4 ms·

This is bad. Because other countries might take the same approach. What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet th

This is bad. Because other countries might take the same approach. What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? Like critisizing Communist Party? I don't see the difference between US prosecuting Assange and China prosecuting those who, being infinitely malignant, publish illegal, misleading information about Communist Party or Tiananmen square events thus bringing the authority and good name of the Government into contempt.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> Because other countries might take the same approach They do. > What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? They...do. Well, not necessarily posts on the internet specifically, but... And, in some cases, not just the “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” way of addressing crimes against their laws. Consider, e.g., the fatwa against the author, editors, and publishers of The Satanic Verses, whose targets were neither Iranian citizens nor operating in Iran.
- chupasaurus 8y ago
  > “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” In Russia, more likely "being held in custody up to court's decision" because of the rules in criminal case processing code.
narag 8y ago
Most countries will prosecute you if you are from that country or if the crime is commited in their jurisdiction.
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  at least comparatively in this thread, yours is one of the most down to earth replies, and it got downvoted?
  - narag 8y ago
    Maybe it was downvoted in error, sometimes it happens and it's better not to think too much about it. Sometimes the problem is that the downvoter thinks that I'm implying something that didn't cross my mind. Most times I prefer to keep the downvote better than explaining everything to the boredom point :)
- codedokode 8y ago
  But Assange is not from US and he published information on Wikileaks not from US. Australia and other countries are not in US jurisidiction yet.
  - narag 8y ago
    That's my understanding too. But USA authorities have a history of trying to expand their reach as much as possible and there are several interpretations that they could resort to. As an example, they could say that Assange was an accomplice of Manning, that was convicted of a crime commited in the USA. Remember when Evo Morales' plane was stopped and searched in Spain (sigh) to catch Snowden? And that's a head of state violation! Or the CIA flights, etc. You can complain as much as you want but that's a fait accompli situation.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Because other countries might take the same approach They do. > What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? They...do. Well, not necessarily posts on the internet specifically, but... And, in some cases, not just the “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” way of addressing crimes against their laws. Consider, e.g., the fatwa against the author, editors, and publishers of The Satanic Verses, whose targets were neither Iranian citizens nor operating in Iran.

chupasaurus 8y ago
> “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” In Russia, more likely "being held in custody up to court's decision" because of the rules in criminal case processing code.

narag 8y ago

Most countries will prosecute you if you are from that country or if the crime is commited in their jurisdiction.

DoctorOetker 8y ago
at least comparatively in this thread, yours is one of the most down to earth replies, and it got downvoted?
- narag 8y ago
  Maybe it was downvoted in error, sometimes it happens and it's better not to think too much about it. Sometimes the problem is that the downvoter thinks that I'm implying something that didn't cross my mind. Most times I prefer to keep the downvote better than explaining everything to the boredom point :)
codedokode 8y ago
But Assange is not from US and he published information on Wikileaks not from US. Australia and other countries are not in US jurisidiction yet.
- narag 8y ago
  That's my understanding too. But USA authorities have a history of trying to expand their reach as much as possible and there are several interpretations that they could resort to. As an example, they could say that Assange was an accomplice of Manning, that was convicted of a crime commited in the USA. Remember when Evo Morales' plane was stopped and searched in Spain (sigh) to catch Snowden? And that's a head of state violation! Or the CIA flights, etc. You can complain as much as you want but that's a fait accompli situation.