Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Americans would not have any privacy left

> I don't want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capability that is there to make tyranny total in America

Isn't he Australian ? I can understand if he was opposed to being spied on by US but if the democratically elected government of US chooses to spy on its own people, isn't it morally presumptuous for Assange to intervene ?



Due to long standing agreements [1] (in place before ECHELON, five eyes etc.) Australia and the US share a huge amount of intelligence. Being from Australia, Assange is aware of the influence that NSA data collection will have on areas outside of the US. Appealing to Americans is the best chance he has of informing the population who can make a difference.

EDIT: Add link

EDIT 2: from link, because I didn't know this and I thought it was interesting:

> Due to its status as a secret treaty, its existence was not known to the Prime Minister of Australia until 1973, and it was not disclosed to the public until 2005. On 25 June 2010, for the first time in history, the full text of the agreement was publicly released by Britain and the United States, and can now be viewed online. Shortly after its release, the seven-page UKUSA Agreement was recognized by Time magazine as one of the Cold War's most important documents, with immense historical significance.

Link to original treaty text [2].

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement [2]: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukusa/


Moral truths don't change just because an election was held / that new laws are passed is evidence that current laws aren't always what's moral.

Democracies have a better track record than most governments with respect to human rights, but they are not perfect. For the obvious example in the US, slavery was always immoral, and didn't suddenly become so when an elected official decided to outlaw it.


As I understand it, there are some things called natural and legal rights. Rights such as 'Right to life', 'Right to liberty' etc are natural. While 'Right to Privacy', 'Right to Freedom or Religion' etc are legal. One set is inalienable and the other the society can decide for themselves to forfeit. This arrangement is there so as to appeal to cultures and societies with different inclinations.


Australia has been an even more oppressive regime than America over the history of its existence. That you would assume that Australians don't care about how government oppression can have negative impact on culture belies your ignorance of the Australian governments' heinous actions against its own people over the course of centuries ..




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: