years ago

That's kind of insanely deceptive and criminal I think.

That just seems like standard for spy agencies along with a pretty mild black propaganda angle. Even books about WW2 propaganda cover the topic.

I think people just underestimate what spy agencies actually do and how dirty it’s always been.

hutzlibu3• 5 years ago

"I think people just underestimate what spy agencies actually do and how dirty it’s always been. "

They do. But maybe they do, because of being told by the governments and in schools, that the CIA and co only fight terrorist and evil empires.

Those leaks showed the general public more of the real picture, not the fake official one. And sure, they do not like that.

StanislavPetrov2• 5 years ago

I think people just underestimate what spy agencies actually do and how dirty it’s always been.

They certainly do, and that is one of the reasons we are seeing a massive authoritarian crackdown on free speech. The last thing the spy agencies and the rest of the deep state want is for people to understand what they actually do and how dirty they actually are.

photochemsyn5• 5 years ago

A false flag cyberattack - an act of war in the modern world, many say - is pretty far beyond what peacetime intelligence agencies have historically gotten up to.

I mean, if you left Russia fingerprints on, for example, a CIA-led cyberattack on a nuclear reactor, that could start a major war. It's pretty reckless in my opinion to even make such tools.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

Formerly there were consequences if a spy gets caught, even one of your own nation. This just brushes it off...

chiefalchemist2• 5 years ago

I'm reading "The Secret History of The American Empire." Recommended. It's difficult to believe Perkins - after his initial book - was still around to continue to tell the tales.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fVAifnnlg0

sonotathrowaway3• 5 years ago

2) Those Vault7 CIA leaks are incredibly embarrassing, it's like so closet criminal organization - and with a program to run cyberwarfare attacks using Russian/Chinese signatures in the code to hide atttribution? That's kind of insanely deceptive and criminal I think.

I can’t tell if you’re being willfully obtuse or you’re just an extremely histrionic, but it’s clear you didn’t reach that conclusion through principled reasoning.

simorley2• 5 years ago

Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc.

Is this a shock to anyone? "Human rights and democracy" is the new imperial "white man's burden". We use it to justify invading, colonizing and stealing from others. When have we ever cared about human rights and democracy? I forget if it was chomsky or someone else who said that we've murdered more people, caused more human suffering and stolen more wealth in the name of "human rights and democracy" than nazi germany did in the name of nazism. Think about that.

I wish the non-western world would just collectively laugh at and mock any western leader when they talk about "human rights", "democracy", "western values", etc. How can they stand the hypocrisy? How can we?

aschlafly• 5 years ago

Why do you think even the pro-democracy forces in China see the US's support of "democrats" as a farce? Why do you think the images in HK of protestors with the US flag were seen as nothing short of treason, even among the liberals of China? The hypocrisy is so obvious, and the naked self-interest too glaring.

The US's foreign policy has set back the cause of democracy and liberalization in China by decades with its underhanded shenanigans. To recieve their support, even moral support, is the kiss of death in China.

deanCommie3• 5 years ago

I 100% agree with everything you're saying.

However, let's not forget that 50/80 years were dominated by a two-headed fight for world hegemony under the threat of nuclear war and potential apocalypse.

In this fight, while the US was far more evil than anyone cared to admit at the time, and the USSR far less than the US propaganda would have you believe, RELATIVELY speaking one side did offer more freedom, liberty, and prosperity than the other. And the primary counterargument from the Communists was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

This remains true today with China. CPC apologists are all too happy to point out (factually correct) gaps in US integrity and freedom. But in the grand scheme of things, relatively speaking, for all it's flaws, "The West" still has due process, doesn't ban religious expression, and doesn't put millions of citizens into force re-education camps.

The most recent Chinese return of the 2 incarcerated Canadians in return for the Huawei executive is the most blatant current example that China will do absolutely whatever it wants.

Whereas even in this news story - where you have government agents freely discussing assassinating Assange - there are others working against them, Lawyers using legal guidelines to flummox the plan, and ultimately it doesn't go forward.

For all of the US's evils, Russia and China would not have hesitated to kidnap or execute Assange in identical circumstances if he was hiding in an Ecuadorian embassy on their soil. He would have been disappeared a decade ago.

secondaryacct• 5 years ago

It's not a shock to me in Hong Kong. Been called a wumao by so many virtue signalers for just saying it's an illusion: we're less oppressed than they say we are, americans are less virtuous in their attempts to "free" us than they say they are.

refurb2• 5 years ago

Why can’t it be both? Since when are people or countries only motivated by one thing?

If you think the US went to war with Nazi Germany for purely altruistic reasons you’re sorely mistaken.

But at the same time an evil fascist dictatorship was defeated because the US got involved.

The world is a messy complicated space and human actions are messy and complicated.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

The propaganda works. Look how many victims claim that the release of this information endangered people. Well, no kidding, innocent lives are on the line. The best way to prevent further damage there should be consequences and reflection on government interventions.

29athrowaway3• 5 years ago

If you own a bakery, the ingredients you use need to be transported to your bakery. Once there, they have to be processed by some form of equipment. Your employees and customers need to physically go to your bakery...

Every activity in that bakery, in one way or another, depends on energy. That is also true for any other economic activity.

By selling energy you effectively have a share of everyone's business.

Also, if you control the fuel supply, you can control entire economies.

wffurr3• 5 years ago

Are you trying to say we can’t have energy and care about human rights and decency?

The United States has plenty of domestic energy reserves and the capability to build a lot of renewable energy and nuclear energy. There’s zero reason to be catering to Middle East despots, other than corruption and cronyism.

pvg3• 5 years ago

Zero interest in 'human rights and democracy', lots of interests in oilfields, pipelines, military sales contracts, etc.

You can go to the cable archive and type 'human rights' in the search box and see this isn't remotely true. Whatever one might think of US diplomacy and its goals, the cables are mostly of historical interest and cause for mild embarrassment. They don't really show some diabolically clever empire cynically manipulating the world. They mostly show it pursuing its publicly stated goals and interests - one can have a pretty dim view of these goals and interests but you don't need the cables to develop or support that viewpoint.

sudosysgen• 5 years ago

Sorry, that's an abysmal argument. The fact that human rights are mentioned is not at all proof that US intelligence cares about them, when there is clearly no regard for them in the actions.

Hegemony is a publicly stated goal of the US. What do you think that entails? What do you think is necessary for a nation of 327 million to be the hegemon over 7.5 billion?

photochemsyn5• 5 years ago

Ah, I did qualify that statement with the search term 'SECRET' (classification level box) on the CableGate archive.

Yes, there are unclassified and even classified cables discussing human rights initiatives - but I'm guessing 'SECRET' is what they really care a lot about, and that stuff in my experience of reading literally hundreds of cables (okay I was leaning more towards energy research) that's just not an issue anywhere I've seen. For example, Syria? It's all about forcing Assad to cut ties with Iran and get into the Saudi-Qatar gas pipeline deal. UAE? Huge arms deals. Ditto for Saudi Arabia. For grim laughs, look up Raytheon and Yemen.

It's really not very flattering, although the writers seem intelligent and well-informed.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

Doesn't explain the heavy handed procecution then.

1cvmask3• 5 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_7

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

AtlasBarfed3• 5 years ago

It's always funny that every big revelation has dozens of comments of people coming to the realization that the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc are not friends of democracy.

We are fortunate that they need to bathe themselves in the trappings of democracy, unlike, say, Putin's services.

It's instructive that they view the third world and the UK as different rules. They get to shit all over the third world and know they can get away with it. Assassinations? Abductions? All A-OK in the brown countries.

This isn't me characterizing things, the quotes are from the officials in the article.

As for the mafia, the founding basis of all mafia romanticism is that government is just another source of power and abuse, and the mafia are simply another competing source.

That would be ridiculous, but the security agencies of the feds certainly do their best to make it plausible.

dataangel3• 5 years ago

and with a program to run cyberwarfare attacks using Russian/Chinese signatures in the code to hide atttribution? That's kind of insanely deceptive and criminal I think.

Uh… I assume you can see how leaving a note saying “CIA was here!!!” might run counter to the goals of a spy agency. You might separately not like some of the missions they are tasked with, but this is what they would be doing even if they spent all their time rescuing orphans and their puppies from North Korean salt mines.

photochemsyn5• 5 years ago

Perhaps one of the missions they were 'tasked with' was ramping up tensions with Russia (for the benefit of the arms dealers) by launching a lot of bogus false flag attacks on US corporations, with attendent hysterical media coverage?

The CIA is more of a propaganda outfit than anything else in my opinion, although their dirty banking and drug dealing games are right up there to. Their 'intelligence role' on important issues could be entirely subsumed by the DIA. Should have been shut down in the 1960s like JFK wanted to do. Useless failure agency on 9/11, too. And, the CIA was behind all the dirty Iraq/Afghanistan torture programs, were they not?

antihero• 5 years ago

Capitalism Enforcement Agency :)

atok1• 5 years ago

At this point, if you can't see how fucked up the US legal system is, I am sorry.

Federal court has in the 90 percent conviction rate. Is it because they have such air tight cases and evidence to follow? No, it's a purely political kangaroo court.

Someone would do well do wipe this cancerous 'judicial' system off grid.

tkojames• 5 years ago

Eh how is it purely political kangaroo court with jury convinctions? And for sure they only bring cases they think they can win they admit to this.. for sure having money helps get you better defense. But a purely political kangaroo is a pretty big stretch. Unless you are talking about the secret FISA courts sure. What is way more scary is the whole killing USA citizen via drone strikes in foreign countries no court cases at all.

washadjeffmad• 5 years ago

Peremptory challenges?

motohagiography• 5 years ago

The interesting bit I didn't know was the article says that Wikileaks did not publish the complete contents of the Vault 7 materials they had. Not sure whether they just published shasums of the bits they didn't, or if they proved some other way they had parts they were holding back as leverage.

It's odd to read what was really at stake. Pompeo's team was ready to assasinate Assange in London, and the only thing stopping them was the justice dept and only nominally the office of the President. What WL (and Snowden) did was show to the public the intelligence community, who was ostensibly accountable to them, for what they truthfully were. The news media took a bigger credibility hit for their history of spiking these stories and delivering hit pieces than the spies ever did.

Most people saw how the sausage was made and decided they still liked sausage. Not only do we tolerate what these services do, but now that we know about it and have done nothing to change it, we have acknowledged it and rewarded them for it all. Snowden's story practically created the ability for retired generals to accept pulpits from tv news where they can armchair QB the issues of the day, and they should thank him for the minor television celebrity and speaker circuit fêting they now enjoy. Whether that undermines the credibility of their institutions is still to be seen, but all that plotting to kill Assange just to sustain some lame narrative about a bureaucracy seems like it was just a fatal distraction from the real unseating of western power that we are clearly into the endgame of today.

GordonS• 5 years ago

Most people saw how the sausage was made and decided they still liked sausage.

I'm not sure that's really true. All of the stuff Snowden and Assange leaked was very much down-played by the popular media - it felt like it was very under-reported and even then with a fair bit of bias.

If you ask some people about how they feel now, they'll say that it wouldn't affect them "because they haven't done anything wrong", or "but Assange is a rapist!", or even "that's just movie stuff, conspiracy bullshit".

I really believe that the population at large either don't believe what the CIA are doing, are in denial about it, or just don't care because it largely affects brown people in far off lands.

smolder• 5 years ago

The population at large has been trained not to think about things like what their government does on their behalf; them's terrorist thoughts. Support da troops. One must give the appearance of being a team player by timidly ignoring Uncle Sam's glaring failures to operate within its claimed principles.

blitzar4• 5 years ago

Most people saw how the sausage was made and decided they still liked sausage.
I'm not sure that's really true. All of the stuff Snowden and Assange leaked was very much down-played by the popular media - it felt like it was very under-reported and even then with a fair bit of bias.

It was not at all played down, especially not Snowden, it was rolling 24 hour news for weeks, they still try and drum up some drama over it whenever they get a chance.

The problem is, people dont care. I feel genuinely sad that Snowden blew up his life, and outside of a few privacy communities nothing has changed. Everyone agrees it is wrong, but they dont care, you are a traitor if you dont believe it has to be done.

He should have won a Nobel prize and been given a ticker tape parade for blowing the whistle, but instead he is holed up in Russia, the illegal spying goes on, and the people call for more spying at every turn.

FDSGSG2• 5 years ago

Very interesting to see how this will end up impacting the Assange extradition trial.

Who's gonna agree to extradite him knowing that Trump was planning to assassinate him? Seems like a hard sell.

E: Turns out that this isn't even news https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8041597/US-plotted-...

boomboomsubban11• 5 years ago

These are separate US based discussions about kidnapping or murdering Assange, the UC Global's actions were another one of the intelligence agencies schemes but these were separate actions.

And the article makes it sound lime the British were kept in the loop for most of it, the previous assassination allegations didn't stop extradition so I doubt these ones will.

dehrmann3• 5 years ago

As an American citizen, I find it absolutely outrageous that our government would be contemplating kidnapping or assassinating somebody without any judicial process...

I clipped it at an unfair point, but remember Anwar al-Awlaki? Obama ordered the execution of a US citizen in a foreign country without trial.

viktorcode• 5 years ago

If I'm not mistaken this is allowed by the US law.

chiefalchemist2• 5 years ago

Allowed probably isn't the best-fit word. Based on what I've read, the then HW legal team found a legal loop hole (or sorts) and shoved the action through. Given the general nature of the situation it's unlikely anyone was going to step forward and make a legal challenge otherwise. And the media naturally sided with the WH.

monocasa• 5 years ago

Eh, only sort of. The Supreme Court only ruled that no one had standing to sue, either before or after it happened.

michaelmrose3• 5 years ago

It's illegal and was probably on its face grounds for convicting Obama along with a laundry list of former executives except nobody has the political will to do it.

boomboomsubban11• 5 years ago

I don't see how anybody could read this and then pretend that Assange has any chance of a fair trial in America. Not only were his communication constantly monitored for years, already a breach of client attorney privilege, the US considered flagrant assassination as a potential way to handle him.

I've heard many people say that Assange committed actual crimes and it's time for him to face the consequences of those actions. While I personally disagree about whether he's done anything illegal, even if he has it impossible for him to get a fair trial and justice to be served. Everything being done to him is an effort to get revenge on the person who embarrassed the military and intelligence communities.

laurent92• 5 years ago

Well, now that he’s been capture by the USA, we’ll soon know whether he committed anything thanks to his trial, right? Wait, has it been more than a year without trial already?

avianlyric• 5 years ago

Erm, last I checked the U.K. justice system wasn’t the “USA”.

The U.K. just denied the US extradition request, so the US isn’t even close to “capturing” Assange.

boomboomsubban11• 5 years ago

Even if Assange's extradition request is granted, his court case won't show whether he has committed anything. I suspect much of the prosecution's argument would be secret, and like in Ellsberg's case Assange would not be permitted to present a defense.

2OEH8eoCRo06• 5 years ago

So what's the alternative? Don't make people you like stand trial?

boomboomsubban11• 5 years ago

Don't flagrantly violate an accused's right to a fair trial. My opinions on the person aren't relevant, though I hardly like Assange.

StanislavPetrov2• 5 years ago

The alternative is to let people stand trial when they've violated legitimate laws, in front of a jury of their peers. The Unconstitutional, Orwellian Espionage Act that Assange is accused of violating is a stain on the US "justice" system and an affront to everyone who believes in free speech and the Constitution.

michaelmrose3• 5 years ago

The CIA out to be fully disbanded with anyone who participated in illegal actions like assassinations or torture prosecuted. You can't fix an agency that believes in its institutional guts its above moral and criminal law. I don't know how you possibly get from here to a government we can actually be proud of instead of ashamed.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

It would already be nice to know whom they serve. It doesn't seem to be the executive part of the United States government. That would mean they completely lack legitimacy for their actions.

sneak• 5 years ago

It's amazing to me how willing the UK is to be totally complicit and offer assistance to the US in this ongoing effort to deny Assange his human rights.

He's been imprisoned for nearly a decade without trial now.

giardini• 5 years ago

Did anything useful come out of the "Vault" revelations? I mean for examples improvements in the WWW, PC hardware/software, browsers, etc.

blitzar4• 5 years ago

I dont think so, certainly nothing on the scale of the original Snowden stuff which by all accounts shook up google et al.

mikem170• 5 years ago

The wikipedia page on the vault 7 mentioned a number of specific vendors that patched their software, cisco for example [0]:

Cisco quickly reassigned staff from other projects to turn their focus solely on analyzing the attack and to figure out how the CIA hacking worked, so they could help customers patch their systems and prevent criminal hackers or spies from using similar methods.
On 20 March, Cisco researchers confirmed that their study of the Vault 7 documents showed the CIA had developed malware which could exploit a flaw found in 318 of Cisco's switch models and alter or take control of the network.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_7#Cisco

neonate• 5 years ago

http://web.archive.org/web/20210926170157/https://news.yahoo...

https://archive.is/GKrLA

huntermeyer• 5 years ago

With this, the idea that Epstein was suicided is not so far fetched.

Ms-J• 5 years ago

At this point, what is the difference between a hardcore criminal and the intel agencies?

I would trust an everyday criminal before one of these organizations, and I'm being totally serious. The ordinary criminal does not harm me.

What value, other than terrible things like deception, do we get out of these agencies in a free society?

roody152• 5 years ago

One major issue with Assange is prosecuting him. Honesty most of the 17 charges are quite week and it remains to be seen how they even apply to a foreign national.

Assange received classified material and published it. This has been done countless times by journalist and it’s a pretty far stretch to somehow apply criminal charges just because he published it.

Honestly from the CIA perspective it would probably have been better to assassinate him. This sends a message to other journalists on what the US will do to protect its interest. A trial just further embarrasses the US since everyone knows the outcome and that it is largely a farce

tunesmith• 5 years ago

If a journalist receives classified material, is that different than if the journalist coordinates the acquisition of that classified material, or offers resources to aid in the acquisition of that classified material, or participates in the placement of resources to gain access to those classified materials...?

I think that's the difficult part of this, right? It's a spectrum with many levels of gradation, that each imply different levels of legality and illegality.

giantrobot2• 5 years ago

Assange received classified material and published it.

This gets repeated a lot but is not what Assange is charged with. He didn't just "receive" classified information. He's alleged to have not only communicated with Manning to direct her to grab specific information and tried to help her break into systems.

He'd have a much better case if he had just been a passive publisher of information. You can't be involved in a crime and then claim journalistic protections after the fact.

Assange is not a journalist. He's a wannabe spymaster and muckraker. Zero percent of his case has anything to do with real journalists as none of them would have participated in the exfiltration of classified documents.

roody152• 5 years ago

I disagree. Chelsea Manning bears the overwhelming fault from a US Legal perspective. He was a member of the armed forces under oath and knowingly shared classified information.

Assange has no oath to the US and despite his interest in the material it is quite a stretch to somehow suggest he “made” Chelsea share this info.

boomboomsubban11• 5 years ago

He didn't just "receive" classified information. He's alleged to have not only communicated with Manning to direct her to grab specific information and tried to help her break into systems.

One of the seventeen charges is about this. The others are all solely to do with publishing classified information.

If all of the other charges were dropped, maybe you'd have a point but it's clear that the entire thing is primarily about his work as a journalist publishing documents.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

Is it really a farce? Give me one US paper that would report critically on it. If a writer would take this on his colleagues would probably excommunicate him. So they could just prosecute him without too much notice. Some of these papers were complicit in selling wars of aggression to the public. But I don't think guilt and bias are even needed to give a prediction on reporting.

hetspookjee• 5 years ago

I wonder if the UK would trade Anna Sacoolas for Julian Assange.

raxxorrax7• 5 years ago

Difference here that she is guilty while he is not.

JoeAltmaier• 5 years ago

I would be surprised if the CIA didn't have all the options studied and planned out, ready to present should that option be selected by 'management'. It's what they do, and not a surprise that they did it in this case.

throw_this_one3• 5 years ago

Assange, Wikileaks, and Snowden. If these people did the same thing to Russia/Putin or the CCP, they would be gone without a trace right now. It's really sad, these false equivalencies gone wild.

Doing something bad or making a mistake doesn't make the actor bad. That's just an un-nuanced world view.

Former U.S. officials describe details of the CIA’s proposals to abduct Assange

Related Stories