Slashdot Mirror
UK Parliament Seizes Cache of Facebook Internal Papers (theguardian.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader infolation writes: The UK Parliament has used its legal powers to seize internal Facebook documents in an extraordinary attempt to hold the US social media giant to account after chief executive Mark Zuckerberg repeatedly refused to answer MPs' questions. The documents are alleged to contain revelations on data and privacy controls that led to Cambridge Analytica scandal. Damian Collins, the chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, invoked a rare parliamentary mechanism to compel the founder of a US software company, Six4Three, to hand over the documents during a business trip to London.
Sunday Facebook's head of public policy told Parliament their actions were "entirely without merit," adding that they believed the move was "more about attacking our company than it is about a credible legal claim."
Sunday Facebook's head of public policy told Parliament their actions were "entirely without merit," adding that they believed the move was "more about attacking our company than it is about a credible legal claim."
Yeah, it's the Daily Mail...
But still, looks like Fuckerberg might be caught in a bald-faced lie.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6426219/Parliament-seizes-Facebook-internal-papers-Mark-Zuckerbergs-refusal-answer-questions.html
The secret cache is believed to include emails between Mark Zuckerberg and other executives that shows the firm knew about flaws in its privacy policy and allowed them to be actively exploited.
MPs discovered the documents were in the possession of an American software executive visiting London on a business trip and sent an official from the House of Commons to his hotel to retrieve them.
He was given two hours to hand them over to an appointee of Kamal El-Hajji, the House of Common's serjeant-at-arms, who is responsible for the security of the parliamentary estate.
However the executive refused, and was then hauled to Parliament and warned he could face imprisonment if he did not comply.
Damian Collins, chairman of the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee, told the BBC: 'We felt this [information] was highly relevant to the inquiry... and therefore we sent an order to Mr [Ted] Kramer through the serjeant at arms asking that these documents be supplied to us. Ultimately, that order was complied with.'
How is this any different from when you merkins arrest executives and or seize laptops on stop over international flights?
If you can do things to expand the grip of the company, rather than to make legitimate improvement or contribution, it's perfectly fine to attack you just to shrink you. Personally, I'm more a fan of offering alternatives to invididuals and corporations that are still using it, but it's not like it would be "unfair" to go for the company directly. They made their bed, let them lie in it. It's like anyone asked them to shit into it beforehand, just because *they* thought they would never have to lie in it.
Sunday Facebook's head of public policy told Parliament their actions were "entirely without merit," adding that they believed the move was "more about attacking our company than it is about a credible legal claim."
This isn't about making a legal claim, at least not yet and it's certainly isn't an attack. This is an investigation into Facebook's dealings with a corporation who is paid to undermine democracy. I don't blame the UK Parliament for unusual conduct in doing this considering the bullshit Facebook has pulled already with the EU. Facebook is telling everyone to trust them and when everything goes to shit they claim it's all fixed now when it's clearly not.
Facebook only cares about Facebook and they are terrified that it's users will figure that out.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, but it wouldn't surprise me if that happens and it's not like America was ever a great example of a free or morally just example of how to do things right. However that said the UK is a TERRIBLE place and I have experience in both. The US federal government sucks, but the most damage occurs at the state level and some states are like the UK in terms of bad and other states are much less bad. CA, NJ, NY, MA, TX, etc really bad. Not always for the same reasons. NH less bad, but it's at least redeemable particularly with the Free State Project and similar migration efforts which are impacting the state in a positive direction.
The US government should sanction the UK as well for holding a US citizen hostage. I am under no illusion though that would happen. That said it's also the case that Six4Three should be held liable for failing to properly secure the data. Under no circumstances should such data have left the court's jurisdiction and if Six4Three's executive left the state or any other employee no orders should have been obeyed to send the data while one of these individuals were in a foreign jurisdiction.
Every time a non-US government takes action against a predatory nominally US-based firm, dozens of "patriots" come out of the woodwork to decry how unfairly the foreigners are treating the nice US tech companies.
I don't know if these people are actually so deluded that they think Facebook holds any allegiance towards the USA (a company in which they pay virtually no tax, nor have any meaningful investment), if they are shills paid by FB, or if they are just bots meant to sow discord within the Western. But brace yourselves; here they come...
Umm... you do know that the Brits don't just allegedly have nukes like North Korea but actually do, yes?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
News for nerds. Uses the common definition of the word cache instead of the computer one. RIP Slashdot.
You think the UK govt. does anything without getting consent from the US Department of State first? It might even have been a Google Jigsaw employee/associate/consultant in the US DoS (they have a very cosy relationship) who gave the go ahead.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
To me, it looks like Parliament is acting legally and democratically, and Facebook's actions are "entirely without merit". Zuckerberg is not above the law and if the USA won't bring him to heel, the UK will.
Umm... you do know that the Brits don't just allegedly have nukes like North Korea but actually do, yes?
And submarines with nuclear ballistic missiles. Sinking the island won't get you around that problem.
that the brits are less incompetent at investigating powerful corps than the americans. Unlikely, but I can hope.
That's exceptionally derpy.
You can simply look at who did what and tell if their diplomatic corps was involved or not.
And it was done by the UK Parliament. So not even a part of the government that would have the sort of foreign ties that would allow for things getting checked in advance.
States that are allies don't ask each other before sneezing, instead they work out how these things are supposed to happen in advance, and then when things happen, they get done by whichever side the place where stuff is happening is.
If it was their executive branch, it would still depend on who did what as to if anything got checked; for example, if city cops do something, you can be sure they didn't talk to foreign powers. If the executive branch of their federal government did something, that's the point where you can finally assume that either some checking happened, or more likely, prompt notification was given.
Says the astroturf troll.
I want them to gut Facebook like a fish, expose every crime and underhanded tactic the company has ever engaged in and fine them until it bankrupts the company.
The major difference is that in the US there needs to.at least be suspicion of a crime, and making money and being popular are not automatically crimes like they are in the EU.
That isn't how islands work. Or heat. Or water.
But lets say you flew a B-2 and landed near in the UK near the coast. Go for a dive. Keep diving. Go all the way to the bottom of the Atlantic. Whenever you get to what you think the bottom is, you'll find that the bottom of the island already meets the bottom of the Atlantic.
What are you going to threaten next, to knock Jersey all the way to France?
Point of order:
The post you replied to was making a point about why the American Revolution was needed - because it supposedly prevents acts like this.
The problem with the grandparents point however is that this act can very easily fall within the bounds of the constitutional quote they highlight - the serjeant-at-arms was issued an order of seizure by a parliamentary committee, naming the class of documents or information and the individual required to disclose those items. It is, to all intent and purpose, a warrant issued by a proper authority under the UK parliamentary system, just as an equivalent order issued by a House or Senate committee would be.
It's funny that you think that free speech undermines democracy, but robbing a business traveler is a good thing?
It's funny because you don't realize that the memes didn't convince anyone of anything. We're instead convinced by your despotic actions in response to silly pictures online that you should by no means be permitted to retain any hold on the power of the state.
Robbing a business traveler under color of law is exactly why we've come to permanently mistrust you and your media allies.
probable cause: someone potentially invaded the privacy rights of UK citizens and the government while operating a business serving UK citizens.
If you think that the US wouldn't do the same thing (through a different legal mechanism) then you are hilariously mistaken. They would have just talked to a favorable judge for a warrant, so i fail to see how this would have justified anything in this case. If a company from anywhere else in the world violated US citizen privacy and an employee was traveling in the US with documents pertaining to an investigation about such a violation then you can be sure that the US government would have done the exact same thing. Remember that this government has requested for questions to be answered several times with a negative response from this country.
If you play in someones back yard you have to play by their rules.
What if it turns out to have happened in London, England, not London, Ohio?
I'm pretty sure they don't have that stuff there, and that considering what we had to do to enact those rules here, you should really know that before quoting it.
How ignorant are you?
Ignorant enough to think that that bolded shit from the U.S. Constitution doesn't apply in the UK?
I want them to gut Facebook like a fish, expose every crime and underhanded tactic the company has ever engaged in and fine them until it bankrupts the company.
I thought that, given Facebook is a legitimate threat to democracy (see USA, 2016) and that the cunt in charge of Facebook doesn't want to show up to answer the governments questions unless coerced, the government should have blocked Facebook from the country until the cunt showed up to be interrogated.
Yeah sure there's the VPN option for those who know how, but the average user would be bitching about losing their Facebook access because they don't know how to set up a VPN while Fuckerberg would be losing ad revenue from the regions where he's been blocked
Some of you might want to react to geo blocking as some sort of "big government" agenda that should be resisted, but this is already the norm when it comes to websites that enable piracy. Is enabling piracy a bigger threat than enabling attacks on democracy?
The post you replied to was making a point about why the American Revolution was needed
Let me get this clear, you hope that Facebook subscribers will rise up in revolution against the nations?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
So Facebook only believes in its own privacy to cover things up, but not the privacy of its users?
Got it.
But it's Facebook so what the hell burn em all.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Does not apply to crossing the US border, especially for non-citizens.
Not to mention that the papers were required through due process, so your whining isn't worth shit.
If an organization you're connected to is under investigation by a foreign entity--don't go there.
You do know the US House and Senate can subpoena documents too?
The post you replied to was making a point about why the American Revolution was needed
Let me get this clear, you hope that Facebook subscribers will rise up in revolution against the nations?
Oh, I see that one Facebook employee with mod points did rise up.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Let's see how that works out.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Facebook subscribers will rise up
As long as that doesn't literally mean climbing the stairs out of their mother's basement.
Have gnu, will travel.
Nope, I'm just pointing out that CaptainDork was living up to their name and missing the point - which you also seem to be doing.
Please do say if you want the thread explained to you in simple terms.
Oh look, someone else who is missing the point :D
Ok, as I seem to be in the minority of people who actually understood the grand parent posters point, let me take a moment to explain it.
They understand that this happened in the UK and not the US. Thats fundamental to their post.
They then suggest that the American Revolutionary War (1765-1783 - otherwise known as The War of Independence, in which the American colonies won their independence from the British crown) was justified precisely because of this act (see the grand parents post title).
They then quote the relevant portion of the Constitution of the United States of America, which was made possible by the independence gained during the American Revolutionary War - the quote they highlight suggests that they think that that part of the constitution would protect against the sort of seizure of documents or papers that occurred in TFA.
Its got nothing to do with the grand parent poster thinking the constitutional protection they highlighted applies in the UK.
Its got everything to do with the grant parent poster thinking that highlighted constitutional protection would prevent this sort of seizure in the US.
And that is why they think the American Revolutionary War was justified.
They are basically saying "And this is why we seceded from the British Crown and enshrined our constitutional rights in a document".
Ok? Everyone got it now? :)
I know this will come as a shock to most Americans, but YES, other governments can do stuff without the US giving consent.
An excellent example of this was the country of New Zealand which in the 1980's said NO to nukes from the USA, France, UK, etc etc, and they hold this policy today.
US laws, rights, etc all finish at the US boarder.
Do you need it explained to you in simple terms, what a point of order is?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
For what?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The post you replied to was making a point about why the American Revolution was needed - because it supposedly prevents acts like this.
Oh please! The American "Revolution" was needed to wipe out debts and zero the books. It had nothing to do with "acts like this".
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Simple explanation: Facebook set their preferences to Seizure of Documents = No but when there was a change of Parliament that setting was defaulted back to Seizure of Documents = Yes to improve customer delight in the Visiting UK Experience.
Probable cause isn't the correct legal standard here because that is an element of criminal law. Annoyingly, the new reports don't say anything more than "rarely used power", but what exactly is that power? Something about select committees and contempt, I think.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
That makes two of us then. I'm glad you don't live in the UK too.
Awww look at you, trying to recover from your embarrassment - I was using it to mock the person I was responding to, rather than using it in the same way they were (whatever way they intended).
But I guess you missed that as well. Missing a lot today, aren't you?
Thats nice.
But guess what, the US constitution is only valid in the USA.
The USA only makes up 4% of the worlds population, the other 96% don't care what you think your rights are, and many live in countries that are MORE free than the USA.
The USA does not run the world , nor control other governments.
If a US citizen enters another country, you are subject to their laws, NOT the US laws.
Take no prisoners! One B-2 is all it takes to sink that island to the bottom of the Atlantic.
Mouth breathing retard....
You are self-mocking.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Weird, because a lot of those "shit holes" have more freedom than the USA, better education than the USA, better healthcare than the USA, less crime and the USA, less violent crime than the USA, smaller prison populations than the USA, are less corrupt than the USA, have greater freedom of the press than the USA, are happier than the USA.
The USA is a long long way from being the pinnacle of civilisation.
Hey, whoa, go easy on Hank Johnson there. He's a Congressman; you can't expect him to understand complicated stuff like islands!
How is this any different than a subpoena from a Judge, with the threat of contempt of court if you refuse to comply?
What part of refusing to comply with a subpoena from a sovereign government while in their country is "kidnapping"?
If you insist.
Value of scapegoats who can absorb some public rage is up dramatically
They were not fighting for the right to disobey English law in England they fought for their own right to live under their own laws.
So that is why, it matters a great deal if it happens in London, Ohio, or London, England.
The obvious fact is that you should not travel to the UK with documents, or access to documents. Post-Brexit, it is simply not a friendly place to do business for anybody but the English, Scottish, and Welsh.
And if you visit Ireland, I'd stay away from the border region.
Yeah, except that what happened here is basically the equivalent of a Senate committee or congressional hearing issuing a warrant for the disclosure of a document or information and someone enforcing that warrant.
Perfectly legal, perfectly within the powers of both bodies, just different names for the processes and people involved.
Nothing to get all het up about, nothing wrong happened here, there was no overstep of authority, no abuse of power or position etc.
The problem though is that this data presumably isn't something that the company representative had. He was threatened with violence and held hostage to achieve it and couldn't seek legal council or leave the country without complying. That isn't an act a warrant can thrust on someone in any moral and just system. That is a barbaric system which should be overthrown at first opportunity. If the US can do this legally then it too should be overthrown.
US laws, rights, etc all finish at the US boarder.
I believe you meant "border".
But regardless, ask Julian Assange about those territorial limits to US law, never mind that what he and Wikileaks has done is essentially the same thing Daniel Ellsberg and the NYT did when they published the "Pentagon Papers".
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Are you saying, the Legislature can issue its own Search Warrant? Could you elaborate, which Article of the Constitution gives them this power?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Americans are being searched at American airports , devices inspected or infected out of sight.Especially international. Assage and DotCom are notable victims of legal rape.
True. Fortunately, in Soviet America EVERYTHING is a crime.
This isn't about being popular... You must have missed some headlines this year. The scandal happened and all we got was a denial followed by another empty apology
Actually, they started out fighting to secure their rights as Englishmen. The independence part came a little later.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The Faceboot vs Soros stories are 99% likely to be FAKE NEWS. Everyone knows both Faceboot and Soros are big supporters of extremist Corporate Social Just-Us ideology.
Troll moderators today?
Bad behavior on the part of the UK is the cause of those words being in the constitution. You are bashing a strawman of your own design.
Indeed. The whole point of the revolution was the assertion that the American colonists, as Englishmen, had not ceased to be Englishmen (with all their historic rights) simply because the Atlantic separated them from the motherland.
The founder of an outside company had the documents because of discovery in a lawsuit he filed against Facebook. A California court said he wasn't allowed to share them. Is it a coincidence he brought them to the UK (where Parliament could force them over) and became known that they were in his possession?
His lawsuit seems to be that he lost $250k because of the Cambridge Analytica security holes, so he's probably upset about that.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
You realize this happened in the United Kingdom, where they don't have a written Constitution - right?
I don't know where this "it's from the Daily Mail" nonsense came from. The links are to the Guardian and CNet. The quotes are from the BBC.
Look, if a bad newspaper rips something off a good news source, that doesn't make it false. It means you should check a good news source.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
As a Brit, this is pretty weird. This power probably hasn't been used in hundreds of years.
It's civil war era stuff. Our civil war, Cromwell et al.
Totally agree, if the intercepted documents prove guilt at the top level then it's worth the risk of investigation.
expose every crime and underhanded tactic the company has ever engaged in and fine them until it bankrupts the company.
So just what common place would you expect this information to all end up where people could easily see it -- Facebook?
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
From the UK... Please do block FB in the UK, that site has long been a parasite leeching of the pipes. Itâ(TM)s about time the net routed around that damage anyway. While you at at it, Twitter can go too.
Opinionated Anonymous Idiot classifies places as "bad" or "not bad" without any explanation or reasoning. News at 11.
I actually laughed reading that, some people are just insane. May, famously of "Foreigners Go Home" advertising campaign, upholding sharia law? Meanwhile Trump sucking Saudi cock, a real bastion of sharia law, gets a free pass.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Trump supporters love those big Arab cocks. From flat-earther style climate change denial to support Arab oil exports to supporting 9/11 financing murderous states, they kneel before their Arab masters, tiny button mushrooms erect, waiting for that big juicy Arab cock.
They siezed the docs NOT from somebody in the UK accused of wrongdoing, but from the PLAINTIFF in a lawsuit within the US courts and US juridiction.
Not only is this a hostile act in the diplomatic sense, essentially a form of government-sponsored IP theft, but it highlights the fact that the UK does not have what Americans take for granted: Constitutional rights in a written document that the courts uphold.
This is not going to start a fight between the US and UK governments; they are used to getting along on much bigger issues while smaller stuff like this pops up (on both sides and in both directions). What is likely to happen hereafter however, is that US companies are likely to add new language to contracts restricting executives and employees from travel to the UK where they could end up held hostage by the British Parliament in order to steal documents and intellectual property. That would ultimately be a bad thing for the UK, and its economy - directly caused by a reckless Parliament seeking a short-term goal by being underhanded and sneaky.
Brexit vote only succeeded because of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica (the thing which is called these days Emerdata -- portmanteau of "merde" and "data", perhaps?).
The advantage with a written one is that at least you know what's being ignored.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Found the person who got his JD from DeVry.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
What is this "Sunday Facebook" and how is it related to Facebook ? Is it what "The Sunday Times" is to "The Times" ?
For example running a legitimate online casino or betting site but not properly firewalling the usa off from the internet.
Otoh the europeans arrested new zealand executives for producing butter of too high quality.
Different continents different priorities.
So he was forbidden to release these documents buttressing his court case but by lucky chance he carried them to England placing them in jeopardy to having them seized against his will by the government that just happens to have known he was there and had the documents?
(Not that I know anything about this I just wondered).
Was it caused by his anus implant which he got recently?
Considering the UK has been owned by the Rotschild banker family since 1911 (the year when the country went bankrupt in a battleship building frenzy vs the Prussian German Empire and the USA and its state bonds had to be bought out to prevent collapse), I would say those who hurt the jewish Facebook company will soon meet a well-deserved sad end. The world jewry saved Britain's posterior during both WW1 and WW2 by bringing US armed forced to their help, so London needs to know its place and behave humble.
Roll an account you fucking nutter, that's the only reason anyone can 'impersonate' you, you dunce.
We should all leave Facebook alone.
Yes enabling piracy is a bigger threat. Its about the money. Always.
Finally, someone seems to be taking steps to try to hold Facebook and Zuckerberg accountable.
It's no surprise that this move DID NOT come from the United States congress.
FB should block all log-ins from the UK and 'ghost' every UK FB page. If they remain intransigant, give them 30 days and then delete all UK FB pages, photos, company pages, videos, messages, etc etc.
Next, have MS remotely disable/encrypt all copies of Windows in the UK.
That socialist native-population-replacing, sharia-law-upholding May can whine all she wants, Trump will just grab her by the pussy and laugh in her face. The UK government won't do anything. They're a bunch of milquetoast pansies that soil themselves anytime someone says anything not 'PC'.
Fucking UK. But what can one expect from a backwards failed empire that's still living in the Middle Ages with a fucking queen?
you forgot inbred, UK citizens are so inbred from mating with their cousins that their teeth point in completely different directions. and the teeth are so big and crooked that it effects the way they talk. most people think it is an accent, but alas it really is from having horse teeth and the fact that their tongue has no room to move to be able to speak clearly. it's not an accent, it's a side effect from sister fucking.
Hey mister neonazi. Probably best to leave the bitter sarcasm to people who have IQs above room temperature. Thick bigots don't win any friends for the cause, and you sounded really fucking dumb in that post.
Daniel Ellsberg failed to turn up after being accused of rape and was found in contempt of court? News to me.
Sometimes there's just too much concentrated crazy to even attempt a response to.
The only thing extraordinary about this is Facebook's contempt for Parliament, can you imagine the uproar if Zuckerberg refused to answer question in a senate or congressional hearings.
Facebook are in Contempt of Parliament and their position to ignore this inquiry is the only thing extraordinary here.
Otoh the europeans arrested new zealand executives for producing butter of too high quality.
Sounds like bullshit. Citation?
Did Daniel Ellsberg commit various sexual assaults and then jump bail to avoid answering those charges? No? Then it's essentially a completely different thing. But you knew that, you disingenuous hack.
Treading the alleged rape as credible at this point involves as much willful stupidity as expecting Saddam's WMD's to surface any day now.....any day now. From being cleared to leave the country by the prosecutor who heard the women's request for an STD test, to Sweden refusing to promise they wont hand Assange over to the United States, to refusing to interview Assange remotely as they've done in dozens of other cases since he sought asylum, it just goes on and on.
So pull your head out of John Brennan's ass already - you disingenuous hack.
And none of the smarmy shitweasels in the mainstream press that have been shitting all over Assange seem to have any awareness of the precedent about to be set. Outfits like NYTimes, WaPo and the Guardian in particular were all happy to take classified information from Wikileaks and publish it, collecting money and rewards in the process. But now that they've hung Assange out to dry, they're asking to be prosecuted themselves the next time they publish classified information.
You realize this happened in the United Kingdom, where they don't have a written Constitution - right?
We do, it's just not codified in a single document; our constitution includes disparate elements from as far back as the Magna Carta to more recent additions like the ECHR.
I didn't write rape, I wrote "sexual assault." There's a reason for that.
And authorities only allow you to travel when they've absolutely cleared you from charges. Oh, wait... they do that all the time when people are still under investigation too.
Why should they? Have they done that before? Do they normally offer guarantees to such treatment to people that they question?
Why is Sweden so much more convenient to pull Assange from than the United Kingdom -- where he was let out on bail from December 2011 to June 2012 -- which has a "special relationship" with the UK?
Oh, by the way, you skipped the whole "bail jumping" thing... probably because that act is indefensible.
Why should they? Have they done that before? Do they normally offer to travel internationally to the people that they question?
Can't even make up your own insult. Sad.
Daniel Ellsworth didn't jump bail. Not the same. So sorry.
Translation: there's entirely enough merit and they're worried enough to lie to people about it.
least we didn't elect Trump as our king.
nah the inbreds all left for someplace else in 1776 where they value freedumb.
Also, the UK is cracking down (successfully? we'll see) on privacy and monopolies.
The US is not tackling those issues on any front.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Fuck you.
... strawman of your own design.
You'd be OK if I did business with, Strawman Designs, Inc.?
Bad behaviour on the part of the UK did not cause those words. The UK is where those words came from .
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Daniel Ellsberg failed to turn up after being accused of rape and was found in contempt of court? News to me.
So do you think the US will charge Assange, a foreigner to the US, with sexual assault or related crimes that were alleged to occur in a different country to a non-American, or do you think they'll prosecute him for publishing things that embarrassed the US government and exposed their corruption?
How does someone like you come to defending indefensible blatant corruption and lawlessness such as the US's actions and those of their allies regarding Assange/Wikileaks?
Point of order.
You're fuller of shit than a Christmas turkey.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
I don't care who you are, that's funny, point being that I don't care who you are and, collaterally, that's funny, I don't care who you are.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
I've no version 3.0++, I'd never post on hosts offtopic + gweihir KNEW u IMPERSONATE me https://it.slashdot.org/commen... c6gunner proves it https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & forgot to SUBMIT AC & used his registered 'lusrname' (he tried to mock me both BEFORE & after I FAIRLY challenged him to show he's done better work - he had ZERO).
I'd never "cry victim" to ne'er-do-wells (TROLLS, not all /.ers) either.
U EVEN HELPED ME https://science.slashdot.org/c... (& then realizing it you quit trying to make me look bad via what you thought were lies on hosts as "ME" IN YOUR IMPERSONATIONS of me e.g. https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... on speculative execution attack: Hosts PREVENT 'EM, joke's on you)
APK
P.S.=> 2nd to last link's KILLING U THAT U HELPED ME & got me to see if hosts stop portsmash/meltdown/spectre & yes - hosts WORK on 'em - U LOSE + FAIL a PORTFILTER TEST https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...
He would make a good bird.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Precisely the point of order I made in the OP. Mod-wise, it diidn't go well.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Americans don't do well with UK trivia. By, "et al" they think you are going for, "And you, Al?" wherein they refer to Al Gore because Leslie Gore (no relation) is his daughter of the revolution, being an American, I'm not sure if we're talking about yours or ours.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Point of order.
You're fuller of shit than a Christmas turkey.
Point of grammar. "More full" of shit.
Pedantic distinction without a difference.
Not if you believe there's merit to the allegations and you're dealing with a foreign national that has made it clear he's about to leave the country. Then they release you from custody but keep your passport.
Do you comment on many subjects at length where you have a comical level of ignorance, or just this one? In 2001, Sweden arrested a couple of men and handed them over to the CIA to be tortured. That by itself makes Assange's fear of extradition a matter of common sense, not paranoia. Since then, Obama launched more prosecutions of whisteblowers than all previous presidents combined, had one tortured for eighteen months before finding her guilty in a kangaroo court. The current Secretary of State is a big fan of torture, and the current head of the CIA is a torturer.
Hell, not only is Assange in the right to want extradition to the US blocked, Sweden is actually required to do so as a signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture, which forbids countries from extraditing to regimes that practice it. Regimes like the United States. But Sweden has ignored that treaty before - thus Assange's more than reasonable request that Sweden go on the record that this really is just about getting him to answer questions about an alleged rape.
1) See above 2) see recent case where UK courts blocked the extradition of an accused hacker to the United States because of America's brutal prison system. The same prison system that saw Manning tortured and found guilty under unlawful command influence.
Obviously, it was throwing your BS back in your face. Obviously.
You think UK police spend millions of pounds on every bail jumping case? Assange has offered to answer questions via video chat or in person if Swedish investigators come to the embassy in London. Sweden has done just that in dozens of other cases since Assange was granted asylum, so neither they nor you have any excuse here. And Assange has offered to give up his asylum and return to Sweden if they promise not to hand him over to the United States. Even if you think Assange is bluffing, Ecuador would no longer have a reason to grant him asylum.
So the allegations are so serious as to swear out an INTERPOL warrant and for the UK to spend millions of pounds keeping Assange under siege, yet Sweden has refused to make a simple promise that would have seen Assange back in their custody in a matter of days. Which tells anyone with two functioning brain cells that this isn't about an alleged rape and never was.
> The UK didn't break any UK laws.
> If you don't like their laws, don't travel to their country.
BRB, going to quote you in the story about the migrants rushing the border.
Point of grammar.
You're the fullerester of shit than anyone else is more fullerest of shit.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
-1 Troll
Tribal savages on the march!
FB should block all log-ins from the UK and 'ghost' every UK FB page. If they remain intransigant, give them 30 days and then delete all UK FB pages, photos, company pages, videos, messages, etc etc.
Next, have MS remotely disable/encrypt all copies of Windows in the UK.
And nothing of any value would be lost.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
These documents were in the UK, they were seized in the UK using legal powers, these documents are relevant to the ongoing Parliamentary investigation into Facebook breach of Data Protection regulation in the Cambridge Analytics scandal. Facebook have had the opportunity to testify before this Parliamentary committee, to have their 'day in court' and have repeated snubbed Parliament. Contempt of Parliament is a very serious charge, more so than their original data breach. They thought they could ignore the law in the UK and it was necessary to prove to them they cannot, as this action has proven.
Parliament is the sovereign authority in the UK, this process is entirely legal, while this authority is typically delegated to the courts, it is still vested in Parliament. They could try to appeal this to the Supreme court but they would be laughed out.
This would be entirely legal for any sovereign authority to do the same. If Facebook faced these charges before a congressional hearing, would you be equally outraged; I suggest not.
Because American is not a defence!
The irony of it all is that the only reason this was able to happen was because a US court allowed the data to be seized and handed over to this 3rd party company in the first place. As such if the UK seizure justifies the revolutionary war, the implication is that the US seizure must too and that hence the American revolution was a failure because American has ended up in the exact same position that supposedly justified the revolutionary war.
The idea that a US legal process seizing Facebook data is legitimate regardless of a line in the US constitution, but a UK one doing so is illegitimate because of the US constitution which doesn't apply in the UK would seem to require a rather unhealthy dose of jingoism.
Prove that. Everyone else disagrees.
Prove that. Because it's not universal, including in Europe.
Answer the questions.
Not answers to the questions. Show how Sweden is acting differently in wanting to question Assange in Sweden. Or continue to not do so. Your evasion speaks volumes.
Blah blah irrelevant blah...
First sentence: "A British computer hacker accused by the United States of causing more than $700,000 damage to U.S. military systems will not be extradited because of the high risk he could kill himself." Where's the mention of "America's brutal prison system"?
Citation needed. Desperately.
By failing to identify one iota of falsity. Kudos, dilettante internet vigilante man
Blah blah irrelevant blah. "Doing essentially the same thing Daniel Ellsberg and the NYT" would involve fighting it out in court. Not jumping bail and hiding out in a foreign embassy. That's why one man is a celebrated hero, and the other is a reviled douche on the verge of being thrown out of his chosen refuge.
Wow, you two. Also, remind me to never spend Christmas at your place.
If you're gonna spend at my place, it's cash only. No crypto, OK?
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
No. They don't. Not even remotely close. Assange is accused of inserting his penis into a sleeping woman without consent. Which is considered rape in all countries involved plus the "hang Assange high" set.
It's utterly commonplace including examples right here in the United States. More willful stupidity isn't helping your case - arguing that the allegations are so serious that they are worth an INTERPOL warrant plus the UK spending millions of pounds to enforce, but not pulling a passport. Hell, forget willful stupidity - now you're engaging in outright willful dumbfuckery.
Answered in spades and in triplicate - dumbfuck.
Is your willful dumbfuck engine fusion-powered? Again, Sweden has interviewed dozens of suspects abroad since Assange was granted asylum, and has refused to make it clear this is nothing but rape allegations, despite prodding and years to do just that.
Translation: even your fusion-powered willful dumbfuckery ran out of talking points when confronted with a deluge of facts.
Again, do you comment at lengths on topics where you have a comical level of ignorance, or just this one? Solitary confinement is torture, particularly when used against a non-violent inmate who has shown zero signs of being a threat to herself or others.
Even more dumbfuckery. It's the entire basis for the refusal to extradite.
You can't answer the question of why the UK would spend millions of pounds on a simple bail-jumping case because you can't.
Dumb.
Fuck.
Er.
Eee.
And that's before looking at the fact that the UK was begging Sweden to maintain the prosecution of Assange instead of dropping it. Not, "hey, can you go ahead and promise this nob you wont hand him to the United States so we can hand him over to you and go home".
You're literally cited no sources. "They've interviewed dozens of suspects. Just take my word for it." Not going to happen.
Loser.