Assange lawyer condemns calls for assassination of WikiLeaks' founder

[Dan J 277]

I don't see a problem with the secrets. I do see a problem when someone takes it upon themselves to decide what should be secret and what shouldn't be. In this case the messenger is the problem.

Wikileaks did not directly acquire any of the data. They were given the data by a military analyst. If anyone committed a crime, it was that analyst. Not to say Assange is a good guy, but his behavior seems to be par for the course when it comes to major whistle-blowing news stories.

As far as what should be secret and what shouldn't be, its fine line. The only way we can hold a democracy accountable is only if the government is completely transparent. But at the same time, there is a need for secrecy in some aspects of diplomacy.

[^_^ 5,021]

If you steal a TV, you commit a crime. If I take your stolen TV, knowing it's stolen goods, I've also committed a crime.

Criminality here is not limited to the analyst.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Wikileaks did not directly acquire any of the data. They were given the data by a military analyst. If anyone committed a crime, it was that analyst. Not to say Assange is a good guy, but his behavior seems to be par for the course when it comes to major whistle-blowing news stories.

As far as what should be secret and what shouldn't be, its fine line. The only way we can hold a democracy accountable is only if the government is completely transparent. But at the same time, there is a need for secrecy in some aspects of diplomacy.

I would hardly call this whistle-blowing. This wasn't a concentrated effort to expose something, it was a fishing trip and he put everything up. All it accomplished was embarassing a lot of politicians in a lot of countries. Furthermore, disseminating top secret information is not legal, Assange is not innocent, or merely complicit.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

This azzhat was motivated by greed. He has a web site and wanted to make it known world wide. He doesn't care a nit about American transparency, only fame and fortune. They guy is a slug that needs stepped on.

[^_^ 5,021]

This azzhat was motivated by greed. He has a web site and wanted to make it known world wide. He doesn't care a nit about American transparency, only fame and fortune. They guy is a slug that needs stepped on.

+1

[The_Dude 1,142]

This azzhat was motivated by greed. He has a web site and wanted to make it known world wide. He doesn't care a nit about American transparency, only fame and fortune. They guy is a slug that needs stepped on.

I don't think he did it for greed, he has always been for transparency. There is however, a right and wrong way to go about it. This, most definitely is the wrong way.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Anyone can be tried for espionage.

i disagree on that last line.

How so?

Treason is acting against one's own country.

Espionage is spying. I guess diplomatic immunity could prevent someone from being charged & tried but beyond that what's to stop one country from charging & trying a citizen of another country for espionage?

[The_Dude 1,142]

How so?

Treason is acting against one's own country.

Espionage is spying. I guess diplomatic immunity could prevent someone from being charged & tried but beyond that what's to stop one country from charging & trying a citizen of another country for espionage?

Assange cannot be tried for treason in the U.S. because he is not a citizen. Perhaps Australia could try him for that, but we can only try him for espionage, or some lower derivative charge.

[Ban Hammer 13,327]

How so?

Treason is acting against one's own country.

Espionage is spying. I guess diplomatic immunity could prevent someone from being charged & tried but beyond that what's to stop one country from charging & trying a citizen of another country for espionage?

he didn't spy.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

he didn't spy.

He received Top Secret Government Documents and then passed them along to others. How is that not spying?

Assange cannot be tried for treason in the U.S. because he is not a citizen. Perhaps Australia could try him for that, but we can only try him for espionage, or some lower derivative charge.

I never said he could be tried for Treason, just Espionage. I did however point out the distinction between Treason and Espionage.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Bob 4 Anna

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I guess he didn't think about the people that are going to die because of his leaks. While I want an open government we still have a vital need for state secrets. I guess karma will win in the end.

Who has died directly because of Wikileaks revelations?

Seriously, government officials shouldn't be in the business of making death threats.. hell, even the Russians are subtler than that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

He received Top Secret Government Documents and then passed them along to others. How is that not spying?

I never said he could be tried for Treason, just Espionage. I did however point out the distinction between Treason and Espionage.

If he conspired to acquire the secret material, it would be spying. Being in possession of secret documents probably only amounts to receipt of stolen goods.

[Dan J 277]

He received Top Secret Government Documents and then passed them along to others. How is that not spying?

I never said he could be tried for Treason, just Espionage. I did however point out the distinction between Treason and Espionage.

When a newspaper publishes top secret documents, is that spying? What effectively makes wikileaks different from your average newspaper or media outlet?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

His lawyer disagrees with the killing of the golden goose. who'da thunk it?

10 to 1 the guy turns up dead from something he ate or just disappears. Depends which agency gets to him first.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Assange cannot be tried for treason in the U.S. because he is not a citizen. Perhaps Australia could try him for that, but we can only try him for espionage, or some lower derivative charge.

Turns out this guy is wrong.

he didn't spy.

+1

He received Top Secret Government Documents and then passed them along to others. How is that not spying?

I never said he could be tried for Treason, just Espionage. I did however point out the distinction between Treason and Espionage.

The dictionary definition of espionage is different from what is delineated in the Espionage Act.

espionage (ˈɛspɪəˌnɑːʒ, ˌɛspɪəˈnɑːʒ, ˈɛspɪənɪdʒ)

—n

1. the systematic use of spies to obtain secret information, esp by governments to discover military or political secrets

Espionage Act of 1917

To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.

To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 fine or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.

Turns out we are both wrong about espionage, and ol Chuckles was right.