5 ms·

> 2x3 metre cell, isolated 23 hours a day Why, though? I didn't even think that was a thing in Britain, at least if you're not some very high risk criminal con

> 2x3 metre cell, isolated 23 hours a day Why, though? I didn't even think that was a thing in Britain, at least if you're not some very high risk criminal convicted of violent crimes, which I don't think he is? Regardless of what one think about what Assange did that just seems extremely unnecessarily cruel unless he was a threat to guards or other prisoners...

wahnfrieden 2y ago
It's used as a torture method
ToucanLoucan 2y ago
> Why, though? Because he fucked with the powerful.
kzzzznot 2y ago
Why? To punish and deter. He exposed terrible things done by large powers, therefore he was persecuted absolutely.
- Wytwwww 2y ago
  Sure that's obvious (or not... depending on one's political views), but there must be some legal justification. Or can they put someone in permanent solitary confinement without giving any reason at all in Britain? I'm reading at some sites that this isn't really true and that he wasn't literally held in a 2x3m cell for 23 hours every day. Although it's not very clear what were the actual conditions. edit: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/11/un-expert-torture-sounds-alarm-again-julian-assanges-lifemay-be-risk#:~:text=Assange%20had%20to%20be%20transferred,bail%20terms%20in%202012%2C%20Mr https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/11/un-expert-to.... it's very vague and unspecific though..
  - lp0_on_fire 2y ago
    Turns out when governments toss around the words "spy" and "espionage" freely and without regard to their actual definitions they can get away with things like this.
  - account42 2y ago
    > Or can they put someone in permanent solitary confinement without giving any reason at all in Britain? Well, who is gong to stop them?
- qsdf38100 2y ago
  He didn’t expose anything significant on Russia, for some reason.
  - exe34 2y ago
    did he raid the fsb servers or the nsa? maybe it's because of the source?
    - qsdf38100 2y ago
      His role in Wikileaks wasn't to personally raid servers. He was receiving leaks that were delivered to him via his platform, and then he decided what was worth publishing. Either he never had been handed any significant leaks on Russia, either he chosed to not publish them.
      - exe34 2y ago
        So for every crime by one state, he has to publish one from another state for balance? Is it not enough that one state committed a crime and he reported it?
        Beldin 2y ago
        The allegations I've seen floating around is that he deliberately withheld certain types of leaks. Thereby making Wikileaks no longer neutral, but politically-motivated. > Is it not enough that one state committed a crime and he reported it? It depends on what "it" would be enough for... but if he indeed actively surpressed damaging info leaked to him on par with the stuff he has released, yeah, that makes matters complex. Another criticism I've seen is that the leaks did not do any redaction whatsoever - even when it clearly pertained to informants in war zones. For that, if the allegations are true, my view is simple: you shouldn't do that. And if you set up an infrastructure for leaking, it is reasonable to assume that you're capable of handling such an important and obviously necessary step. So "isn't it enough?" - no, it is more complicated than that.
ifwinterco 2y ago
23 hour bang up isn't uncommon in the UK, mostly just because the prisons are overcrowded and underfunded and it's easier to keep things under control with everyone locked in their cells most of the time. There are legal minimums for how much time prisoners have to be allowed out of their cells but they're pretty low and not always followed

wahnfrieden 2y ago

It's used as a torture method

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

> Why, though? Because he fucked with the powerful.

kzzzznot 2y ago

Why? To punish and deter. He exposed terrible things done by large powers, therefore he was persecuted absolutely.

Wytwwww 2y ago
Sure that's obvious (or not... depending on one's political views), but there must be some legal justification. Or can they put someone in permanent solitary confinement without giving any reason at all in Britain? I'm reading at some sites that this isn't really true and that he wasn't literally held in a 2x3m cell for 23 hours every day. Although it's not very clear what were the actual conditions. edit: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/11/un-expert-torture-sounds-alarm-again-julian-assanges-lifemay-be-risk#:~:text=Assange%20had%20to%20be%20transferred,bail%20terms%20in%202012%2C%20Mr https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/11/un-expert-to.... it's very vague and unspecific though..
- lp0_on_fire 2y ago
  Turns out when governments toss around the words "spy" and "espionage" freely and without regard to their actual definitions they can get away with things like this.
- account42 2y ago
  > Or can they put someone in permanent solitary confinement without giving any reason at all in Britain? Well, who is gong to stop them?
qsdf38100 2y ago
He didn’t expose anything significant on Russia, for some reason.
- exe34 2y ago
  did he raid the fsb servers or the nsa? maybe it's because of the source?
  - qsdf38100 2y ago
    His role in Wikileaks wasn't to personally raid servers. He was receiving leaks that were delivered to him via his platform, and then he decided what was worth publishing. Either he never had been handed any significant leaks on Russia, either he chosed to not publish them.
    - exe34 2y ago
      So for every crime by one state, he has to publish one from another state for balance? Is it not enough that one state committed a crime and he reported it?
      - Beldin 2y ago
        The allegations I've seen floating around is that he deliberately withheld certain types of leaks. Thereby making Wikileaks no longer neutral, but politically-motivated. > Is it not enough that one state committed a crime and he reported it? It depends on what "it" would be enough for... but if he indeed actively surpressed damaging info leaked to him on par with the stuff he has released, yeah, that makes matters complex. Another criticism I've seen is that the leaks did not do any redaction whatsoever - even when it clearly pertained to informants in war zones. For that, if the allegations are true, my view is simple: you shouldn't do that. And if you set up an infrastructure for leaking, it is reasonable to assume that you're capable of handling such an important and obviously necessary step. So "isn't it enough?" - no, it is more complicated than that.

ifwinterco 2y ago

23 hour bang up isn't uncommon in the UK, mostly just because the prisons are overcrowded and underfunded and it's easier to keep things under control with everyone locked in their cells most of the time. There are legal minimums for how much time prisoners have to be allowed out of their cells but they're pretty low and not always followed