Judge Orders Los Angeles Times to Delete Part of Published Article

Re:Judge Orders Los Angeles Times to Delete Part of Publishe... by ars on Monday July 16, 2018 @12:35AM (#17538802)

> and the LA Times gets a pass

Hu? The LA Times took it down. How is that "gets a pass"?

The LA Times also acquired the information lawfully, Wikileaks did not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge Orders Los Angeles Times to Delete Part of Publishe... by hedora on Monday July 16, 2018 @01:33AM (#17538982)

The people at the LA times that published the information haven’t been forced to choose between exile in an embassy, and facing a kangaroo court, and also well-documented persecution via probably illegal psy-ops, falsified slanderous/libelous communications “from” trusted colleagues, etc, etc.

Compared to wikileaks, they “got a pass”. It doesn’t make the mistreatment of the LA Times any better though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge Orders Los Angeles Times to Delete Part of Publishe... by ars on Monday July 16, 2018 @11:38AM (#17542141)

Because they obeyed the court order and took it down, so obviously they didn't have to do any of that.

I really don't understand what you are expecting. If you disobey a court, you get punished. Why is that strange?

And the exile in an embassy thing was unrelated to any leaks, despite Assange desperately trying to make it as if it was.

Look, I supported Wikileaks goals at first, but then Assange tried to turn it into his personal PR firm, using the name "wiki" to try to make it as if it's some "for the public thing".

[ Parent | on HN ]