5 ms·

Not taking a stance on what has happened here, but, I just find it weird in this day and age how you can be accused of crimes against a country you aren't in by

by wilhil 7y ago

Not taking a stance on what has happened here, but, I just find it weird in this day and age how you can be accused of crimes against a country you aren't in by doing something over the internet. Was it Turkey (I forget) recently that was trying to accuse people of crimes for writing anti-government pieces online and everyone says how bad it is, but, people seem to be cool when it's the USA doing it. I don't understand the modern world and the reach of governments/where the crime actually occurs etc. Going to Assange now - I can understand if he hacked the American government and you could state that the crime took place in America, but, if he passed around information outside of America, surely the offence didn't actually occur where the USA have jurisdiction?

WoahNoun 7y ago
I don't see how this is complicated. US has a lot of allies and those allies have agreed to this. Turkey does not have a lot of allies (or at least as strong of allies as the US has/had) and thus doesn't have the same agreements in place.
- thatoneuser 7y ago
  You can't see how it's complicated? Not at all? No historical events pop out as "it's not normal precedence to arrest people in other countries for crimes in your country"? I mean look at the international outrage when people from country A commit a crime INSIDE country B and country B punishes based on their own laws. The north Korea prisoner who was tortured and died shortly after release stands out, but there are plenty of other examples. To just say "I don't see how anyone has a problem with this" makes you sound like a shill or someone trying to look enlightened, because it's not hard at all to see how this is complicated.
  - kpU8efre7r 7y ago
    It's fairly complicated because it is geopolitics and international law. Why? Because that's what the government's have worked out between each other. Usually between representatives who were put there through Democratic means. I'm hoping that he is extradited and stands trial because I can't think of an alternative. It will settle the issue as best as we humans can.
short_sells_poo 7y ago
In an international framework, law is whatever a particular country can enforce. In other words, whoever has the biggest stick will ultimately have their way. This has nothing to do with technology, but fundamental political facts of life that are unlikely to change. The players might change, but the game is the same.
- politician 7y ago
  Indeed, in all ages of man, groups took political hostages and traded them. Might makes right.
Myrmornis 7y ago
> people seem to be cool when it's the USA doing it. People like who?! As far as I'm aware most sentient people in the world are utterly depressed by the USA's arrogance and hypocrisy.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
zepto 7y ago
There is a difference between posting anti-government opinions, and aiding and abetting the theft of state secrets. Eliding then into one thing is intellectually dishonest. I think it’s totally reasonable to argue that Assange did not do what he is accused of, but what he is accused of is not journalism or simply the expression of free speech.
- thatoneuser 7y ago
  Aiding and abetting is a lesser crime than the actual theft crime. Eliding those things into one is intellectually dishonest. Further, the person who actually committed theft has been pardoned serving less time than Julian spent in the embassy. It makes no sense that he would receive any punishment at this point for the lesser crime.
  - zepto 7y ago
    Who is eliding those things?
n8henry 7y ago
The US is claiming that he illegally accessed a government system and that is why they have jurisdiction. Whether or not he actually did that is questionable.
xtracto 7y ago
It is the current imperialism in the USA.
buryat 7y ago
you can steal money using internet while you’re not in the same country. This case is no different
- thatoneuser 7y ago
  Where your analogy is mistaken is he didn't steal anything.

by wilhil 7y ago

WoahNoun 7y ago

I don't see how this is complicated. US has a lot of allies and those allies have agreed to this. Turkey does not have a lot of allies (or at least as strong of allies as the US has/had) and thus doesn't have the same agreements in place.

thatoneuser 7y ago
You can't see how it's complicated? Not at all? No historical events pop out as "it's not normal precedence to arrest people in other countries for crimes in your country"? I mean look at the international outrage when people from country A commit a crime INSIDE country B and country B punishes based on their own laws. The north Korea prisoner who was tortured and died shortly after release stands out, but there are plenty of other examples. To just say "I don't see how anyone has a problem with this" makes you sound like a shill or someone trying to look enlightened, because it's not hard at all to see how this is complicated.
- kpU8efre7r 7y ago
  It's fairly complicated because it is geopolitics and international law. Why? Because that's what the government's have worked out between each other. Usually between representatives who were put there through Democratic means. I'm hoping that he is extradited and stands trial because I can't think of an alternative. It will settle the issue as best as we humans can.

short_sells_poo 7y ago

In an international framework, law is whatever a particular country can enforce. In other words, whoever has the biggest stick will ultimately have their way. This has nothing to do with technology, but fundamental political facts of life that are unlikely to change. The players might change, but the game is the same.

politician 7y ago
Indeed, in all ages of man, groups took political hostages and traded them. Might makes right.

Myrmornis 7y ago

> people seem to be cool when it's the USA doing it. People like who?! As far as I'm aware most sentient people in the world are utterly depressed by the USA's arrogance and hypocrisy.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

zepto 7y ago

There is a difference between posting anti-government opinions, and aiding and abetting the theft of state secrets. Eliding then into one thing is intellectually dishonest. I think it’s totally reasonable to argue that Assange did not do what he is accused of, but what he is accused of is not journalism or simply the expression of free speech.

thatoneuser 7y ago
Aiding and abetting is a lesser crime than the actual theft crime. Eliding those things into one is intellectually dishonest. Further, the person who actually committed theft has been pardoned serving less time than Julian spent in the embassy. It makes no sense that he would receive any punishment at this point for the lesser crime.
- zepto 7y ago
  Who is eliding those things?

n8henry 7y ago

The US is claiming that he illegally accessed a government system and that is why they have jurisdiction. Whether or not he actually did that is questionable.

xtracto 7y ago

It is the current imperialism in the USA.

buryat 7y ago

you can steal money using internet while you’re not in the same country. This case is no different

thatoneuser 7y ago
Where your analogy is mistaken is he didn't steal anything.