Civil liberties thread

[Vrede too]

NYPD Sends Letter To Google Demanding It Remove Cop Checkpoint Notifications From Google Maps
from the when-one-business-model-interferes-with-another-business-model dept

Free speech.

[Vrede too]

60 Minutes tonight: "... the increased power of the ACLU, flush with donations and new memberships since Donald Trump was elected..."

He's a job creator.

[neoplacebo]

and a master baiter

[Vrede too]

and a master baiter

... and inspires poets, and supports fine cinema:



... and "creative" visual arts:


https://people.com/politics/time-asks-t ... ne-covers/

... and fine "educational" programming:

[O Really]

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was arrested at Ecuador's London Embassy Thursday after the country withdrew its offer of asylum. The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently released its indictment of Assange — importantly focusing on his technical assistance helping Chelsea Manning hack State Department cables rather than on publishing leaks.

https://www.axios.com/julian-assange-ar ... 7e033.html

[billy.pilgrim]

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was arrested at Ecuador's London Embassy Thursday after the country withdrew its offer of asylum. The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently released its indictment of Assange — importantly focusing on his technical assistance helping Chelsea Manning hack State Department cables rather than on publishing leaks.

https://www.axios.com/julian-assange-ar ... 7e033.html

Priorities

you could punish something that happened years ago and send a message to lone wolf saboteurs and somehow on to transgenders
or
make seriously needed improvements to national security

besides, leaks get more complicated, I like pressure, not leaks. leaks are weak, who likes leaks? not me for one I'll take the pressure of a smooth prosecution of silence is golden to me and to our country too becoming great again as we speak unless we let the radical minority of liberal socialists rip the law away with open boarding of illegals everywhere, Sade!!!

[Vrede too]

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was arrested at Ecuador's London Embassy Thursday after the country withdrew its offer of asylum. The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently released its indictment of Assange — importantly focusing on his technical assistance helping Chelsea Manning hack State Department cables rather than on publishing leaks.

https://www.axios.com/julian-assange-ar ... 7e033.html

I was a supporter of Julian Assange, may have even sent WikiLeaks money. Not sure if it went through when all of the online and credit card portals were being shut down. However, that was before:
The Sweden rape allegations, never knew what to make of those;
Such a very long time in the Ecuadoran Embassy. He made his personal choice, but any alternative would have been politically better, and more fair to Ecuador;
His choice to join forces with the Russians to favor one side in our 2016 election. Can't say for sure, but I would like to think I'd feel the same way about it if he'd favored the Dems.

I agree with you that "technical assistance helping Chelsea Manning hack State Department cables" is worse than merely "publishing leaks." I mostly supported the latter exposure of our Afghan war crimes.

What now will be interesting. The UK supposedly won't extradite if torture or execution is on the table. Of course, 45SHOLE, Barr and Pompeo lie, so that may not matter. He's done his damage to the Dems and they're not in power. Does he have dirt on 45SHOLE and the Repugs to trade on?

[neoplacebo]

Who knows? Hell, trump may pardon him of any US charges; he said "I love Wikileaks" so there you go. I think the Brits got to him just in time from the photo I saw of him being carried out of there. Hell, if they hadn't rescued him, he'd probably not lasted another month. It was close.

[Vrede too]

Who knows? Hell, trump may pardon him of any US charges; he said "I love Wikileaks" so there you go. I think the Brits got to him just in time from the photo I saw of him being carried out of there. Hell, if they hadn't rescued him, he'd probably not lasted another month. It was close.

For my own mental health I would have taken my chances being a fugitive or fighting in court after the first few months of asylum.

[neoplacebo]

Who knows? Hell, trump may pardon him of any US charges; he said "I love Wikileaks" so there you go. I think the Brits got to him just in time from the photo I saw of him being carried out of there. Hell, if they hadn't rescued him, he'd probably not lasted another month. It was close.

For my own mental health I would have taken my chances being a fugitive or fighting in court after the first few months of asylum.

I know; the dude was there seven fucking years! He looked to be in pretty bad shape in the photo I saw earlier today of him being carried out of the embassy. Another story I read says the Ecuadorans had had enough of him and insisted that he clean his bathroom and clean up after his cat. As an amateur forensic detective, I surmise he ate the cat soon after this mandate to be responsible, stopped all forms of personal hygiene, and just generally resigned himself to being without pussy along with increasing pressure from Ecuadoran bush doctors to "get the fuck out" and he just stopped caring. His next trick will be Mekileaks as he loses control of his involuntary nervous system and begins pissing himself uncontrollably. It's tragic but can't be helped.

[O Really]

I've never been a fan of Assange nor any of the other Daniel Ellsberg wannabes. To plagiarize Lloyd Benson in regard to Dan Quayle... Mr. Assange, you may think that because you claim to be a journalist, that your theft of classified information makes you like Ellsberg. Well, I knew Ellsberg; Ellsberg was an honorable person I admired; and you - are no Daniel Ellsberg. And as to the "journalist" claim, you're no Walter Cronkite, either.

[Vrede too]

Whatever one thinks of Assange, not much in my case, this stuff matters or potentially matters:

The U.S. Government’s Indictment of Julian Assange Poses Grave Threats to Press Freedom

The indictment of Julian Assange unsealed today by the Trump Justice Department poses grave threats to press freedoms, not only in the U.S. but around the world. The charging document and accompanying extradition request from the U.S. government, used by the U.K. police to arrest Assange once Ecuador officially withdrew its asylum protection, seeks to criminalize numerous activities at the core of investigative journalism.

So much of what has been reported today about this indictment has been false. Two facts in particular have been utterly distorted by the DOJ and then misreported by numerous media organizations.

The first crucial fact about the indictment is that its key allegation — that Assange did not merely receive classified documents from Chelsea Manning but tried to help her crack a password in order to cover her tracks — is not new. It was long known by the Obama DOJ and was explicitly part of Manning’s trial, yet the Obama DOJ — not exactly renowned for being stalwart guardians of press freedoms — concluded that it could not and should not prosecute Assange because indicting him would pose serious threats to press freedom. In sum, today’s indictment contains no new evidence or facts about Assange’s actions; all of it has been known for years.

The other key fact being widely misreported is that the indictment accuses Assange of trying to help Manning obtain access to document databases to which she had no valid access: i.e., hacking rather than journalism. But the indictment alleges no such thing. Rather, it simply accuses Assange of trying to help Manning log into the Defense Department’s computers using a different username so that she could maintain her anonymity while downloading documents in the public interest and then furnish them to WikiLeaks to publish.

In other words, the indictment seeks to criminalize what journalists are not only permitted but ethically required to do: take steps to help their sources maintain their anonymity. As longtime Assange lawyer Barry Pollack put it: “The factual allegations … boil down to encouraging a source to provide him information and taking efforts to protect the identity of that source. Journalists around the world should be deeply troubled by these unprecedented criminal charges.”

That’s why the indictment poses such a grave threat to press freedom. It characterizes as a felony many actions that journalists are not just permitted but required to take in order to conduct sensitive reporting in the digital age.

But because the DOJ issued a press release with a headline that claimed that Assange was accused of “hacking” crimes, media outlets mindlessly repeated this claim even though the indictment contains no such allegation. It merely accuses Assange of trying to help Manning avoid detection. That’s not “hacking.” That’s called a core obligation of journalism....

More articles/opinion, same topic:
https://shadowproof.com/2019/04/11/just ... espionage/
https://www.justsecurity.org/63595/assa ... s-freedom/
https://rightsanddissent.org/news/defen ... n-assange/

[O Really]

I'm all for freedom of the press, but a person shouldn't be able to claim "journalistic immunity" and be able to do stuff anybody else would get indicted for. Stealing information is no different from stealing anything else. Maybe (likely) in some whistleblower cases the end result or the cause justifies the means. But that decision ought to be made on a case by case basis in the courts where there is information theft.

[Vrede too]

I'm all for freedom of the press, but a person shouldn't be able to claim "journalistic immunity" and be able to do stuff anybody else would get indicted for. Stealing information is no different from stealing anything else. Maybe (likely) in some whistleblower cases the end result or the cause justifies the means. But that decision ought to be made on a case by case basis in the courts where there is information theft.

Not sure whether the articles are accurate or not, but they're making the case that Assange didn't steal anything, that was all Manning.

I don't have a problem with Ecuador's expulsion of Assange, it's their country, just interesting:

Ecuador denies it will imminently expel Assange from embassy

April 6, 2019

... Assange was “prepared” for expulsion from the building, a British friend of his said on Tuesday, after Ecuador’s President Lenin Moreno said he had “repeatedly violated” the terms of his asylum.

Moreno accused Assange of harming Ecuador’s relations with other countries by intervening in their politics and said he did not have the right to “hack private accounts or phones.” WikiLeaks said Moreno’s remarks were in retribution for WikiLeaks having reported on corruption accusations against Moreno, who denies wrongdoing.

Not very smart of WikiLeaks.

... Ecuador “categorically rejects the fake news that have circulated recently on social networks, many spread by an organization linked to Mr Julian Assange, about an imminent termination of the diplomatic asylum granted to him since 2012,” it said.

The ministry said it reserved the right to terminate asylum when it considered it justified.

“By releasing information that distorts the truth, (Assange) and his associates express once again their ingratitude and disrespect to Ecuador,” it said.

Once again, WikiLeaks was accurate and a government lies.

... Ecuador last year established new rules for Assange’s behavior while in the embassy, which required him to pay his medical bills and clean up after his pet cat. He challenged the rules in local and international tribunals, arguing they violated his human rights. Both courts ruled against him.

Last month, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which is linked to the Organization of American States, rejected Assange’s request that Ecuador ease the conditions it has imposed on his residence in the London embassy....

What a whiny asshole. When you are a guest, your only options are gratitude and leaving.

[O Really]

I'm all for freedom of the press, but a person shouldn't be able to claim "journalistic immunity" and be able to do stuff anybody else would get indicted for. Stealing information is no different from stealing anything else. Maybe (likely) in some whistleblower cases the end result or the cause justifies the means. But that decision ought to be made on a case by case basis in the courts where there is information theft.

Not sure whether the articles are accurate or not, but they're making the case that Assange didn't steal anything, that was all Manning.

Well, that's a point of defense, but it doesn't take much to make somebody an accomplice if they provide any assistance to someone they know or should know is going to commit a crime.

[Vrede too]

Well, that's a point of defense, but it doesn't take much to make somebody an accomplice if they provide any assistance to someone they know or should know is going to commit a crime.

That's where we get into the gray area of an unacceptable assault on freedom of the press. As quoted above in The Intercept article:

"... the Obama DOJ — not exactly renowned for being stalwart guardians of press freedoms — concluded that it could not and should not prosecute Assange because indicting him would pose serious threats to press freedom."

Who am I to disagree?

[O Really]

That's where we get into the gray area of an unacceptable assault on freedom of the press. As quoted above in The Intercept article:

"... the Obama DOJ — not exactly renowned for being stalwart guardians of press freedoms — concluded that it could not and should not prosecute Assange because indicting him would pose serious threats to press freedom."

Who am I to disagree?

And how about not indicting him would be giving a free pass to violation of security laws. Just say you're a "journalist" and it doesn't matter if you're a Pulitzer-winning columnist or a muck-raking paparazzi scum, you can get by with anything. Homey don't play that. Freedom of the press, like freedom of speech or right to bear arms is not absolute. Laws can be enforced without destroying the fundamental freedom. As I've said, let the courts decide.

[neoplacebo]

I'm all for freedom of the press, but a person shouldn't be able to claim "journalistic immunity" and be able to do stuff anybody else would get indicted for. Stealing information is no different from stealing anything else. Maybe (likely) in some whistleblower cases the end result or the cause justifies the means. But that decision ought to be made on a case by case basis in the courts where there is information theft.

I agree. I see this more as a computer hacking case than a freedom of the press case. The information that was stolen was not written or generated by either Manning or Assange; they just worked together to steal it and expose it. To my way of thinking, the recent Alex Jones case in which he spews the theory of the Sandy Hook school shootings as being staged is more of a freedom of the press case than this one is.

[Vrede too]

Freedom to travel?

Publication of Updated Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR) and Frequently Asked Questions

6/4/2019
​
The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is amending the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 515 (CACR), to further implement portions of the President’s foreign policy toward Cuba. In accordance with newly announced changes to non-family travel to Cuba, OFAC is amending the CACR to remove the authorization for group people-to-people educational travel. The CACR amendment will be published in the Federal Register on Wednesday June 5, 2019, at which time the changes will take effect. OFAC is also publishing a number of updated Frequently Asked Questions and a Fact Sheet pertaining to this regulatory amendment.

[Vrede too]

In Guantánamo Case, U.S. Government Says It Can Indefinitely Detain Anyone — Even U.S. Citizens

Constitution, what Constitution?

House Democrats “resist” Trump by voting to rubber stamp his terrifying mass surveillance capabilities



The Democrat controlled US House of Representatives just voted 253-175 against a bipartisan amendment that would have finally reined in some of the government’s most egregious mass surveillance practices. The Amash-Lofgren Amendment would have closed notorious loopholes in Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the National Security Agency (NSA) has abused to conduct warrantless surveillance of American citizens’ emails, SMS messages, and Internet activity. More Democrats voted against the bill than Republicans.

Nearly 50 civil liberties organizations –– ranging from right-wing FreedomWorks to civil rights groups like Color of Change and Demand Progress to the ACLU and EFF –– sent a letter in support of the amendment. Millions of people have spoken out against the US government’s mass surveillance programs in recent years, but Congress has failed to act....

House Republicans should be even more embarrassed. They’ve spent months complaining about the Obama administration’s abuses of FISA and then voted for the status quo when they had an actual opportunity to rein in Big Brother....

How Surveillance Cameras Could Be Weaponized With A.I.
Advances in artificial intelligence could supercharge surveillance cameras, allowing footage to be constantly monitored and instantly analyzed, the A.C.L.U. warned in a new report.