Wiki leaks

[cotts135]

With the recent news of Wiki leaks founder Julian Assange having some , what looks like bogus legal problems, I came across an article which in essence said what he did in publishing the classified information is not illegal. If this is true it makes the Pentagon and all their bluster look rather foolish. If anyone has any other info on this that contradicts what I said I would be glad to see it.

I will look for that info later and post a reference to what I am stating

[YardleyLabs]

I would imagine that he would only be subject to prosecution in the United States and that the presumed crime would be espionage. There is nothing illegal per se with publishing classified documents. However, it appears that Wikileaks provided assistance in transmitting the classified documents which, if true, would make it part of an espionage action against the United States. When the NY Times published the Pentagon Papers, one of the things that protected them was that the papers were simply delivered to the newspaper and the paper had nothing to do with their theft. By contrast, Wikleaks appears to have provided technical assistance to Manning, which would make it part of the crime.

BTW, legal or not, I would still make Assange a target for US Intelligence to disrupt an operation that has become a threat to US security and US forces.

[Hew]

BTW, legal or not, I would still make Assange a target for US Intelligence to disrupt an operation that has become a threat to US security and US forces.

Or we could look for reasons to cheer him on in his fight against the "blustery fools" in the Pentagon like good ol' Cotts. We're anxiously awaiting your report back to us with your claims of Assange's heroism, Cotts.

A little realpolitik from Yardley. I like it. I would go you one further (being the rightwing reactionary I am and all) and suggest that if it's proven that his release of classified secrets has, or likely, will result in the death of Americans then the POS is every bit as worthy to be on the receiving end of a well-placed, sub-sonic .22 round behind the ear as some al Qaeda hack in the hills of Pakistan is worthy of a Hellfire missle loosed from a Predator drone.

[subroc]

cotts, could you just get it over with and find a way to twist this story and make it a left/right issue instead of a national security issue.

[cotts135]

Here is the article I was referencing, for anyone interested.

http://salon.com/a/skQ4fAA==

Yardley, you bring up a good point about the transmission of classified info and I am not sure how that is going to be handled or what the case law is in that situation.

Hew, I am sorry to disappoint you but I am certainly not going to make a hero out of Assange for doing what he did. My point is that before anyone swallows whole what the government puts out it should be checked for facts and fallacies before it is taken as scripture.

[road kill]

Here is the article I was referencing, for anyone interested.

http://salon.com/a/skQ4fAA==

Yardley, you bring up a good point about the transmission of classified info and I am not sure how that is going to be handled or what the case law is in that situation.

Hew, I am sorry to disappoint you but I am certainly not going to make a hero out of Assange for doing what he did. My point is that before anyone swallows whole what the government puts out it should be checked for facts and fallacies before it is taken as scripture.

You have "swallowed whole" what Assange put out!!
Should not that be tempered as well??



RK

[cotts135]

You have "swallowed whole" what Assange put out!!
Should not that be tempered as well??

B]RK[/B]

Agree with second point of your post, but in no way have I swallowed whole as you put it what Assange has said. That is a completely separate issue from my original post which challenged that it is criminal to disclose classified info.