4 ms·

US citizens are most certainly subject to Iranian law. Just try to commit a crime there and see what happens.

potatolicious 16y ago
Note: I am not a fan of Assange. I think his indiscriminate leaking of everything, however inconsequential, harms the whistleblowing process and makes it all too easy to gloss over the real abuses exposed. But he has not committed a crime in the US. Even if disseminating state secrets is a crime (and the jury's still out on that one, to boot) he didn't do it here.
- damoncali 16y ago
  Would you bet your freedom on that? I haven't seen the dude strolling about in the States... He's going to pay a big price for his academic experiment. The US government has justifiably killed people over less serious attacks, and citizenship has nothing to do with it. And that's before you get to what has been done without justification (look up Ruby Ridge). When you pick a fight with a giant, you can expect to lose.
  - potatolicious 16y ago
    Oh don't get me wrong, I fully expect the US to do... interesting... things to Assange. Still doesn't mean they have a legal case around it, though. The best they have on him are questionably well-timed sex crime charges.
    - damoncali 16y ago
      That's the fascinating part to me. He's operating in this international legal grey area, all the while behaving as if the law will protect him.
      - potatolicious 16y ago
        He's got the insurance file, though, which sounds like he's not entirely counting on the law protecting him. And I'm fairly certain the law is fairly low on the CIA's radar of priorities.
  - mikecane 16y ago
    Justifiably or self-justifiably? In these days of warrantless searches, crotch invasions, and GPS tracking, it seems "justifiably" lacks the "justice" part. You know, that safeguard called the court. The CIA, for example, was prevented from foreign assassinations after the Church Committee. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_committee [typo edit]

Note: I am not a fan of Assange. I think his indiscriminate leaking of everything, however inconsequential, harms the whistleblowing process and makes it all too easy to gloss over the real abuses exposed. But he has not committed a crime in the US. Even if disseminating state secrets is a crime (and the jury's still out on that one, to boot) he didn't do it here.

damoncali 16y ago
Would you bet your freedom on that? I haven't seen the dude strolling about in the States... He's going to pay a big price for his academic experiment. The US government has justifiably killed people over less serious attacks, and citizenship has nothing to do with it. And that's before you get to what has been done without justification (look up Ruby Ridge). When you pick a fight with a giant, you can expect to lose.
- potatolicious 16y ago
  Oh don't get me wrong, I fully expect the US to do... interesting... things to Assange. Still doesn't mean they have a legal case around it, though. The best they have on him are questionably well-timed sex crime charges.
  - damoncali 16y ago
    That's the fascinating part to me. He's operating in this international legal grey area, all the while behaving as if the law will protect him.
    - potatolicious 16y ago
      He's got the insurance file, though, which sounds like he's not entirely counting on the law protecting him. And I'm fairly certain the law is fairly low on the CIA's radar of priorities.
- mikecane 16y ago
  Justifiably or self-justifiably? In these days of warrantless searches, crotch invasions, and GPS tracking, it seems "justifiably" lacks the "justice" part. You know, that safeguard called the court. The CIA, for example, was prevented from foreign assassinations after the Church Committee. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_committee [typo edit]