6 ms·

He could leave the embassy at any time, which is where the purported damage was done. He is now in prison, where he cannot leave it any time. Melzer visited him

by sambe 7y ago

He could leave the embassy at any time, which is where the purported damage was done. He is now in prison, where he cannot leave it any time. Melzer visited him recently in prison, thus your quote. It seems pretty clear. The parent may be lacking in nuance for his situation, but it is correct.

k1m 7y ago
Melzer was asked about that. He responded: "Mr. Assange was about as free to leave as someone sitting on a rubber boat in a shark pool." - https://twitter.com/NilsMelzer/status/1134400849097220102 https://twitter.com/NilsMelzer/status/1134400849097220102
- zepto 7y ago
  Generally people accused of serious crimes are not as free as the rest of us. He has always been free to face his accusers.
  - black_puppydog 7y ago
    BS. They're accusing him under a law that would not allow him to present any motive for what he did. Not a fair trial by most countries' standards.
    - jimbokun 7y ago
      What is an acceptable motive for rape?
      - mattigames 7y ago
        The charges he will be facing on the US are for spionage (under patriot act) not rape.
    - mariorossi666 7y ago
      > They're accusing him under a law that would not allow him to present any motive for what he did Yeah, rape doesn't need motive.
      - colejohnson66 7y ago
        Please don’t do that here. We’re not talking about rape. We’re talking about the espionage accusations.
        mariorossi666 7y ago
        I thought the news was about Sweden dropping the case of rape.
        black_puppydog 7y ago
        Well then you've clearly not been following the discussion and are just provoking. Do your reading first please. Edit: yes, this news item is about the rape allegations. BUT Assange had long been stating that the US were preparing a secret indictment under the espionage act, something that has turned out to be 100% correct, even though the US administration kept denying (read: lying about) it. They never intended to give him a fair trial, there were never any indications they would, and since his indictment has become public, it is clear as daylight they won't.
        mariorossi666 7y ago
        I've done my reading, nowhere it was mentioned that it wasn't about the allegations of rape. BTW, the comments guidelines state Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article?
        foldr 7y ago
        Not really. It was the arrest warrant for the rape charges in Sweden that kept him confined in the Ecuadorian embassy.
- solipsism 7y ago
  You're plastering this thread with the same talking points. People are responding to you. Were you going to address any of the responses, or just keep plastering?
black_puppydog 7y ago
They were waiting in front of the embassy 24/7. We can now see that he was exactly right in his prediction of what would happen if he left, and how. He's been held in solitary confinement, itself already widely regarded as torture. Saying "he could have left" in this situation, after being shown exactly how that would have/did go down, is like camping out in front of your ex-girlfriend's house with a baseball bat, then telling the officer you didn't beat her and thus did nothing wrong. Except the whole world can see you totally did beat her when she finally left the house.
- chungus_khan 7y ago
  In addition, he didn't even know if it would be a real arrest and just solitary confinement considering the CIA's reputation.
- sambe 7y ago
  I didn't say otherwise. The grandparent stated that he had a choice to leave, the parent implied that he did not because he was in prison. That is not true - the grandparent was correct. As I said, framing it as that simple of a choice may lack some nuance in describing the pressure he was under. But it is factually true that he was not forced to stay in the conditions which are being criticised. Some would also say that the nature of the conditions was somewhat of his own doing, since the relationship with the embassy is well documented to have deteriorated greatly over time. I can't vouch either way, and it seems people are downvoting normal conversation so I doubt it will be productive to continue.

by sambe 7y ago

k1m 7y ago

Melzer was asked about that. He responded: "Mr. Assange was about as free to leave as someone sitting on a rubber boat in a shark pool." - https://twitter.com/NilsMelzer/status/1134400849097220102 https://twitter.com/NilsMelzer/status/1134400849097220102

zepto 7y ago
Generally people accused of serious crimes are not as free as the rest of us. He has always been free to face his accusers.
- black_puppydog 7y ago
  BS. They're accusing him under a law that would not allow him to present any motive for what he did. Not a fair trial by most countries' standards.
  - jimbokun 7y ago
    What is an acceptable motive for rape?
    - mattigames 7y ago
      The charges he will be facing on the US are for spionage (under patriot act) not rape.
  - mariorossi666 7y ago
    > They're accusing him under a law that would not allow him to present any motive for what he did Yeah, rape doesn't need motive.
    - colejohnson66 7y ago
      Please don’t do that here. We’re not talking about rape. We’re talking about the espionage accusations.
      - mariorossi666 7y ago
        I thought the news was about Sweden dropping the case of rape.
        black_puppydog 7y ago
        Well then you've clearly not been following the discussion and are just provoking. Do your reading first please. Edit: yes, this news item is about the rape allegations. BUT Assange had long been stating that the US were preparing a secret indictment under the espionage act, something that has turned out to be 100% correct, even though the US administration kept denying (read: lying about) it. They never intended to give him a fair trial, there were never any indications they would, and since his indictment has become public, it is clear as daylight they won't.
        mariorossi666 7y ago
        I've done my reading, nowhere it was mentioned that it wasn't about the allegations of rape. BTW, the comments guidelines state Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article?
      - foldr 7y ago
        Not really. It was the arrest warrant for the rape charges in Sweden that kept him confined in the Ecuadorian embassy.
solipsism 7y ago
You're plastering this thread with the same talking points. People are responding to you. Were you going to address any of the responses, or just keep plastering?

black_puppydog 7y ago

They were waiting in front of the embassy 24/7. We can now see that he was exactly right in his prediction of what would happen if he left, and how. He's been held in solitary confinement, itself already widely regarded as torture. Saying "he could have left" in this situation, after being shown exactly how that would have/did go down, is like camping out in front of your ex-girlfriend's house with a baseball bat, then telling the officer you didn't beat her and thus did nothing wrong. Except the whole world can see you totally did beat her when she finally left the house.

chungus_khan 7y ago
In addition, he didn't even know if it would be a real arrest and just solitary confinement considering the CIA's reputation.
sambe 7y ago
I didn't say otherwise. The grandparent stated that he had a choice to leave, the parent implied that he did not because he was in prison. That is not true - the grandparent was correct. As I said, framing it as that simple of a choice may lack some nuance in describing the pressure he was under. But it is factually true that he was not forced to stay in the conditions which are being criticised. Some would also say that the nature of the conditions was somewhat of his own doing, since the relationship with the embassy is well documented to have deteriorated greatly over time. I can't vouch either way, and it seems people are downvoting normal conversation so I doubt it will be productive to continue.