Is Julian Assange a Criminal and What Are His Crimes
Julian Assange, Founder of Wikileaks is in Hot Water Over Publishing Classified Information Did He Break the Law?
Despite Palin and Lieberman a larger question looms and that question is should Julian Assange be considered a criminal because he is posting information given to him? This is information that removes Uncle Sam's makeup and shows a very ugly face of America.
Let's compare Mr. Assange with another man who provided Pentagon information to the media. After all, we should all be held to the same standard so such a comparison is more than apt.
The man I am referring to is "The Most Dangerous Man in America", Daniel Ellsberg.
During the Johnson Administration, Mr. Ellsberg smuggled top secret Pentagon papers and delivered them to the New York Times. Mr. Ellsberg's actions really caused the US Government to shutter to its core. Mr. Ellsberg showed that at least 5 different Presidents knowingly went and lied to the American people.
Now, what should be understood is that Mr. Daniel Ellsberg worked very high up in the Pentagon ranks. He initially helped create the reports in support of the American invasion of Vietnam. As time progressed Mr. Ellsberg started seeing how different Administrations outright lied to the American people. His conscience could only take so much. He realized he had also been lied to and because of those lies he helped perpetrate an atrocity against peoples of a foreign land.
So, being led by his conscience, Mr. Ellsberg started smuggling those reports out of his safe at the Pentagon, taking them home, xeroxing them and returning them the next day and repeating the procedure with a fresh batch of papers.
To make a long story short, Mr. Ellsberg eventually ended up delivering all these papers to the New York Times which in turn edited, wrote and published articles that were the nightmare scenario of several Presidential administrations.
Ellsberg had the highest security clearance of just about anyone who isn't a sitting President. In order to get clearance of such nature, Ellsberg had to sign several secrecy and non-disclosure agreements with the Government. So when he stole, xeroxed and disseminated those secret reports to the press, he was violating at least several dozen laws.
Skip forward to present time and Mr. Ellsberg is celebrated as a hero. He has a documentary made about this period of his life which won numerous film awards. He is not in prison and is rightfully regarded as a patriot of the United States. A man who saw a wrong being done and took it upon himself to tell the world the entire truth about the Vietnam War.
Presently we have another man who believes in giving the world information about what the truth of world politics is. I'm speaking of Julian Assange, of course. It is important to note that Mr. Assange is not an American citizen, does not live in America, did not sign any secrecy and non-disclosure agreements and did not steal any documents.
The fact of the matter is that Julian Assange did absolutely nothing except disclose documents on his website, Wikileaks.org. These documents were provided to him by persons who saw dishonesty being perpetrated yet again and wanted to notify the world. These people wanted the truth to be told but they were not in a position where they could disclose their identity.
So why is Julian Assange being dubbed a criminal? He has not committed a single illegal act.
Truth is that Julian Assange and Wikileaks are actually more comparable to the New York Times then to Mr. Daniel Ellsberg.
I will not pretend to say that my bias isn't for Julian Assange as I see the Wikileaks.org Embassy Cables as a breath of fresh air. A gust that has, at least temporarily, pushed the smog of lies and deceit out of the way and allowed "We the people" to see what our Government is doing.
We have every right to know this information as our Government is "of the people for the people". It is a Government that represents every one of us.
If our Government is misbehaving then it is telling the world that the United States and Robert Korczak, as well as Joe the Plumber, along with Sarah Palin and with the lovely John Doe all agree. It says that we all believe that lying, cheating, stealing, strong-arming and so on are all acceptable ways for American behavior on the global stage.
So I repeat the question, how is Mr. Julian Assange a criminal? Did he steal something? Did he cheat someone? Did he violate American law? Furthermore, isn't Julian Assange performing the exact same service today that the New York Times, which back then had the Cojones, disclosed back in the 60s and 70s?
The only thing that Julian Assange is guilty of, for certain, is that he pissed off the American Government which doesn't like its dirty laundry drying in public view. Tidy-whities with skid marks are not what you want the neighbors to see.
Here is the contrast in a nutshell; Mr. Ellsberg, though he was morally right, broke countless American laws and exposed just how ugly the US was being in that period of history. He is celebrated as a hero, and rightfully so. Mr. Assange didn't break any laws or steal any papers, was morally right and exposed just how ugly the US is being in this period of history. Mr. Assange is treated like a villain and very unjustly.
Is Julian Assange a criminal? Well, let me answer that question with a question. Is Daniel Ellsberg a criminal?
Published by Rob Korczak
Some information about Rob Korczak for those interested. 1.Rob Korczak is the son of former CIA Agent Boris Korczak. 2.By Age 8, Rob had 3 kidnapping attempts made on him. 3.Rob was a witness to his fat... View profile
- The History Makers Some events in history seem to repeat themselves as time-modified replicas, if not exact copies. And there are chroniclers of those events - participants at times - who bestow an undisputed clarity in the analysis of...
Howard Zinn: The "People's" HistorianHoward Zinn has had a remarkable journey since his birth to immigrant parents in 1922: As labor organizer, World War II bomber crewman, college professor and political activist...- Freedom of the Press: When Journalists Should Reveal Their Sources" at a time when journalists seek a reporter's privilege like attorney-client privilege, they ought to recognize that an attorney can be compelled to testify. Journalists are not entitled to promise complete confid...
Women in History: Publishing Magnate, Katharine GrahamGraham led the Washington Post through some troubled times, exposing some of the biggest stories in United States history.- Who is Sibel Edmonds? F.B.I. Translator Blew Whistle on Possible EspionageSibel Edmonds, an FBI translator who alerted her superiors to possible espionage, was fired. Her case against the government was struck down under theState Secrets Privilege.
- Julian Assange Arrested in London for Rape, Sexual Molestation in Sweden
- WikiLeaks' Julian Assange Promises to Spill Corporate Secrets Early Next Year
- WikiLeaks' Julian Assange on Interpol Most Wanted List
- US Government Behind Fake Charges of Rape Against Wikileaks Founder, Julian Assang...
- WikiLeaks and Hillary Clinton - Espionage Charges from Julian Assange
- WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Targeted
- Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Releases 92,000 Top Secret Documents on Afghan War
- Julian Assange is in a UK Jail awaiting an extradition hearing.
- Jullian Assange is the founder of Wikileaks.
- Julian Assange in hot water over Cablegate as he published secret American Embassy documents.
16 Comments
Post a Commentclarification by "in violation of law" I am referring to the original distribution, not the publication by Assange. I am using a computer that has deficient keys and concentrating on its foibles and my thoughts simultaneously is a challenge.
classified that should not be classified, it would be hard to argue that a lot of it shouldn't be public or isn't already in some fashion.
The biggest issue for me is that it's always easier to judge these matters in hindsight. A whistle-blower of any ilk (this goes to the leaker, not Assange) has the internal or the external option. If you know someone is giving you classified info that he doesn't have the right to give you, you know at a minimum that he is breaking the law. Are you aiding and abetting by taking what you know to be stolen information (might be easier to say theft if it were a physical document?) and distributing it?Are you a receiver of stolen info? These are interesting questions that we have to resolve and I don't think the answers should be outcome dependent. If what Assange did is legal, then we also have to be prepared to accept the wikileaks disclosure of info that gets our president assassinated or our troops killed in action because you can't pick and choose what classified info someone can knowingly receive and publish in violation of law. On the other hand, there is so much
Ðевід'ємні права Людини.
Ðеотъемлемые права Человека.
Droits inaliénables de l'homme.
Unveräußerlichen Rechte des Menschen.
Inalienable human rights.
For lawyers, attorneys Julian Paul Assange from WikiLeaks.
Я думаю, что американцы должны вÑпомнить какие люди пиÑали их КонÑтитуцию, о какой Ñтране они мечтали, вÑпомнить о Билле о правах.
I think that Americans must remember, what people wrote their Constitution, what country they dreamed about, must remember about Bill of Rights.
Защищать необходимо не только права женщин, но, как оказываетÑÑ, и права мужчин.
Necessary to protect not only the rights of women, but as it turns out, and the rights of men.
Therefore, even if in terms of morality, not really nice to meet two girls, from the point of view of the law - he is innocent, if they met voluntarily and without violence.
I do not understand the position of the Australian Government. Julian Paul Assange, if I understood correctly, is the citizen of Australia, a prosecution was pulled out him in one country, detained in other country. The government of Australia is not interested in the fate of an Australian citizen and it does not want to fulfill their responsibilities to protect its citizens?
If it is true what is written on the Internet, Julian Paul Assange got into this situation by formally put forward claims of activists of the feminist movement, which I think is unreasonable requirements, violating his rights as a person. Formally put forward the claim to be in violation, in my opinion, international law and established international human rights law, even in Sweden and have such laws, so distorting the relationship between men and women. Human rights can not be waived or prohibited by national law any country - is repealing the Human Rights Act would be unlawful. The discussion should not abuse the rights and on equality - it means respect for the equal rights of men and their parity, negotiation of reciprocal rights with mutual responsibilities. Me it seems to that in this case is present abuse of right, overstatement of rights for one side due to the illegal diminishing of rights for other side. Therefore, even if in terms of morality, not really nice to meet two g
The basis of legal protection, Mr. Julian Paul Assange of WikiLeaks could be justification for its compliance with existing international law and fundamental human rights (including this and the right to know who controls the people and what they as an intellectual, moral or and professional level, in so far as regards their ability to regulate public social processes).
In addition, there is legal justification of his right not to disclose sources of information, if released information corresponds to reality and affects the basic rights of many people.
Regarding of formal charges, Julian Paul Assange (Julian Paul Assange) from WikiLeaks: judging by the charges against him (published in the online information), it probably is not the accused should be, it is likely the victim, because of the very essence of the charges it is clear that it is the actual discrimination and baseless carping from the opposite side, having little to do with human rights and simple logic.
I think that Americans must remember, what people wrote their Constitution, what country they dreamed about, must remember about Bill of Rights.
Necessary to protect not only the rights of women, but as it turns out, and the rights of men.
Formally put forward the claim to be in violation, in my opinion, international law and established international human rights law, even in Sweden and have such laws, so distorting the relationship between men and women. Human rights can not be waived or prohibited by national law any country - is repealing the Human Rights Act would be unlawful. The discussion should not abuse the rights and on equality - it means respect for the equal rights of men and their parity, negotiation of reciprocal rights with mutual responsibilities. Me it seems to that in this case is present abuse of right, overstatement of rights for one side due to the illegal diminishing of rights for other side.
If it is true what is written on the Internet, Julian Paul Assange got into this situation by formally put forward claims of activists of the feminist movement, which I think is unreasonable requirements, violating his rights as a person.