7 ms·

Ah, the old “he was free to leave anytime” argument. No. He wasn’t. Yes, technically, he was free to leave, but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving w

Ah, the old “he was free to leave anytime” argument. No. He wasn’t. Yes, technically, he was free to leave, but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail. It’s victim blaming. Would you say a victim of Stockholm Syndrome is “free to leave at any time”? No, because that’s a ridiculous argument. Would you say Snowden is “free to leave [Russia] at any time”? No! So why is it an acceptable argument when it’s Assange? Because he possibly committed a crime in Sweden? Because he indiscriminately blew the whistle on the US government’s crimes? Sure, he’s a puppet of Russia, but to say he doesn’t deserve the same protections as the rest of us is to argue for tyranny.

solipsism 7y ago
Either there's a rule of law or there's not. You can't hide from the police and then claim that the very act of hiding is an act of torture enacted on you by the police.
- k1m 7y ago
  You're assuming he had a lot of choice in the matter and that the UN didn't take that into account. Nils Melzer when asked about it 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 Also, as far as I'm aware, Assange didn't claim he was tortured, the UN experts on torture came to that conclusion.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  The rule of law is followed to the letter by state actors as everyone knows...
- authoritarian 7y ago
  > Either there's a rule of law or there's not. You can't hide from the police and then claim that the very act of hiding is an act of torture enacted on you by the police. So by that logic Anne Frank was in the wrong, and wasn't psychologically abused/tortured in any way by the Nazis because she was breaking the law?
  - lucozade 7y ago
    Please don't. Assange jumped bail after a multi stage judicial process on charges of rape and sexual molestation. Ms Frank was hiding to avoid genocidal extermination by an occupying force during war. They're not equivalent.
    - authoritarian 7y ago
      I didn't say they were equivalent. OP said that there's rule of law, and that if you are hiding from the police you can't claim that having to hide is an act of torture, which is obviously not always the case
  - solipsism 7y ago
    Part of the rule of law is that laws must be just and impartial. The laws and actions of the Third Reich obviously did not have that quality. The two situations aren't remotely comparable. But you probably know that, you're just trolling.
    - authoritarian 7y ago
      Throughout history it's been very clearly demonstrated that laws are not always just and impartial. I'd even go so far as to argue that there has never been a time in history where all laws were just and impartial. Having a difference of opinion doesn't automatically make the other person a troll, and acting like that's the case doesn't lead to productive discourse
- klagermkii 7y ago
  The "rule of law" isn't about individual citizens submitting to the system. It's about the people in power following a standardised process based on the crime that was supposedly committed, and being applied uniformly, vs the "rule of man" where things are handled on an adhoc manner based on who's in power and who's being charged. The system can be breaching the "rule of law", not the individuals targeted by that system.
  - solipsism 7y ago
    I didn't claim Assange was breaching the rule of law. Part of the rule of law is that individuals are accountable for their actions. A court of law is usually the correct way to determine accountability. The state is obligated to protect individuals (in this case the women who were allegedly raped) via the justice system. The idea that having to flee charges is tantamount to being tortured implies the state does not have that right. If there is to be the rule of law, the state has not only the right but the obligation.
luizfzs 7y ago
Snowden's case is different, if I'm not mistaken, since the US suspended his passport. Meaning he cannot travel anywhere else (unless he's got a Russian passport, which I doubt).
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  Russians could grant him citizenship pretty easily though. I still think he would get picked up by interpol or CIA though if he went to the wrong countries or unescorted/unprotected by the country he traveled to.
arrrg 7y ago
But that line of thinking doesn’t make sense to me … Just for the sake of argument, say you are a bank robber who successfully barricaded yourself somewhere (really uncomfortable) where police cannot reach you. You are then free to leave at any time, but would be arrested as soon as you did. Would you really argue that police would have to drop the case to avoid torturing you? Your line of thinking seems to presuppose that the threat of arrest was somehow unjust, but you never really argue for that point.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- colejohnson66 7y ago
  I’m not arguing that the case is unjust. I’m refuting the argument that he was free to leave at any time. I see where the two cross, so I’ll argue the former here: He’s wanted because he embarrassed the United States government. Espionage laws are a horrible attack on free speech and freedom of the press and I’m appalled the Supreme Court previously ruled they’re constitutional.
  - arrrg 7y ago
    I think that’s a much more coherent argument, especially if you factor in a fear of disproportionate punishment. For example, in the case of the bank robber I would actually agree that it would amount to torture if police were clearly communicating to the bank robber that they were intent on killing them as soon as they showed up, no matter what they did. So there is nuance to this and I don’t think that nuance ever gets you around to actually arguing the case and the facts of the case.
  - ttul 7y ago
    The espionage act is a horrible piece of legislation. So challenge it. Go fight the charges. Take the spotlight and let everyone see how unjust the law is. Fleeing from the law made Assange seem like a coward, which worked against his cause. There is no better way to seem guilty than to run from a legal process that most people feel is fair, even if you personally think otherwise.
P_I_Staker 7y ago
Okay, but then any criminal on the lamb is being tortured? If someone jumps bail, we should just leave them alone, so we don't traumatize then? All criminals are being tortured (these same things happen in prison). I don't agree with how all this was handled, but I think we're being a bit rediculous here.
- syshum 7y ago
  >> All criminals are being tortured (these same things happen in prison) If you are talking about US Prisions then there is a Good Case to be made that is true. The Treatment of Prisioners in the US is abhorrent
  - ttul 7y ago
    He could have made this point to the British legal system in an effort to avoid deportation. But instead he fled that process and doomed himself by biasing the entire British legal system against him.
  - P_I_Staker 7y ago
    I actually agree. I wouldn't be so sure this is just an American thing though. I wasn't happy to see my country on locked up abroad; but so is France.
olalonde 7y ago
There's no argument over that. The argument is that if his stay at the Ecuadorian embassy was akin to prolonged "psychological torture", he could have surrendered himself to British authorities and received the same treatment as any other prisoner. The strongest case you could make is that his life at the embassy was akin to living in prison.
isostatic 7y ago
So he was free to leave, but would then face Swedish justice, which is the 4th best in the world [0], just behind Denmark, Norway and Sweden. [0] http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/# http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/#
- colejohnson66 7y ago
  After which he would be extradited to the US...
  - isostatic 7y ago
    Why the charade of Sweden? Why not extradite him direct from the UK, which is far further down the list of good justice systems
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jimbokun 7y ago
"Yes, technically, he was free to leave, but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail." Didn't it mean he would be free to stand trial for the rape allegations? Do those women not have a right to have their case heard?
- colejohnson66 7y ago
  They do. He should stand trial for that. However, I’m talking about the US case where he is being charged with espionage. In other words: exposing the US government’s illegal doings. He should not have to stand trial for that.
  - mariorossi666 7y ago
    > . He should not have to stand trial for that. The Trump administration pushed the pedal on it. And to think that Assange was scared as hell of Hillary Clinton, which actually would be a much better option for him now, imagine Hillary forgiving Assange, she had a lot to gain from it, Trump doesn't care, he just really doesn't.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      Yep. If Assange were betting a Trump administration would pardon him, he didn't do his homework on Trump.
      - SuoDuanDao 7y ago
        I assume he did his homework on Clinton. Whatever else one thinks of Assange, he must have known what skeletons were in her closet.
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        We're off in speculation territory, but I think it's unlikely the situation would have been worse for him than it is now (unless one buys into the ridiculous "The Clintons have people killed" conspiracy theory, in which case I have the basement of a pizza parlor to sell if anyone's buying. ;) ).
mariorossi666 7y ago
> but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail. > It’s victim blaming Yeah, but the victim is the woman he raped and that will not see any justice, because he ran...
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  He did not rape anyone nor did anyone accused him of rape. He is being accused of a very specific thing which at best might be classified as sexual misconduct.
  - mariorossi666 7y ago
    > He did not rape anyone nor did anyone accused him of rape That's false. > He is being accused of a very specific thing which at best might be classified as sexual misconduct. it's rape in Sweden. I don't know why you split hairs on this simple fact.
    - dependenttypes 7y ago
      I will quote Stallman on that: "I think it is morally absurd to define “rape” in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in" What he did does not fall within the definition of rape, please do not accuse him of doing a much worse thing than he did.
      - mariorossi666 7y ago
        Stallman was saying the exact opposite of what you believe he said. He was arguing that rape is rape, even if in different states they have different laws. If you rape a girl the fact that in some country she is of legal age and in others she's not, it doesn't change the fact. It is rape, she said no, he forced her, it is rape. Please accept it, because it's what happened.
        dependenttypes 7y ago
GetOutOfBed 7y ago
So this would be like mudering a bunch of people, hiding in cave to avoid prosecution and then claim that you are being tortured? That's a bit silly in my view.
alkonaut 7y ago
This argument seems a bit silly. The rescuing circumstance for the argument is that whatever legal process he would face in the US might not be described as predicatble or maybe not even just. But in general, the arument is flawed. If I rob a bank and barricade myself in my basement when the police shows up I'm not being subjected to torture because I'll face jail for my bank robbery if I leave the basement. Not after one day nor after ten years.

solipsism 7y ago

Either there's a rule of law or there's not. You can't hide from the police and then claim that the very act of hiding is an act of torture enacted on you by the police.

k1m 7y ago
You're assuming he had a lot of choice in the matter and that the UN didn't take that into account. Nils Melzer when asked about it 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 Also, as far as I'm aware, Assange didn't claim he was tortured, the UN experts on torture came to that conclusion.
raxxorrax 7y ago
The rule of law is followed to the letter by state actors as everyone knows...
authoritarian 7y ago
> Either there's a rule of law or there's not. You can't hide from the police and then claim that the very act of hiding is an act of torture enacted on you by the police. So by that logic Anne Frank was in the wrong, and wasn't psychologically abused/tortured in any way by the Nazis because she was breaking the law?
- lucozade 7y ago
  Please don't. Assange jumped bail after a multi stage judicial process on charges of rape and sexual molestation. Ms Frank was hiding to avoid genocidal extermination by an occupying force during war. They're not equivalent.
  - authoritarian 7y ago
    I didn't say they were equivalent. OP said that there's rule of law, and that if you are hiding from the police you can't claim that having to hide is an act of torture, which is obviously not always the case
- solipsism 7y ago
  Part of the rule of law is that laws must be just and impartial. The laws and actions of the Third Reich obviously did not have that quality. The two situations aren't remotely comparable. But you probably know that, you're just trolling.
  - authoritarian 7y ago
    Throughout history it's been very clearly demonstrated that laws are not always just and impartial. I'd even go so far as to argue that there has never been a time in history where all laws were just and impartial. Having a difference of opinion doesn't automatically make the other person a troll, and acting like that's the case doesn't lead to productive discourse
klagermkii 7y ago
The "rule of law" isn't about individual citizens submitting to the system. It's about the people in power following a standardised process based on the crime that was supposedly committed, and being applied uniformly, vs the "rule of man" where things are handled on an adhoc manner based on who's in power and who's being charged. The system can be breaching the "rule of law", not the individuals targeted by that system.
- solipsism 7y ago
  I didn't claim Assange was breaching the rule of law. Part of the rule of law is that individuals are accountable for their actions. A court of law is usually the correct way to determine accountability. The state is obligated to protect individuals (in this case the women who were allegedly raped) via the justice system. The idea that having to flee charges is tantamount to being tortured implies the state does not have that right. If there is to be the rule of law, the state has not only the right but the obligation.

luizfzs 7y ago

Snowden's case is different, if I'm not mistaken, since the US suspended his passport. Meaning he cannot travel anywhere else (unless he's got a Russian passport, which I doubt).

stjohnswarts 7y ago
Russians could grant him citizenship pretty easily though. I still think he would get picked up by interpol or CIA though if he went to the wrong countries or unescorted/unprotected by the country he traveled to.

arrrg 7y ago

But that line of thinking doesn’t make sense to me … Just for the sake of argument, say you are a bank robber who successfully barricaded yourself somewhere (really uncomfortable) where police cannot reach you. You are then free to leave at any time, but would be arrested as soon as you did. Would you really argue that police would have to drop the case to avoid torturing you? Your line of thinking seems to presuppose that the threat of arrest was somehow unjust, but you never really argue for that point.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
colejohnson66 7y ago
I’m not arguing that the case is unjust. I’m refuting the argument that he was free to leave at any time. I see where the two cross, so I’ll argue the former here: He’s wanted because he embarrassed the United States government. Espionage laws are a horrible attack on free speech and freedom of the press and I’m appalled the Supreme Court previously ruled they’re constitutional.
- arrrg 7y ago
  I think that’s a much more coherent argument, especially if you factor in a fear of disproportionate punishment. For example, in the case of the bank robber I would actually agree that it would amount to torture if police were clearly communicating to the bank robber that they were intent on killing them as soon as they showed up, no matter what they did. So there is nuance to this and I don’t think that nuance ever gets you around to actually arguing the case and the facts of the case.
- ttul 7y ago
  The espionage act is a horrible piece of legislation. So challenge it. Go fight the charges. Take the spotlight and let everyone see how unjust the law is. Fleeing from the law made Assange seem like a coward, which worked against his cause. There is no better way to seem guilty than to run from a legal process that most people feel is fair, even if you personally think otherwise.

P_I_Staker 7y ago

Okay, but then any criminal on the lamb is being tortured? If someone jumps bail, we should just leave them alone, so we don't traumatize then? All criminals are being tortured (these same things happen in prison). I don't agree with how all this was handled, but I think we're being a bit rediculous here.

syshum 7y ago
>> All criminals are being tortured (these same things happen in prison) If you are talking about US Prisions then there is a Good Case to be made that is true. The Treatment of Prisioners in the US is abhorrent
- ttul 7y ago
  He could have made this point to the British legal system in an effort to avoid deportation. But instead he fled that process and doomed himself by biasing the entire British legal system against him.
- P_I_Staker 7y ago
  I actually agree. I wouldn't be so sure this is just an American thing though. I wasn't happy to see my country on locked up abroad; but so is France.

olalonde 7y ago

There's no argument over that. The argument is that if his stay at the Ecuadorian embassy was akin to prolonged "psychological torture", he could have surrendered himself to British authorities and received the same treatment as any other prisoner. The strongest case you could make is that his life at the embassy was akin to living in prison.

isostatic 7y ago

So he was free to leave, but would then face Swedish justice, which is the 4th best in the world [0], just behind Denmark, Norway and Sweden. [0] http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/# http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/#

colejohnson66 7y ago
After which he would be extradited to the US...
- isostatic 7y ago
  Why the charade of Sweden? Why not extradite him direct from the UK, which is far further down the list of good justice systems

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jimbokun 7y ago

"Yes, technically, he was free to leave, but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail." Didn't it mean he would be free to stand trial for the rape allegations? Do those women not have a right to have their case heard?

colejohnson66 7y ago
They do. He should stand trial for that. However, I’m talking about the US case where he is being charged with espionage. In other words: exposing the US government’s illegal doings. He should not have to stand trial for that.
- mariorossi666 7y ago
  > . He should not have to stand trial for that. The Trump administration pushed the pedal on it. And to think that Assange was scared as hell of Hillary Clinton, which actually would be a much better option for him now, imagine Hillary forgiving Assange, she had a lot to gain from it, Trump doesn't care, he just really doesn't.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    Yep. If Assange were betting a Trump administration would pardon him, he didn't do his homework on Trump.
    - SuoDuanDao 7y ago
      I assume he did his homework on Clinton. Whatever else one thinks of Assange, he must have known what skeletons were in her closet.
      - shadowgovt 7y ago
        We're off in speculation territory, but I think it's unlikely the situation would have been worse for him than it is now (unless one buys into the ridiculous "The Clintons have people killed" conspiracy theory, in which case I have the basement of a pizza parlor to sell if anyone's buying. ;) ).

mariorossi666 7y ago

> but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail. > It’s victim blaming Yeah, but the victim is the woman he raped and that will not see any justice, because he ran...

dependenttypes 7y ago
He did not rape anyone nor did anyone accused him of rape. He is being accused of a very specific thing which at best might be classified as sexual misconduct.
- mariorossi666 7y ago
  > He did not rape anyone nor did anyone accused him of rape That's false. > He is being accused of a very specific thing which at best might be classified as sexual misconduct. it's rape in Sweden. I don't know why you split hairs on this simple fact.
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    I will quote Stallman on that: "I think it is morally absurd to define “rape” in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in" What he did does not fall within the definition of rape, please do not accuse him of doing a much worse thing than he did.
    - mariorossi666 7y ago
      Stallman was saying the exact opposite of what you believe he said. He was arguing that rape is rape, even if in different states they have different laws. If you rape a girl the fact that in some country she is of legal age and in others she's not, it doesn't change the fact. It is rape, she said no, he forced her, it is rape. Please accept it, because it's what happened.
      - dependenttypes 7y ago

GetOutOfBed 7y ago

So this would be like mudering a bunch of people, hiding in cave to avoid prosecution and then claim that you are being tortured? That's a bit silly in my view.

alkonaut 7y ago

This argument seems a bit silly. The rescuing circumstance for the argument is that whatever legal process he would face in the US might not be described as predicatble or maybe not even just. But in general, the arument is flawed. If I rob a bank and barricade myself in my basement when the police shows up I'm not being subjected to torture because I'll face jail for my bank robbery if I leave the basement. Not after one day nor after ten years.