6 ms·
This is horrifying. As a European I'm afraid to even visit the USA. I'd expect this from some third world hellhole but not from a country which professes to hav
by ganzuul 7y ago
This is horrifying. As a European I'm afraid to even visit the USA. I'd expect this from some third world hellhole but not from a country which professes to have the rule of law.
- Tomte 7y agoThe article is about England...
- fit2rule 7y agoI think it goes without saying that the UK is becoming less and less the kind of place that any freedom-loving person would want to visit. Living in Europe, I am aware of a number of people who have decided to have nothing more to do with the place, and these are wealthy, educated, business leaders. I can't imagine where this is going to lead if Assange is not freed as a result of these proceedings. We are watching the West eat itself.
- arethuza 7y agoThere have been significant cutbacks in the criminal justice system in England and Wales over the last decade or so - ironically by the party of "law and order". I can strongly recommend the book by the Secret Barrister: https://thesecretbarrister.com/ https://thesecretbarrister.com/
- fit2rule 7y ago>Woolwich Crown Court ".. if a single day at Woolwich Crown Court does not convince you the existence of liberal democracy is now a lie, then your mind must be very closed indeed."
- willis936 7y agoI can’t imagine freedom-loving people choosing to live in hateful, racist places that are found all over Europe. https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2018/being-black-eu#TabPubKeyfindings https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2018/being-black-eu#Tab... Perhaps Europe could learn a thing or two from US culture.
- _iyig 7y agoWhy have you been downvoted? You are correct. This extradition hearing, and the alleged mistreatment of Mr. Assange, is taking place in London under British authorities.
- cmroanirgo 7y agoFrom the day 1 proceedings [0]: > Normal courts in this country are public buildings, deliberately placed by our ancestors right in the centre of towns, almost always just up a few steps from a main street. The major purpose of their positioning and of their architecture was to facilitate public access in the belief that it is vital that justice can be seen by the public... When enquiring about facilities for the public to attend the hearing, an Assange activist was told by a member of court staff that we should realise that Woolwich is a “counter-terrorism court”. That is true de facto, but in truth a “counter-terrorism court” is an institution unknown to the UK constitution. Indeed, if a single day at Woolwich Crown Court does not convince you the existence of liberal democracy is now a lie, then your mind must be very closed indeed. Something very fishy is going on here, it seems. So while the proceedings might appear to be above board, it seems that Mr Murray (the reporter here) is convinced of otherwise: > It’s the Lubyanka. [0] https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-1/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...
- tomatocracy 7y agoSeveral famous courts are or were historically attached to prisons in the UK, eg Lancaster Assizes which were connected to a prison inside Lancaster Castle and were frequently used for high security trials. The Old Bailey (the Central Criminal Court) is built in the former Newgate Prison. I don't think this is anything to be concerned about - and I believe building courts attached to prisons where people are held pending arraignment or trial is common practice in many countries for the same practical reasons, including some which are arguably in the interests of the defendants (it facilitates a speedy trial for example and can offer them and their defence team better physical security where they might be widely hated eg terrorist suspects or high profile murder trials).
- 7y ago
- bambax 7y agoSince Brexit and because of it, the UK is becoming part of the US empire; it's a dominion and as such, it will obey US injunctions in that case and any other.
- fit2rule 7y agoSince the AUMF on Iraq and the founding of the 5-eyes War Coalition, the US has had its Empire expanded to include the Anglo- states. We in the 5-eyes nations are all proxy subjects of the USA now. Our militaries no longer answer to us.
- mft_ 7y agoI’d be interested in your sources for these statements? I understand the long history of cooperation between the US and UK (not always balanced) but has anything substantive changed since, or because of, Brexit?
- shawabawa3 7y agothe US has a lot of leverage due to post-brexit trade deal negotiations, afaik that's the only change
- enriquto 7y agoIt is sad to say that, but I would feel safer traveling from the EU to Russia than to the USA right now. My last visit to the states was such a bad experience (I've never been as physically terrified in my life as when the customs officers interrogated me), that I will never go there again.
- 101404 7y agoIt's no different here in the EU. After all, Sweden and the UK (until recently) are EU countries. I'm from Germany, and I can totally see things like this could happen here too.
- jonathanstrange 7y agoThere is no way somebody could face in Germany for whistleblowing (or computer hacking, etc.) the same as what Assange is facing in the US if he's extradited. The alleged crimes they've stacked up against him have a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison. It's simply ridiculous.
- kmlx 7y agoaren't the US Gov claiming people died due to his hacking?
- stephen_g 7y agoTrying to, although they admitted in Chelsey Manning’s court martial that nobody was injured as a result.
- hutzlibu 7y agoWith no direct proof, as far as I know. But they do refer to the complete publishing of the diplomatic cable, where apparently quite some irakian sources were mentioned in plain text, or with enough information to identify them. So it is possible, that indeed people died of it. (killed by ISIS or alike) And this point is also the weakest in the defence of Assange in my point of view. (generaly speaking. I am not in favor of extradicting him) Because the goal of the leaks was to uncover war crimes etc. But by just publishing everything, even though wikileaks worked with newspapers before to especially prevent informants from being exposed, he went over the line. On the other hand, the whole invasion of iraq was against all international right. So from that point of view Assange did not care for informants for the US. (he actually said so, said some press people involved)
- 7y ago
- raxxorrax 7y agoScrapped my wishes of visiting as they started an unrelated war to save face against terrorism they probably caused themselves to a degree through intelligence operations where they propped up the perpetrators. The same they did with Saddam. At least they cleaned up that to a degree, but it also wouldn't win many prices.
- megous 7y agoWait till you realize that US government officials can shoot you at the border at whim and they will not be even tried or your family allowed to take this to US courts, no matter the reason for the murder. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/25/politics/supreme-court-cross-border-shooting-case/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/25/politics/supreme-court-cr... > Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said that "regulating the conduct of agents at the border unquestionably has national security implications" and that any risk of undermining border security provides a "reason to hesitate." Basically absolutely nothing will happen, except maybe your country's foreign ministry wagging a finger at US, if that.
- dijit 7y agoTruthfully though, it would be an international incident with lots of press coverage if someone from a western country was killed at the US border. The more insidious stuff to my mind is anything that can be made to look fuzzy or complicated. The populace gets divided on tiny/minute details and speculation, even _if_ they discuss things, which is not a given when it's something that can be made to look unclear or contested. It's true that you have no rights as a non-US citizen at the US border, you can be detained for any reason on entry; so ask yourself: Would the media be interested in the fact you got detained for 9hrs? Even if you were abused in custody? (and not provably so). I think that's unlikely, but that's a big deal to most people.
- wnoise 7y agoSince when is Mexico not a Western country?
- dijit 7y agoFeels like this comment is coming from a place of anger or a presumption that: 1) I'm a US citizen (I'm not). 2) Mexicans are shot at the border when trying to get through normal US customs checks, like in an airport (They're not). 3) that the Mexicans that are actually being shot on the border by the border guard is seen by the international community as acceptable (It isn't). But, for the sake of refuting what you _actually_ said, lets go with "Western as an economic definition": From Wikpedia: -----8<----- The term "Western world" is sometimes interchangeably used with the term First World or developed countries, stressing the difference between First World and the Third World or developing countries. This usage occurs despite the fact that many countries that may be culturally "Western" are developing countries – in fact, a significant percentage of the Americas are developing countries. It is also used despite many developed countries or regions not being Western (e.g. Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao), and therefore left out when "Western world" is used to denote developed countries. Privatization policies (involving government enterprises and public services) and multinational corporations are often considered a visible sign of Western nations's economic presence, especially in Third World countries, and represent common institutional environment for powerful politicians, enterprises, trade unions and firms, bankers and thinkers of the Western world. ----->8----- So, "Western" is often used interchangably with first world; Countries in the first world, also according to wikipedia: -----8<----- Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, West Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The Western-aligned countries included: Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Japan, South Africa, South Korea, and Taiwan The neutral countries included: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, and (now former) Yugoslavia. ----->8----- This is because "First world"/"Western" has roots in the cold war. "Second world" == Soviet bloc "Third world" == everywhere else. (yes, that's a tepid definition when you think about it because most people take it to mean impoverished)
- wil421 7y agoYou do realize all this is happening in Europe not the US. Assange is in the UK not USA.
- ganzuul 7y agoThat is even worse. Much worse.