Assange is declared "enemy" of the United States

[anarchy 99]

No freedom of speech in America.

America is run by a group of mass murdering fascist tyrants.

Free assange!

 

[JayAtl]

The Pentagon papers involved the NYT leaking classified military documents. If that isn't 'espionage' as per the guidelines of the current US government and military. I don't know what is. Did you see those journalists getting declared enemies?

Besides, this precedent lets the US government call anyone publishing anything the government deems harmful as enemies of the state. A tad authoritarian for a country like the United States.

Pentagon papers had to do with actual inappropriate actions of the govt , covert and kept away from the congress. Diplomatic cables are not covert BUT are a classified discussions. What did wiki leaks ultimate show? internal discussions and opinions being discussed? what govt transparency / action that the congress was supposed to know was reveled ?

Should we have one of your doctor that helped us with Osama - poster made up to?

 

[xdrive]

Nothing Julian Assange did was "Free speech" Theft is not free speech. As for the charges against him regarding the rape. He has a reputation of being a pig towards women. He is probably using his leaks as an excuse to get out of what he did.

The only reason why so many people on this forum support him is because he is seen as going again the U.S in which they hate. They couldn't care less about Julian Assange himself.

No freedom of speech in America.

America is run by a group of mass murdering fascist tyrants.

Free assange!

Julian Assange should come live in the Peoples Republic of China! Plenty of free speech there. LOL.

 

[gambit]

The only reason why so many people on this forum support him is because he is seen as going again the U.S in which they hate. They couldn't care less about Julian Assange himself.

What if Assange did 'it' to their countries?

Julian Assange should come live in the Peoples Republic of China! Plenty of free speech there. LOL.

Humor the kid. Just another conscript reject and too dumb to do anything else other than reading whatever his shift stuporvisor give him.

 

[Icecreamcart]

Pentagon papers had to do with actual inappropriate actions of the govt , covert and kept away from the congress. Diplomatic cables are not covert BUT are a classified discussions. What did wiki leaks ultimate show? internal discussions and opinions being discussed? what govt transparency / action that the congress was supposed to know was reveled ?

The diplomatic cables are not the only thing released. There are also the videos of the helicopter attacks in Iraq, the Stratfor leaks, and the numerous war logs of the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. This is only for America, not including the data on Iran, big banks, toxic dumping and etc. This stuff is relevant. But it is perceived as putting the US a bad light, when the real intent is simply to have free information. He has done work exposing other countries and companies yet he is accused of being anti-American.

Nations such as Russia, China and Australia don't support Assange because of the various leaks that have been released like the Australian censorship list. And you'll be surprised to know that quite a few times, Wikileaks was taken down by Russian and Chinese hackers for its work in exposing the truth.

For the diplomatic cables:
The idea is that Assange is a journalist. Manning is the leak.

I feel sorry for Manning, but he has broken a law by leaking classified military secrets as a member of the United States military. I wish he would get a lenient sentence, but that's unlikely, since the maximum punishment is execution.

Assange on the other hand is the person who received the leaks, like any journalist when receiving a tip. No matter what you think or how distasteful you think the leaks are, there is no reason for Assange to be declared an enemy of the state and hunted down. Journalists are never treated this way, but only in Assange's case. This kind of extrajudicial action wrecks the credibility of the US in my opinion.

The case that the US wishes to charge Assange on is that Assange somehow coerced Manning into leaking the information. There's no doubt that the US wishes to persuade Manning into testifying that Assange did more than just provide a method to receive the leaks and was an active conspirator.

 

[SamranAli]

wow at american double standards.

 

[Thorough Pro]

So much for freedom of speech.

US...champion of human rights...

 

[gambit]

The idea is that Assange is a journalist.

Assange is not a 'journalist'. Never was.

First...The 'freedom of the press' does not mean I have to be a credentialed member of a credentialed news organization to claim that freedom. The 'freedom of the press' mean the freedom to use methods to disseminate information. That mean today I am an 'ordinary Joe' and tomorrow I can claim to be 'journalist Joe' and there is nothing the government can do about it.

Second...Even if the 'freedom of the press' is so broadly cast a net, it still does not make Assange a 'journalist' in the practical accepted sense of the word, the context that we are familiar with through TV, radio, and other methods of information dissemination by truly credentialed -- or 'real' -- journalists. It simply mean that in order to continue to enjoy that freedom we must defend even those who casually and carelessly abuse that title for their own gains.

So much for freedom of speech.

US...champion of human rights...

As different as fire and ice between US and Pakistan when it comes to human rights.

 

[Icecreamcart]

Assange is not a 'journalist'. Never was.

First...The 'freedom of the press' does not mean I have to be a credentialed member of a credentialed news organization to claim that freedom. The 'freedom of the press' mean the freedom to use methods to disseminate information. That mean today I am an 'ordinary Joe' and tomorrow I can claim to be 'journalist Joe' and there is nothing the government can do about it.

Second...Even if the 'freedom of the press' is so broadly cast a net, it still does not make Assange a 'journalist' in the practical accepted sense of the word, the context that we are familiar with through TV, radio, and other methods of information dissemination by truly credentialed -- or 'real' -- journalists. It simply mean that in order to continue to enjoy that freedom we must defend even those who casually and carelessly abuse that title for their own gains.

If he is not a journalist, he is a publisher of information. These roles overlap.

Should a journalist or publisher be treated any differently if they receive information and release it for public consumption?

Assuming that Assange did not purposely coerce Manning into stealing information (This fact is under dispute), then he should not be singled out for this action.

One issue here is that the detractors of Assange believes that releasing any 'confidental' information of the United States regardless of the fact he has broken no laws makes Assange a traitor (amusingly), and a target for assassination or extrajudicial punishment.

 

[gambit]

If he is not a journalist, he is a publisher of information. These roles overlap.

Should a journalist or publisher be treated any differently if they receive information and release it for public consumption?

Both 'journalist' and 'publisher' are genuine professions that have DIRECT association with information and the dissemination of information. A gossip monger, the kind that each of us occasionally are, are not so considered, not because we do not disseminate information in the technical sense, but that the information we disseminate are unrefined and interesting only to us but boring to most.

So I am not saying that Assange does not have the right to exercise his freedom of the press, aka play 'journalist', for a while. I am saying that even though he disseminate information in the technical sense, he had not performed any deeds that we normally associate with professional journalists, such as interviewing people and dissect their responses or investigate if claims can be verified into facts. Assange is not in the same class as Amanpour. Calling him a 'journalist' is an insult to professional journalists but am sure all of the real journalists bite their tongues in order to preserve their profession. Between Assange and me, it is only the impact of Wikileaks that made him a more worthy figure of the freedom of the press than me and my petty gossip.

Assuming that Assange did not purposely coerce Manning into stealing information (This fact is under dispute), then he should not be singled out for this action.

Why not? Now he is a DIRECT participant in the fleshing out of information, not just an inactive recipient of it.

One issue here is that the detractors of Assange believes that releasing any 'confidental' information of the United States regardless of the fact he has broken no laws makes Assange a traitor (amusingly), and a target for assassination or extrajudicial punishment.

It depends on a bit or many bits of information. I have been out of the military for 20 yrs and yet there are still bits of technical knowledge that I will probably have to wait until my deathbed to reveal.

Bottom line is this: Assange made himself and his organization a purposeful conduit for information related to governments. That much we know. What we do not know -- and should know -- is the 'how' that he made possible this conduit. And that is why Assange ran, not because of the sexual crimes alleged to him. The Watergate reporters Woodward and Bernstein broke no laws. All they did was persuade, think, and persuade people some more. It is beginning to look suspicious to the public that Assange may have done more than just persuade.

 

[Banu Umayyah]

Assange is not a 'journalist'. Never was.

First...The 'freedom of the press' does not mean I have to be a credentialed member of a credentialed news organization to claim that freedom. The 'freedom of the press' mean the freedom to use methods to disseminate information. That mean today I am an 'ordinary Joe' and tomorrow I can claim to be 'journalist Joe' and there is nothing the government can do about it. He did nothing wrong, he received information and made it public, he is under no legal obligation to keep it a secret. The information was secret under the US government alone, not the whole world.

Second...Even if the 'freedom of the press' is so broadly cast a net, it still does not make Assange a 'journalist' in the practical accepted sense of the word, the context that we are familiar with through TV, radio, and other methods of information dissemination by truly credentialed -- or 'real' -- journalists. It simply mean that in order to continue to enjoy that freedom we must defend even those who casually and carelessly abuse that title for their own gains.


As different as fire and ice between US and Pakistan when it comes to human rights.

Stop deflecting criticism to other countries. This isn't about China or Pakistan, they don't claim to protect freedom of speech. Also, Assange is a journalist no matter how much you try bend the definition so to exclude him from it. What he did is publish information he received, this information is only classified secret by the US government, he is under no legal obligation to not publish it since he is not an American. Unlike what many Americans think, US law doesn't equal international law.

 

[gambit]

Stop deflecting criticism to other countries. This isn't about China or Pakistan, they don't claim to protect freedom of speech. Also, Assange is a journalist no matter how much you try bend the definition so to exclude him from it. What he did is publish information he received, this information is only classified secret by the US government, he is under no legal obligation to not publish it since he is not an American. Unlike what many American think, US law doesn't equal international law.

No deflection here, buddy. Just making comparisons.

 

[Baby Leone]

US should respect "Freedom of Speech".....

 

[xdrive]

So much for freedom of speech.

US...champion of human rights...

Theft isn't free speech nor is it a human right.

US should respect "Freedom of Speech".....

The U.S does. What's your point?

 

[xdrive]

Stop deflecting criticism to other countries. This isn't about China or Pakistan, they don't claim to protect freedom of speech. Also, Assange is a journalist no matter how much you try bend the definition so to exclude him from it. What he did is publish information he received, this information is only classified secret by the US government, he is under no legal obligation to not publish it since he is not an American. Unlike what many Americans think, US law doesn't equal international law.

It doesn't matter if he is a journalist or not and it doesn't matter if he is an American or not.

He received documents which were obtained by theft and he then distributed these stolen items.

It would be like me breaking into your house, stealing things and then saying "oh, don't arrest me for stealing, i'm just practicing free speech"