Assange Op Ed in The Australian newspaper

[xotoxi]

Freedom of speech is not the same as trafficking stolen property.

Good point.

Just because he is given information that he should not have, does not give him the right to share it with everyone.

If I am given stolen Rolexes, and I sell them, should I be considered innocent?

Is Wikileaks selling the information they've obtained?

Selling or not, it doesn't matter.

If I was given stolen Rolexes, and I gave them away to my friends, or even to random, I would still be an accomplice to a crime.

 

[California Girl]

Freedom of speech is not the same as trafficking stolen property.

Good point.

Just because he is given information that he should not have, does not give him the right to share it with everyone.

If I am given stolen Rolexes, and I sell them, should I be considered innocent?

Is Wikileaks selling the information they've obtained?

Whether they sell it or give it away is of no consequence. It is against the laws of the US to disseminate information stolen from the US Government. It is called espionage.

If you receive stolen property and give it to someone else, you are still guilty of handling stolen property. The money is of no consequence.

 

[daveman]

Whether you see it or not is not really the point. The point is how our DoJ sees it. He knowingly disseminated stolen classified information. It is vital to our national security that we are able to communicate with other countries without them being concerned that it will end up on the front page of the world's newspapers. You get that right?

It is vital to your national security when it involves communiques that deserve that designation....I've seen nothing released so far that fall into that category. Most of it is just a bunch of office gossip.

And if other countries don't realise that this information was released without the permission of the US govt, then it's their problem, not yours.

Do you have original classification authority? No? Then your opinion of the classification of the stolen information is worthless.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I know they govt's don't play nice, and I am not that naive to think they would. But to me there is a difference between playing nice and doing what is necessary to keep your country safe. I think half the time these idiots are running around wasting time and tax payer's money. In fact, that is most of what I take out of these leaks.

Yes, for the most part, but the most important thing to me is that Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton should be in jail not Bradley Manning or Julian Assange.

If naivety was illegal, you'd be in prison too. Bradley Manning is a traitor - not technically, but most certainly in the spirit of treason.... Assange is guilty of espionage. Personally, I'd like to see Manning get the DP - assuming he is found guilty. And Assange can rot in jail... in the general population - with Americans.

Let "freedom" ring... etc... etc...

Not technically a traitor means not a traitor at all, by the way. To label him a traitor would require a certain amount of judicial activism. Surely you don't want that?

 

[daveman]

All of you who have spoken out against open governance in this thread have been successfully duped into believing that your "freedoms" are contingent on your government's ability to commit atrocities in secret. All of the leaks up to this point have served either to expose blatant wrongdoing or to bring diplomatic negotiations to the public's attention. My only gripe with Wikileaks is that they clearly aren't telling us everything that they know. The powers that be and those who refuse to question their actions can all go to hell

So can America-hating bastards who want to see my nation damaged in any possible way.

 

[daveman]

Yes, for the most part, but the most important thing to me is that Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton should be in jail not Bradley Manning or Julian Assange.

If naivety was illegal, you'd be in prison too. Bradley Manning is a traitor - not technically, but most certainly in the spirit of treason.... Assange is guilty of espionage. Personally, I'd like to see Manning get the DP - assuming he is found guilty. And Assange can rot in jail... in the general population - with Americans.

Let "freedom" ring... etc... etc...

Not technically a traitor means not a traitor at all, by the way. To label him a traitor would require a certain amount of judicial activism. Surely you don't want that?

Do you support what Manning did? If so, why?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If naivety was illegal, you'd be in prison too. Bradley Manning is a traitor - not technically, but most certainly in the spirit of treason.... Assange is guilty of espionage. Personally, I'd like to see Manning get the DP - assuming he is found guilty. And Assange can rot in jail... in the general population - with Americans.

Let "freedom" ring... etc... etc...

Not technically a traitor means not a traitor at all, by the way. To label him a traitor would require a certain amount of judicial activism. Surely you don't want that?

Do you support what Manning did? If so, why?

Absolutely. Civil disobedience is important to keep an out of control government in check, and Manning exposed criminal activities that our State Dept. has been involved in. He should be praised, and Hillary and Condoleezza should be in prison.

 

[Kalam]

All of you who have spoken out against open governance in this thread have been successfully duped into believing that your "freedoms" are contingent on your government's ability to commit atrocities in secret. All of the leaks up to this point have served either to expose blatant wrongdoing or to bring diplomatic negotiations to the public's attention. My only gripe with Wikileaks is that they clearly aren't telling us everything that they know. The powers that be and those who refuse to question their actions can all go to hell

So can America-hating bastards who want to see my nation damaged in any possible way.

I've never made a habit of singling America out and don't plan to start now. I'm more eager for releases that expose corruption in the governments of the "Muslim World" because those are the governments that I want to see fall apart.

 

[Kalam]

Selling or not, it doesn't matter.

If I was given stolen Rolexes, and I gave them away to my friends, or even to random, I would still be an accomplice to a crime.

Rolexes and information are of a completely different nature, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Dr Grump]

Whether you see it or not is not really the point. The point is how our DoJ sees it. He knowingly disseminated stolen classified information. It is vital to our national security that we are able to communicate with other countries without them being concerned that it will end up on the front page of the world's newspapers. You get that right?

It is vital to your national security when it involves communiques that deserve that designation....I've seen nothing released so far that fall into that category. Most of it is just a bunch of office gossip.

And if other countries don't realise that this information was released without the permission of the US govt, then it's their problem, not yours.

Do you have original classification authority? No? Then your opinion of the classification of the stolen information is worthless.

So is yours..shrug..

I have read some of them, and they are not worthy of such a designation.

Hey, if you want to give your govt carte blanche and pull the wool over your eyes, more power to you...

 

[Kalam]

It is against the laws of the US to disseminate information stolen from the US Government. It is called espionage.

Then why didn't the Supreme Court rule against the NYT when they published the Pentagon Papers?

 

[Dr Grump]

Aren't you righties always complaining there is too much govt; that there are too many bureaucrats; that they're all corrupt and incompetent; that they are answerable to the people? Now Assange is proving your point by the crap they get up to, and you want to vilify him. How strange.

Hey Daveman, what gives some faceless bureaucrat the right to decide what I should hear or not hear, or is all of the above wrong? You love and trust your govt?

 

[xotoxi]

Selling or not, it doesn't matter.

If I was given stolen Rolexes, and I gave them away to my friends, or even to random, I would still be an accomplice to a crime.

Rolexes and information are of a completely different nature, wouldn't you agree?

Of course. But they are similar if they are stolen.

 

[Samson]

Freedom of speech is not the same as trafficking stolen property.

His domain names and merchant accounts are being cut off.

Works so far.

Not for long..they are being set up again...

They are in the public domain as fas as I'm concerned.

how about addressing the points I made in the OP, or is that too far of a stretch for you?

Was there a point to the OP?

***yawn***


****stretch****

 

[Dr Grump]

Freedom of speech is not the same as trafficking stolen property.

His domain names and merchant accounts are being cut off.

Works so far.

Not for long..they are being set up again...

They are in the public domain as fas as I'm concerned.

how about addressing the points I made in the OP, or is that too far of a stretch for you?

Was there a point to the OP?

***yawn***


****stretch****

Trolling again....

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I never said he was guilty of espionage, but that's not the end-all of his culpability, now, is it?

But he is guilty of espionage.

What information has he released? Nothing that would harm the military. The only information so far as been what the government has been doing, which has not been of any military value. If Assange is silenced who's to say the government will stop there?

 

[Epsilon Delta]

You guys really gotta simmer down. Assange can't seriously be tried under the Espionage Act. The only people that can be tried are the people who actually, literally obtained the documents and gave them away. Wikileaks, which is a media organization, cannot be tried (First Amendment) unless you change the law and proceed to try The Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais, and Der Spiegel, not to mention the New York Times which got them from the Guardian. In fact, the NYT itself along with all the others started publishing coverage and cables even BEFORE Wikileaks did, because it was under attack at the time.

I nevertheless love the way this issue is splitting the bases up, you got your bash-America crowd, your crazy no-goverment tea partiers, your anarchos, libertarians, etc, and on the other side you have your jingoists which come in red and blue, of course.

And speaking of that, should people be tried for this in the first place? Obviously not. I hope this sends signals that spread far and wide. I want to see wikileaks of everything, the banks, the Chinese Communisty Party, I wanna see French Wikileaks, German Wikileaks, RUSSIAN Wikileaks. I wanna see total glasnost n' perestroika all over again, man. Obviously that personal privacy is sacrosanct, but the government? The government is THE PEOPLE's, it can't keep secrets from the PEOPLE, and now they fuckin' know.

THAT'S RIGHT, MAKE 'EM PISS 'ER PANTS, JULIAN!

 

[California Girl]

You guys really gotta simmer down. Assange can't seriously be tried under the Espionage Act. The only people that can be tried are the people who actually, literally obtained the documents and gave them away. Wikileaks, which is a media organization, cannot be tried (First Amendment) unless you change the law and proceed to try The Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais, and Der Spiegel, not to mention the New York Times which got them from the Guardian. In fact, the NYT itself along with all the others started publishing coverage and cables even BEFORE Wikileaks did, because it was under attack at the time.

I nevertheless love the way this issue is splitting the bases up, you got your bash-America crowd, your crazy no-goverment tea partiers, your anarchos, libertarians, etc, and on the other side you have your jingoists which come in red and blue, of course.

And speaking of that, should people be tried for this in the first place? Obviously not. I hope this sends signals that spread far and wide. I want to see wikileaks of everything, the banks, the Chinese Communisty Party, I wanna see French Wikileaks, German Wikileaks, RUSSIAN Wikileaks. I wanna see total glasnost n' perestroika all over again, man. Obviously that personal privacy is sacrosanct, but the government? The government is THE PEOPLE's, it can't keep secrets from the PEOPLE, and now they fuckin' know.

THAT'S RIGHT, MAKE 'EM PISS 'ER PANTS, JULIAN!

Whatever the rantings of keyboard warriors, the US Government is considering Espionage charges against Assange.

 

[L.K.Eder]

I never said he was guilty of espionage, but that's not the end-all of his culpability, now, is it?

But he is guilty of espionage.

Ordinarily, I believe the process is that we try an individual, evaluate the evidence, and then find them guilty or innocent as appropriate. Is it just you or is the left wing generally now supportive of just throwing people in prison without bothering with that whole 'due process' thing?

 

[Ravi]

Let "freedom" ring... etc... etc...

Not technically a traitor means not a traitor at all, by the way. To label him a traitor would require a certain amount of judicial activism. Surely you don't want that?

Do you support what Manning did? If so, why?

Absolutely. Civil disobedience is important to keep an out of control government in check, and Manning exposed criminal activities that our State Dept. has been involved in. He should be praised, and Hillary and Condoleezza should be in prison.

I think you could make a case for whistleblowing if he actually exposed any criminal activity...like proof of torture or war crimes. He didn't. I would be surprised, and in fact disappointed, to find that our government did not keep tabs on other governments, friendly or not. I'd also be surprised if other governments didn't keep tabs on ours.

There is nothing in what was released that anyone needs to know...except that the State Department is doing what it is supposed to do.