So now the greatest democracy in the world openly promotes illegal murder?

[Puks]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36xEvVnF2I" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36xEvVnF2I</a>

These are interesting times.. you all probably heard or read about Wikileaks and the absurd witch-hunt on Julian Assange, founder of WL. Thoughts?

[beckmen]

I can't even watch that video, I have a feeling if I do, I will burn down my entire house and will attempt to follow it up by burning down this entire country.

Calling him a 'terrorist' is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever heard. Also, nobody really seems all that interested in standing up to these nutjobs. I really think he'll end up either renditioned or just die under mysterious circumstances, and nobody will care.

[Neltharion]

Why are you suggesting that one man's opinion is his governments opinion?

And to be honest, the vast majority of the cables leaked amount to playground bitching between two friends, all it will do is create animosity between nations which is not what we need. So I think its fucking pointless and stupid what Wikileaks has done.
If it released cables that were exclusively about human rights abuses, corruption and what not I would have no problem. And In principle I do not. Its just that it seems rather fucking pointless and nothing but shit stirring to release diplomatic cables that show nothing of value other than bitching.

[Puks]

Why are you suggesting that one man's opinion is his governments opinion?

Oh please. You know better than that.

[Neltharion]

What exactly are you trying to say about me?

[LargeLeader]

Fox News

Ahahahahaha.

[Hieronymus]

Assassination is just ridiculous.  I know the US has a long history of knocking off foreign nationals it doesn't like, but it's completely antithetical to the concept of democracy.

That said, what consequences could Assange legitimately face?  He's not an American citizen, as far as I know, so we can hardly try him for treason.  I think it would be a stretch to call him an enemy combatant.  He didn't obtain the information himself, so he's not a spy.

I understand that the person who leaked this information to Assange has been kept in solitary for a while, which may be legal under certain anti-spying provisions of the law (even if I disagree with it).  But what could be done to Assange?

[Pandorag]

  But what could be done to Assange?

[deezelboy]

As I understand it, the Espionage Act provides two ways Assange could be prosecuted.

The first, and easiest, way would be to show there was some active collusion between Assange (and/or Wikileaks) and the leaker (who I assume to be Bradley Manning).  This may not have been much more than giving some help to Manning in how to send the stuff to Wikileaks, but that would be all they need.  It might be quite difficult to provide the proof, or it might be quite easy, depending on how Manning cooperates (there's certainly the possibility of plea bargaining, for example).

The second, more nuclear option is that the Espionage Act makes the spreading of the information itself illegal.  Utilising this does mean that every media outlet has contravened the Act, but if you made a case (and had a reasonably sympathetic/naive judge) that Wikileaks was not a traditional media outlet...

I must admit I was a bit surprised to learn that not only do you not have to be a US Citizen but you don't have to have ever set foot in the US to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.  Yikes!

Although I have to say that in light of Joe Biden's recent comments about pursuing a case against Assange, and viewing him as closer to a 'high-tech terrorist' than a whistleblower, all bets may be off as to how it's done.

[beckmen]

As I understand it, the Espionage Act provides two ways Assange could be prosecuted.

The first, and easiest, way would be to show there was some active collusion between Assange (and/or Wikileaks) and the leaker (who I assume to be Bradley Manning).  This may not have been much more than giving some help to Manning in how to send the stuff to Wikileaks, but that would be all they need.  It might be quite difficult to provide the proof, or it might be quite easy, depending on how Manning cooperates (there's certainly the possibility of plea bargaining, for example).

The second, more nuclear option is that the Espionage Act makes the spreading of the information itself illegal.  Utilising this does mean that every media outlet has contravened the Act, but if you made a case (and had a reasonably sympathetic/naive judge) that Wikileaks was not a traditional media outlet...

I must admit I was a bit surprised to learn that not only do you not have to be a US Citizen but you don't have to have ever set foot in the US to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.  Yikes!

Although I have to say that in light of Joe Biden's recent comments about pursuing a case against Assange, and viewing him as closer to a 'high-tech terrorist' than a whistleblower, all bets may be off as to how it's done.

Has the act been amended since 9/11? Because this stuff sure sounds like Patriot Act mentality. But maybe it goes back to The Red Scare or beyond. The U.S. seems to be quite fond of coming up with bullshit just so they can Goddamn do what they want.

[deezelboy]

No, it's been that way since 1917. 

Rarely used, though.

[SM]

Who is Bob Beckel and does he speak for the "greatest democracy in the world"?

Or is this thread title just an attempt at ironic Fox-esque hyperbole?

[Puks]

The thread title is supposed to grab your attention. In which it succeeded.

[deezelboy]

Do you not think Bob Beckel's comment was supposed to do the same thing?

[Puks]

Beckel's just thinking out loud for your government.