Julian Assange: Fighting for World Justice, or A Dangerous Criminal?

[Razor]

Julian Assange. Man, that dude is getting the Pentagon pissed off. He runs a site called Wikileaks, which serves as a host for anonymous whistleblowers to upload their documents to Assange and his colleagues. Assange then posts them on the internet for all to see, taking the full blow of whatever danger would have come the whistleblower's way.

Disclaimer: I won't link to the website or any content thereon, because I know we have military personnel on this forum. The Pentagon released a memo the other week stating that their armed forces should refrain to visiting the site, so I'm going to keep all possibilities of violating official Pentagon orders to a minimum.

Source

Source

Source

While it's not an official ban, as CNN said, it's still a "Hey, don't go there." order. I'll respect that for the troops. I'll still go there as much as I want, but you know how it is.

The Action

Oh shit. Assange got some documents from a private by the name of....Bradley Manning. From what I can tell, at least.

Souce

It appears Manning, not yet done after releasing the infamous "Collateral Murder" video of two soldiers laughing as they shot down innocent civilians and two journalists in Afghanistan, decided to leak a hundred thousand written reports from the front lines of Afghanistan.

These aren't some random reports from a dude giving medicine in Kandahar. These are reports from sergeants, lieutenants, everyone. These are not doctored and straight from the soldiers themselves. Raw data. Everything from the casualties from the latest patrol to the suspected corruption of Afghan officials, both from Confidential Informants and the soldiers themselves.

While we all know President Kharzai is a self-righteous, corrupt asshole....no one really says so. It's kept hush hush. Now we have all of these files detailing the exact nature of the campaign in Afghanistan. A corrupt, bloody, and murky one.

And what did Julian Assange do? Why, he posted all but a select 15,000 on the internet for all to enjoy. Hurray?

The Fallout

First of all, the United States Government was pissed. They instituted the "suggested" avoidance of Wikileaks by their officers, and held a press conference. Their press secretary, Geoff Morrell, had this to say:

"We are asking them to do the right thing. I don't know that we're very confident they'll have a change of heart."

"The Defense Department demands that WikiLeaks return immediately to the U.S. government all versions of documents obtained directly or indirectly from the Department of Defense databases or records,"

MSNBC knows what was said.

Morrell said the Pentagon is pursuing other options if the website fails to comply, although he declined to answer a question about possible legal action.

That was from NPR. Source

When the Pentagon says "We will pursue other avenues" we all know what that means. Legal, military, or we will fucking kill you. Only three options for them, really.

Positive Reactions

However, no matter how much the United States shits its pants, there are some overwhelmingly positive comments from people all over the world.

Sweden, from where Julian Assange is having to base his operations out of fear of reprisals from around the world, hasn't budged in their acceptance of him and their continued neutrality on the matter. In fact, the Swedish populace herald him a hero. A champion of the greater good.

People in America, from Tea Party activists to Democrats to those cooky Conspiracy Theorists who would make you chuckle if they weren't just a little too weird, have also embraced the leaks. In an era which has been forced to sitting idly by while their government does what it wants, this new transparency was well received.

TLD; DR. The Question

The question is, essentially, was Julian Assange right? Does he hold the moral high ground in this issue? And what if the Pentagon takes legal action against him? Would it be a case of the government going after the lowly whistleblower, or the government taking back what is rightfully theirs?

I'll leave you with a few words from the current chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen:

"Mr. Assange,” Mullen commented, “can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family.

Source

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

I don't know wheather to hail this guy as hero for being a whistle blower or to grab a gun and shoot this idiot in the face. If he does have what he thinks he has from what is most likely a disgruntled private, then the evidence probably is suspect. If you release military documents without going through the proper channels, like say crossing out the names of the people and the programs then that puts people's lives in jeopardy and you are an idiot for doing so.

 

[Thriller Ant]

I am currently a journalism major at the college I attend. I haven't gotten into the Journalism Law class yet, but I've been in a class that talks about ethics and situations like this came up. The general idea is that if the information is important to the public, and doesn't put people involved in a classified mission in danger or compromise the mission itself, then it is generally ok to publish. Clearly, from the info in the OP, he violated this rule. He gave up classified info that can almost definitely cause issues for the delicate mission in the Middle East. There's a chance he had good intentions (I personally think he wanted more traffic on his site), but no matter what, he should not have published these articles.

 

[RockFan89]

Can anyone tell me what we learned that we already didn't know from these leaks? Afghanistan is corrupt? Pakistan is corrupt? War is Hell? People die needlessly during war? If there was some great revelation of the war the public was not privy to, I'd understand the leak, but he seems to be leaking documents for the fame and website traffic. And if even one American soldier or Afghan informant is killed or one of his/her family members is killed because of the release of these documents, I hope this guy is executed in a firing squad.

Also, does anyone else not think this guy is a little creepy? Just watch an interview of him and tell me you don't think there is something off with this guy.

 

[The Crock]

I can't support this guy, at all. He's not an American, why would he do this? He could be thrown into the same group as all the other people out there against the American government. He's nothing but an attention ****e, all he wants is to be recognized and to be seen by people. Is he not familiar with war? Shit happens in war, people die, it's not all cut and dry. Of course all these people are corrupt, of course some innocent lives are taken... I'm not saying it's right but it's definitely not something that should just be put out there for everybody to see. Hell, in every war there has been a point and time where things haven't quite gone as planned. There's no reason to put our government, the American government on blast. These documents are private documents that weren't supposed to get out, bad things can happen as a result of this. I hope he gets some kind of punishment for this, but more importantly I hope that the website is taken down.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

So I've been storing extra braincells over the last week to make a somewhat intelligent post, but I accidentally killed them last night, so I apologize in advance.

If there's one thing I don't do, it's follow current events, so this was the first I had heard of this situation. So after reading this nice summary of what was going on I feel I can at least offer my feelings on the situation.

I say he has the right, I mean how can you argue with anything that brings Republicans, Democrats, and Conspiracy theorists together on a situation. I feel the government has to much power and control to begin with, and it would be more than just going after a whistle blower. In my opinion it would be a clear abuse of power on the governments behalf.

As for that blood on the hands comment, I just can't help but offer a deep heartfelt LULZ.

 

[RockFan89]

This guy is back in the news again and I remembered this thread about him so I figured I'd try to get it started back up again.

It used to be that only conservatives (including myself) hated this guy for leaking classified military documents while liberals loved him for "exposing" some of the stuff done in war. But now he has even angered the left by releasing information critical of diplomats. It is now going to be much harder for countries to start trusting the U.S. and to start discussing peaceful resolutions to the worlds problems.

Originally people thought of this guy as some peace loving liberal who was just trying to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But now the world should be able to see that this guy has no interest in peace and is only interested in getting traffic to his web site, regardless of the cost.

So has the recent release of documents changed the opinion you have of this guy? Why or why not?

 

[Loveless]

I don't know wheather to hail this guy as hero for being a whistle blower or to grab a gun and shoot this idiot in the face. If he does have what he thinks he has from what is most likely a disgruntled private, then the evidence probably is suspect. If you release military documents without going through the proper channels, like say crossing out the names of the people and the programs then that puts people's lives in jeopardy and you are an idiot for doing so.

It's my understanding that out of the 250,000 documents they have, only 500 have been publicly released and that they have been edited. The other files have been privately released to certain (and I use the word lightly) respectable media outlets.
OK on to the main topic. I'm caught in two minds about the entire thing but I'm siding somewhat on the side of Wikileaks. Things like corruption should be brought to light and it takes balls to procede with this kind of extreme journalism. And that is what this is, journalism albeit in a somewhat new way. This might actually be the purest sense of journalism because unlike basically any other paper in the world, there's no manipulation for political purposes, it's simply the documents as they are. It's hypocritical for the US to espouse free speech and freedom of the press above all else until it suits them.

Now on the other hand, if this is infact a massive security risk and is putting peoples lives at risk, that's the point where it's gone too far.

 

[Davi323]

I am going to be as clear as possible. Julian Assange is a criminal. When you get right down to the core of it, he is a common thief, a fence. Regardless of your political leanings, I think there are a few things EVERYONE can agree on...

1. The Classified documents in question are the intellectual property of the United States government, and the various state departments in which they were created.

I don't think any argument can be made that can logically suggest otherwise. Clearly, Classified documents would not be public domain, would not fall under the jurisdiction of the Freedom of Information Act, or anything else.

2. There is simply no way whatsoever that Julian Assange could have taken possession of the documents legally.

Since Julian Assange is not an employee, representative of, or in any other way affiliated with the United States government, nor has he ever been, there is no way for him to have obtained those documents through legal means.

3. Julian Assange knows he is not an employee, representative of, or in any other way affiliated with the United States government.

This may seem like a repeat of point number two, but it really isn't. #2 establishes that WE knew he could not have obtained the documents legally, #3 establishes that HE knew he could not have obtained the documents legally. Therefore, Julian Assange knew that the documents had been stolen, that he had no legal right to them whatsoever, and still chose to accept those documents into his possession. This removes the potential argument that he didn't know what he was doing was illegal.

4. According to American law, and the laws of most other countries, simply being in possession of stolen property is a crime in and of itself, regardless of whether or not you did the actual theft or simply accepted the stolen merchandise.

This disallows any claim that Assange might try to make that since he wasn't the one that actually stole the information off of the US government servers, that he didn't commit any crimes. He isn't some hapless accidental accomplice who didn't know that his buddy stole a bunch of TVs from Sears, he knew full well that all of the documents he received were stolen.

5. It is also a crime under American law and the laws of most other countries to knowingly distribute stolen property.

Once we can take away the "I didn't steal it, I just obtained the documents" argument, we still have Julian Assange knowingly and willfully distributing that stolen property. He can't possibly claim that there is nothing illegal about posting stolen property online for others to take. It doesn't matter that it is only information, stolen property is stolen property, whether its a car, paintings, or a bunch of 1s and 0s assembled into a specific binary pattern that a computer can read and transform into music, movies, or documents. It is this very same principle that drives the anti-piracy efforts in regards to downloading music and movies.

I am not going to get into whether or not the documents represent a danger to the troops or anything like that, because ultimately, that is a side issue. Regardless of whether or not WikiLeaks endangers people's lives, those documents are still the legal property of the United States government, not Julian Assange's.

Therefore, given that he accepted stolen property, knew that he was accepting stolen property, and then knowingly distributed that stolen property online, how can he be anything other than a criminal? He is a pirate!

 

[LigerBomb]

No offense to any younger members but the Assange has a sophomoric world view that seems to deal almost exclusively in self righteous indignation. Point blank, everybody spies and everybody lies. World diplomacy and war-time backroom deals are standard operations and practices.
White lies and mutually greased palms really do make the world go 'round. In Mr. Assange's perfect utopia—or anarchistic fantasy as the case maybe—there perhaps would be no need or use for such tactics, but sadly the rest of us don't live in that fantasy world. On a day-to-day basis do we not talk behind people's backs (even those we genuinely care about/for and consider friends)? Do we make deals to serve our own agendas and self-interests (and again those we have alignment with, be they friend/family/etc)? Do we sometimes hold distasteful opinions of the people our livelihoods force upon us (but smile politely and get the job done regardless)? Why on earth then, would it be any different for governments and their officials/military personnel/diplomats/etc.? These men and women are trained in politicking, diplomacy, deal-cutting, and information gathering; it should be expected and assumed that they would lie to one another to get things done and preserve a greater good.
As with so many things, global relations, are a lot like High School. There are cliques, gangs, outcasts, gossip, rumors, lines-drawn, sides taken, and yes, backs to be stabbed. Again, I'm sure we've all seen those episodes of TV sitcoms where a character rallies around the notion of unadulterated truth, openness, and honesty only to (SHOCKINGLY!) find that human socialization and civility ultimately breaks down in the face of unmitigated, careless and perfunctory "truth for the sake of truth". Simply put we're not ready for that level of honest opinion yet –if ever.
Honesty, as it turns out, isn't the best policy. Go figure?

 

[Loveless]

OK, I'll play devils advocate

1. The Classified documents in question are the intellectual property of the United States government, and the various state departments in which they were created.

I don't think any argument can be made that can logically suggest otherwise. Clearly, Classified documents would not be public domain, would not fall under the jurisdiction of the Freedom of Information Act, or anything else.

Matters of public interest come under the freedom of the press.

2. There is simply no way whatsoever that Julian Assange could have taken possession of the documents legally.

Since Julian Assange is not an employee, representative of, or in any other way affiliated with the United States government, nor has he ever been, there is no way for him to have obtained those documents through legal means.

Well there's no way for him to obtain them legally but if someone else broke the law and provided him with them...

3. Julian Assange knows he is not an employee, representative of, or in any other way affiliated with the United States government.

This may seem like a repeat of point number two, but it really isn't. #2 establishes that WE knew he could not have obtained the documents legally, #3 establishes that HE knew he could not have obtained the documents legally. Therefore, Julian Assange knew that the documents had been stolen, that he had no legal right to them whatsoever, and still chose to accept those documents into his possession. This removes the potential argument that he didn't know what he was doing was illegal.

OK, already covered #2
Establishing that anyone knew anything about anything is rarely open and shut. How personally involved was he? How would he know they were confidential if they're just printouts? A lot of what I've read is actually from emails and not top secret files. Unless every page is stamped with Confidential files of the US government, you can argue that how is he to know what's confidential and what isn't.

4. According to American law, and the laws of most other countries, simply being in possession of stolen property is a crime in and of itself, regardless of whether or not you did the actual theft or simply accepted the stolen merchandise.

This disallows any claim that Assange might try to make that since he wasn't the one that actually stole the information off of the US government servers, that he didn't commit any crimes. He isn't some hapless accidental accomplice who didn't know that his buddy stole a bunch of TVs from Sears, he knew full well that all of the documents he received were stolen.

You have to know it's stolen property to be charged with possession. Any scumbag journalist worth his salt knows never to ask.

5. It is also a crime under American law and the laws of most other countries to knowingly distribute stolen property.

Once we can take away the "I didn't steal it, I just obtained the documents" argument, we still have Julian Assange knowingly and willfully distributing that stolen property. He can't possibly claim that there is nothing illegal about posting stolen property online for others to take. It doesn't matter that it is only information, stolen property is stolen property, whether its a car, paintings, or a bunch of 1s and 0s assembled into a specific binary pattern that a computer can read and transform into music, movies, or documents. It is this very same principle that drives the anti-piracy efforts in regards to downloading music and movies.

Same answer to No4. He can play the innocent, claim he didn't know it was stolen and use the freedom of the press to post it as "Being in the public interests"

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

While I was listening to Fox News..... Yes I like to watch that network. So sue me. Anyway, Judge Andrew Napolitano said it best. What Julian is doing isn't against U.S law however deplorable it is. If congress tries to charge Julian under the Espionage Act which was made invalid in today's world by the Supreme Court that would amount to censorship which would violate the First Amendment. Sucks but we really can't do anything against the bastard. However, my personal opinion is that he may have good intentions, what he doesn't realize is that these leaks hurt the efforts of many nations. Not just the U.S. I also believe that he's under the Journalist Protection Act as well.

 

[Davi323]

Loveless, Assange is not a journalist, so claiming freedom of the press is poppycock. Further, you an absolute moron if you think anyone will believe that Assange, being as intelligent as he is, didn't know the documents are stolen. They are classified, I mean really, how dumb are you to try to argue that you can remain ignorant when you knowingly accept classified material? Lastly, given that he has what he has dubbed a "poison pill" that he threatens will be released if he gets arrested, that is another crime. Its called blackmail. He is making threats to cause harm should something happen. He is nothing but a e-terrorist who is trying to hold entire countries hostage with the threat of releasing classified documents. Journalist? What a fucking joke.

 

[Minnesota Connection]

Information should be made free and readily available. Classified or not.

We have the right to know what our government is doing.

We have the right to know where our money is going.

This country has put pressure on other countries to condemn what? The truth? That is ridiculous.

He's a terrorist? No. This country is. The United States of America is a terroristic country who bullies other countries into believing in what they believe. This country uses threats of economic sanctions and military intervention as key words at a negotiations table. Don't agree with me? Throw me into jail with the other guy. Otherwise, let me continue to use my right to free speech just as this guy should have his right as well.

Looking at those documents, any consciousness human being would have released our war crimes to the world. It's horrible we would even hide some of this information, even worse that it was covered up.

Reminds me of Pat Tillman. R.I.P. That guy was a true American.

 

[El Rev sXe]

Pops to the OP for bringing this topic. I wanted to do it but when I enter a political topic on this site, I don't have answers..

First of all he isn't American, so don't try to play the "what he is doing is un-american" card.

The guy is a fucking hero, he has the balls to take a stand and say everything that is wrong in most of the countries including the US and yes even my country BOLIVIA. What he did is illegal, agree. So? This are documents that if it wasn't taken by Julian Assange, we wouldn't knew about it. Why would we? Every country does horrible things but those things you aren't supposed to know. You all need to be like the patriot guy who loves his country and only see the good about it.

Julian Assange is being persecuted and I wouldn't be surprised if in the next days he gets "accidentally" shot because "he was trying to escape" or something.

It is kinda funny, everybody already knew these things about the US ( the fact they surveil "communist" countries like Bolivia, Cuba and Venezuela for example) except the american citizens, and that is what this is all about. Appearance is what matters here, and guess what the US is looking like shit for american citizens, and that's what the american government doesn't like.

I repeat, Julian assange IS a hero and IS fighting for World Justice, he might be a criminal only for the countries that are looking like shit. In this case, specially the US.

 

[Arkham Noir]

No offense to any younger members but the Assange has a sophomoric world view that seems to deal almost exclusively in self righteous indignation. Point blank, everybody spies and everybody lies. World diplomacy and war-time backroom deals are standard operations and practices.
White lies and mutually greased palms really do make the world go 'round. In Mr. Assange's perfect utopia—or anarchistic fantasy as the case maybe—there perhaps would be no need or use for such tactics, but sadly the rest of us don't live in that fantasy world. On a day-to-day basis do we not talk behind people's backs (even those we genuinely care about/for and consider friends)? Do we make deals to serve our own agendas and self-interests (and again those we have alignment with, be they friend/family/etc)? Do we sometimes hold distasteful opinions of the people our livelihoods force upon us (but smile politely and get the job done regardless)? Why on earth then, would it be any different for governments and their officials/military personnel/diplomats/etc.? These men and women are trained in politicking, diplomacy, deal-cutting, and information gathering; it should be expected and assumed that they would lie to one another to get things done and preserve a greater good.
As with so many things, global relations, are a lot like High School. There are cliques, gangs, outcasts, gossip, rumors, lines-drawn, sides taken, and yes, backs to be stabbed. Again, I'm sure we've all seen those episodes of TV sitcoms where a character rallies around the notion of unadulterated truth, openness, and honesty only to (SHOCKINGLY!) find that human socialization and civility ultimately breaks down in the face of unmitigated, careless and perfunctory "truth for the sake of truth". Simply put we're not ready for that level of honest opinion yet –if ever.
Honesty, as it turns out, isn't the best policy. Go figure?

This is the truth.

I hate the fact that governments have so many secrets kept from their citizens. I hate some of the measures that are used in order to get things done. A big part of me wants to shake the guys hand for releasing this shit. Exposing alot of these things is what an honest and fair country would do.

But don't kid yourself.

Ligerbomb is right. I fit the "sophomoric world view that seems to deal almost exclusively in self righteous indignation". If I could have a world of complete truth and freedom ,I would jump for it in a heart beat. But that's not what the world has become. The old saying "nice guys finish last" is true. To deal with the shit that goes down in the world, some times you have to break the rules. Things aren't that black and white.

Morally, I'm glad that alot of these things are out there for the world to see. Logically, this guy will most likely be assasinated in a few months....... But seriously, he will most likely be put in prison. Who knows how many missions he comprimised and I'm sure these documents weren't just sitting on his desk.