Wikileaks: First Amendment Or Espionage?

[RetiredGySgt]

He is in the UK!!

If true the US should demand his extradition on Espionage charges. Any refusal by the British Government should result in what I posted in the previous post.

But he didn't commit espionage. Bradley Manning did.

By A) accepting the material

B) realizing it was classified data from a Foreign Country

C) publishing said data as raw data, it is most definitely espionage.

If he had worked with the Government on what was allowed to be disclosed that would have removed the charge as then, in effect the Government would be giving him permission to publish. By out right refusing he committed espionage. And Interpol must agree as they are trying to arrest him.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Is what he's doing illegal though. I'm just not sure about that. This stuff is very embarrassing for the U.S. but i'm not sure it's illegal.

 

[loosecannon]

Wrong. Lots of aliens live here and are subject to our law. The jurisdictional basis in such cases would be their actual presence here.

The jurisdictional basis to prosecute Assange would be the nexus of his acts to the material being disseminated.

That you don't understand the nature of jurisdiction is not surprising. But suffice it to say, that your ignorance is not persuasive. You are wrong.

Prove it or stfu. I doubt you have the remotest clue in the world what you are babbling about.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Is what he's doing illegal though. I'm just not sure about that. This stuff is very embarrassing for the U.S. but i'm not sure it's illegal.

It is ILLEGAL , it is called espionage. He disclosed tons of classified information. Anyone that knowingly discloses classified information without the authority of the Federal Government has committed Espionage.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Is what he's doing illegal though. I'm just not sure about that. This stuff is very embarrassing for the U.S. but i'm not sure it's illegal.

It is ILLEGAL , it is called espionage. He disclosed tons of classified information. Anyone that knowingly discloses classified information without the authority of the Federal Government has committed Espionage.

I hear ya but i don't think it's that simple. It was clearly Espionage when someone stole and then leaked the documents but i'm not sure Wikileaks has done anything illegal in releasing the info. to the public. I'm no legal expert though.

 

[loosecannon]

Is what he's doing illegal though. I'm just not sure about that. This stuff is very embarrassing for the U.S. but i'm not sure it's illegal.

Illegal where? Lots of things are illegal here but not there.

Like it is "legal" for the USA to violate espionage laws all over the world including our own domestic laws merely because our own DOJ will never prosecute our own government.

Is it legal for our foreign embassadors to steal biometric and personal data from foreign dignitaries?

We break the law 1000s or millions of times every day, including a lot of laws specific to other nations.

Unless you have a treaty to accept common law between nations or a world court every nation has it's own laws and nobody outside their boundaries is subject to them except their citizens abroad.

But now we have a WH willing to assassinate US citizens abroad so even those standards are under assault.

 

[rightwinger]

The unauthorized passing of classified information is espionage. He should be prosecuted

There is no first amendment right to reveal classified information

 

[loosecannon]

C) publishing said data as raw data, it is most definitely espionage.

If he had worked with the Government on what was allowed to be disclosed that would have removed the charge as then, in effect the Government would be giving him permission to publish. By out right refusing he committed espionage. And Interpol must agree as they are trying to arrest him.

He DID work with the US government to vet the leaks, and he didn't release ANY raw data.

Link posted several times from the NYT detailing the process.

 

[loosecannon]

The unauthorized passing of classified information is espionage. He should be prosecuted

There is no first amendment right to reveal classified information

If he passed Australian classified documents you might have a point. He isn't subject to US law.

Do we have a treaty with Australia wherein we agree to share jurisdiction over the other nations citizens in matters of secrecy violations?

I highly doubt it. In fact I will bet both my nuts that we do not.

 

[Common Sense]

Free Speech is not absolute. This has been proven time and time again.

You cant yell fire in a public area. thats not free speech, its simply to entice panic. Same idea here. this is why we have classified information and not everything the government does is public knowledge.

 

[rightwinger]

The unauthorized passing of classified information is espionage. He should be prosecuted

There is no first amendment right to reveal classified information

If he passed Australian classified documents you might have a point. He isn't subject to US law.

Do we have a treaty with Australia wherein we agree to share jurisdiction over the other nations citizens in matters of secrecy violations?

I highly doubt it. In fact I will bet both my nuts that we do not.

He is if he sets foot in the US. He, and anyone who assisted him should be prosecuted if they come to the US

 

[GWV5903]

Is it a crime what Assange did? Or is he protected by Free Speech/Free Press? You make the call. I'm interested in hearing what you all think. Thanks.

It is certainly a violation of this US Law 18 U.S.C. § 793 : US Code - Section 793: Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, does our current administration have the kahunas to enforce it? I am willing to bet we will only get lip service, Assange should be meeting his maker about now....

 

[rightwinger]

In addition..

Any US news source that prints known classified information should be prosecuted

 

[loosecannon]

the unauthorized passing of classified information is espionage. He should be prosecuted

there is no first amendment right to reveal classified information

if he passed australian classified documents you might have a point. He isn't subject to us law.

Do we have a treaty with australia wherein we agree to share jurisdiction over the other nations citizens in matters of secrecy violations?

I highly doubt it. In fact i will bet both my nuts that we do not.

he is if he sets foot in the us. He, and anyone who assisted him should be prosecuted if they come to the us

ok.

 

[loosecannon]

In addition..

Any US news source that prints known classified information should be prosecuted

The NYT gave their documents to the DOD and WH to be vetted prior to publication. And the documents were already in the public domain fully covered by free press authority.

 

[rightwinger]

In addition..

Any US news source that prints known classified information should be prosecuted

The NYT gave their documents to the DOD and WH to be vetted prior to publication. And the documents were already in the public domain fully covered by free press authority.

I don't think that being in the public domain reclassifies a document. If it is marked "Secret" you don't get to use the "He did it first" defense.

A document is classified until it is declassified

 

[jillian]

It is true that he's not a U.S. citizen.

It is NOT true that (because of that) he is not subject to U.S. law.

Lots of folks who are not U.S. citizens are subject to U.S. law.

Case not closed.

To bring someone under our criminal law for an act against the U.S., we have to go through appropriate extradition proceedings. it's not legal for us just to go in and grab someone up and drag them here.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

When are the bank leaks coming out?

 

[Jarhead]

In addition..

Any US news source that prints known classified information should be prosecuted

The NYT gave their documents to the DOD and WH to be vetted prior to publication. And the documents were already in the public domain fully covered by free press authority.

I don't think that being in the public domain reclassifies a document. If it is marked "Secret" you don't get to use the "He did it first" defense.

A document is classified until it is declassified

What deems it as classified?

Becuase a "stamp" is on it saying CLASSIFIED?

To me, a document is classified until someone without proper clearance has access to it...whether they were stolen or not. WQhat makes it classified is not what it is called, but who gets to see it.

A classified document should have better protection...if it doesnt it is subject to become unclassified.

 

[jillian]

When are the bank leaks coming out?

a few months from now.