Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Andrew, I read your post on freeing Assange with interest. I'm genuinely not sure where I stand.
Let me pose a hypothetical question. Let's say that we believe Assange is on the verge of releasing the name of a credible, high-level North Korean informant who last week succeeded in conveying to us a message that Pyongyang plans to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Seoul in January. He has access to the details of these plans. He is scheduled to transmit them to us next week. There is no way to contact our source in a non-alerting way to warn him that he's on the verge of exposure. There is nothing we can do to rescue him. All the information we've received from him thus far has proven accurate.
Would you support assassinating Assange to protect this source? If not, why not?
Would all your arguments not apply in this case, too?
- Comment (34)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
You assume too much, Claire. More specifically that the CIA could organize a hit team and, here's the kicker, keep it secret. LOL! The CIA is way too inept to do anything like that, and any special forces sent to do the job would have to run it by their lawyers, more yuks there. We're talking American intel, here. You know the intel that publishes everything it knows in the New York Times.These guys couldn't do lunch, never mind Assange.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 1:13amJul '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
The CIA's specialty is more along the lines of an escort service. Given the latest twists in the story Assange likely will need that as well.
Nov '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Given your rather loaded scenario, Claire, of course Assange would have to be killed. If you gave me a gun, I would cheerfully do it myself. "Dead! Done!"
What amazes me is that everyone in the world, including the kind folks on Ricochet, seems to be waiting — even hoping — for Assange to get whacked. If Assange were still free, and tomorrow he turned up in the gutter with two slugs in his head, would anyone be surprised? Would anyone be particularly upset? Would anyone even make a serious effort to find out whodunnit? I rather doubt it.
Basically, we are talking about two separate and unrelated issues. Does Assange deserve to be arrested on trumped-up sex charges? No. Does he deserve to be killed for being an obnoxious loose cannon who is a threat to national and maybe even global security? Probably.
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Lady Kurobara
Basically, we are talking about two separate and unrelated issues. Does Assange deserve to be arrested on trumped-up sex charges? No. Does he deserve to be killed for being an obnoxious loose cannon who is a threat to national and maybe even global security? Probably. · Dec 8 at 2:01am
But this is my point, Lady K--how can anyone get exercised about his being arrested on weird sex charges (which do appear to have some real relationship to Swedish law, whether or not we think that law is good law) if you're sanguine about the idea of him being whacked? Where's the logic in that? Is this just an expression of indignation about the Swedish definition of rape? Surely that's little concern of ours--I'm hardly going to go to bat to defend the right of men in Sweden to have sex without a condom whether or not their partner consented to it. As human rights go, that one's low on my list of global priorities.
May '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Does anyone know what Assange's computer skills are? Does he rely on a team of nerds. Hitting the nerds might be more effective.
Jul '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
They have been hitting the nerds, mostly by very thorough customs searches and seizures from what I have read. The nerds tried to rile up support and outrage on the web. Pity the poor nerds enabling the whack job to shred international relations and trust. Life is so unfair.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 3:12amRe: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
It seems from the comments that Ricochet generally favors the idea of assassinating Assange--completely extralegally, obviously--but can't bear the idea that Assange would suffer a punishment that sounds sort of Swedish and politically correct and feminist, even if it might be entirely legal.
Am I missing something here? Is this rational?
May '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: It seems from the comments that Ricochet generally favors the idea of assassinating Assange--completely extralegally, obviously--but can't bear the idea that Assange would suffer a punishment that sounds sort of Swedish and politically correct and feminist, even if it might be entirely legal.
Am I missing something here? Is this rational? · Dec 8 at 4:27am
No. It is irrational. Swedish law is Swedish law. If you don't like it, don't boff the bimbos.
OTOH, Assange is a kind of pirate, and nations have legal means of dealing with pirates, including offing them if you can catch them.
But please don't equate offing with boffing.
May '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: It seems from the comments that Ricochet generally favors the idea of assassinating Assange--completely extralegally, obviously--but can't bear the idea that Assange would suffer a punishment that sounds sort of Swedish and politically correct and feminist, even if it might be entirely legal.
Am I missing something here? Is this rational? · Dec 8 at 4:27am
Assange is not the only one who has access to the documents, so putting him behind bars accomplishes little. The desired outcome is something that A) silences him and B) has a chilling effect on others with the same knowledge.
Nothing has the same chilling effect as a slab in the coroner's office.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 5:17amOct '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Assange definitely needs a communion. This will be the best deterrent to other ninny-hammers of his persuasion. I don't think you will find him leaking Russian documents. He acts with impunity because he is sure that nothing extralegal will happen at the hands of the US. Russia, however, would not be so restrained.
Nov '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
outstripp
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: It seems from the comments that Ricochet generally favors the idea of assassinating Assange--completely extralegally, obviously--but can't bear the idea that Assange would suffer a punishment that sounds sort of Swedish and politically correct and feminist, even if it might be entirely legal.
Am I missing something here? Is this rational?
Assange is a kind of pirate, and nations have legal means of dealing with pirates, including offing them if you can catch them.
Assange is definitely a kind of pirate. There seems to be a general perception that he has crossed a line and is now fair game for "extralegal" measures.
It would not have to be Russia. Any country might look at Assange and think: "Maybe we better swat this flea before he makes trouble for us."
My main objection to the Swedish sex rap is that it is just petty and pointless (as well as being possibly trumped-up). In other words, it is not good enough; Assange must die.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 6:44amAug '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
I think the reason I'm sympathetic over the "sex crimes" charges is because it seems pretty clear it WASN'T a CIA plot.
If the CIA was actually sneaky enough to use overly-broad foreign sex crimes laws as an alternative to targeted assassination, I might actually be impressed (though I still wouldn't support it).
Instead, the "sex crime" charges are purely about acrimonious gender politics. My sympathies come from the fact that I can imagine lots of other innocent men getting stuck in the same situation. The fact that the target in this case is Julian Assange is just a coincidence.
While it's true that I'll likely never have to deal with Swedish sex laws, so why should I care, these sorts of "sex crime" stories are relatively common right here in North America. I think my point is, assuming that Assange isn't actually guilty, unless he's acquitted it negatively affects lots of other innocent men in Sweden who could be sent to jail for similar actions.
(Maybe I have my own "hierarchy of outrage" with gender politics outweighing international politics? Something to think about...)
Aug '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
In other words, I think it boils down to, "yes, I would prefer extralegal action against Assange to the use of Swedish sex crime laws, because the precedent of the case could potentially hurt lots of innocent Swedish men. Extralegal action, on the other hand, would only hurt one man --- Assange."
I think that's a rational position.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 6:47amNov '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
That is probably as good (and as succinct) an explanation as you are likely to get, Claire.
Again, I am struck by this fact: People in the Ricochet forum are, by and large, good-hearted and level-headed. Yet, we are all willing to arrange a date between Assange and a sinister fellow in a trenchcoat with a suspicious bulge under the left armpit.
That, by itself, speaks volumes about this case.
Edited on Dec 8, 2010 at 7:01amAug '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: It seems from the comments that Ricochet generally favors the idea of assassinating Assange--completely extralegally, obviously--but can't bear the idea that Assange would suffer a punishment...
Am I missing something here? Is this rational?
On the other hand, what if your idea of Hell is a drawn-out and humiliating legal procedure and a life forever tainted by it? Which is better, death (could be Heaven, Hell, mere oblivion, who knows...) or Hell?
The calculus of suffering in life versus death is a very personal one, and I think some of us are less attached to life than others.
If I could choose between the death penalty and life in prison without chance of appeal or parole, I would probably choose the death penalty. I'd also rather die a few years earlier and avoid prolonged suffering than do everything to live as long as possible, only to suffer for it. Other people would make the opposite choice: I'm not sure either could be called rational.
If I were in Assange's position, I might find a well-aimed sniper's bullet a mercy. But then, I'm nothing like Assange.
Jun '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
He was a mathematics major in Oz. From the little I know he is a well educated hacker, who probably writes good code.
Aug '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Welllllll...
I cannot speak for anyone else, but in my case it's more that, in theory, I wouldn't shed a tear if Assange were to meet with such a fate.
In practical terms, however, I wouldn't be willing to actually ADVISE that such extra-legal action be taken. That's really just because I think the risks of such an action becoming public knowledge are too high. It's pretty clear to me that the extra-legal assassination of an Australian citizen by agents of the United States is politically unacceptable.
Jun '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
But this is my point, Lady K--how can anyone get exercised about his being arrested on weird sex charges (which do appear to have some real relationship to Swedish law, whether or not we think that law is good law) if you're sanguine about the idea of him being whacked? Where's the logic in that? Is this just an expression of indignation about the Swedish definition of rape? Surely that's little concern of ours--I'm hardly going to go to bat to defend the right of men in Sweden to have sex without a condom whether or not their partner consented to it. As human rights go, that one's low on my list of global priorities. · Dec 8 at 2:29am
Swedish rape law is to law what Abba is to rock 'n roll.
Aug '10
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Good point -- and reminds me of another one:
Assassination of political leaders seems to be considered "more wrong" than war, but I'd venture to guess that war usually costs more innocent lives. Now, assassination, depending on the situation, could cost more lives than just the assassinee's -- if it caused civil unrest, for example. Still, I think war is usually costlier.
So why is war a "legitimate" tool of statecraft and assassination not? I have some ideas of why the world works this way, but the question still bugs me from time to time.
Re: Freeing Assange: A Thought Exercise for Andrew Klavan
Well, Claire, I like the plot and may use it for my next thriller. And I confess I've frequently used a similar scenario to justify the water-boarding of terrorists (which I think should be an Olympic sport): if you don't mind killing a man to save a city, why do you mind making him uncomfortable? But I'm actually less happy with the argument you're making, which essentially is: if you would kill to stop a terrorist, why not pervert the law? It's the scene from the old detective movie: "Listen, Mugsy, you even try littering in this city and I'll put you away for life." That's fine if the detective is Humphrey Bogart. If it's Barack Obama... not so much. If we are willing to justify assassination in this case, let's do it. But don't abuse the law. And while I wake up every morning thanking God I'm neither Swedish nor sleeping with a radical feminist, I can't imagine anyone's law allows women to decide they've been misused two weeks after the afterglow has faded. Now I'm off to do the ricochet podcast.