In my opinion, interfering with a little boy is far more serious than interfering with a government.

 

From what I can see Assange is not just publishing anti-American material, he is publishing anything he can get his hands on by the look of it.  So the Americans should not be the only ones aggreived. 

 

Most of the stuff he has published that I have seen, has been in the public interest, with only the governments and politicians of the opinion that we have no need to know, because it is showing them in a bad light.  If he has published material that has endangered our or any one elses troops, well that is idiotic, and unpatriotic in the extreme.  I personally have not seen anything to that effect, but I have not read much of Wikileaks material.  But it does appear to me that people are being too protective of their governments and politicians on this thread.

 

I think the calls to have Assange assassinated and imprisoned for life are extreme.   After a 30 year career in Law Enforcement, and actual experience of what sentences people receive for crimes committed, I feel that I am in a position to make that observation. (unless it is shown to me that he has caused Australians to be at risk).

he has named local afghanis, that immediately means those afgahnis have been compromised, and it provided the opportunity for an enemy to apply leverage to their families and loved ones to extract info etc...

if they're been an interpreter working with friendly forces, then even as an interpreter it means that they have a knowledge of force procedures  etc thats not attractive to have shared out.

people like assange aren't nationalists, they focus on the inalienable right top information for all etc....  the fact that he doesn't accept the fact that printing such material could put others (and not just westerners/soldiers) at risk is selective naievete IMO

assange is no dimwit, he is academically  very very smart, and sometimes that can carry with it a degree of arrogance about whats right for others.

I don't see him exercising any responsibility in releasing material, he assumes that because its available to him, even though its acquisition  was obviously dishonest, makes all of it fair game to share to all.

granted he has been releasing material on other countries, but his contempt for americans seems a bit transparent to me.

 

 

 

Interfering with a little boy is against Australian law, Espionage is against US law, in both cases both countries extend their jurisdiction outside their own borders. Whilst interfing with a little boy brings instinctive revulsion, surely setting up hundreds of Afghans to be tortured or simply murdered for cooperating with the US is the crime that does far more damage to far more lives.

 

Throw in the fact that Assange himself admits responsibility for triggering the deaths of 1300 Kenyans and it is hard to suggest that (A). Assange is only 'interfering with a Govt', and (B). that molesting one child is worse that killing 1300 people and rendering 350,000 homeless + setting up hundreds of Afghans for death at the hands of the Taliban.

 

Keep in mind that wikileaks has been, over the last few weeks, pulling documents, redacting names, places etc and reposting them, which tells us they know that they have set others up to die as well and frankly, those redactions are too little and far too late.

 

Diplomacy requires secrecy so that diplomats can speak frankly amongst themselves, when diplomacy fails you risk war. Assanges goal is to make diplomacy harder by denying it the ability to operate in secret. anyone irresponsible enough to attempt to make diplomacy break down on a global scale is too dangerous to allow their freedom, if that means killing him, so be it.

 

BTW, as an amusing comparison, have a look at Assanges own comments about his own place at the heart and soul and chief architect etc of Wikileaks and compare them to Adolf Hitlers comments re his position in the 3rd Reich, I was struck by the similarity of attitudes.

As an example, if you were to try going to Cambodia, b*ggering a little boy there and then, on your return, show the AFP your holiday snaps, you'll find that Australia extends its jurisdiction well beyond its own borders and if you made it overseas subsequently the AFP would be more than happy to extradite you back to Aust to face criminal charges (and few people would suggest that it is a bad thing that they would do so).

I think you would find that those laws apply only to Australian citizens.

Espionage charges frequently involve foreign citizens, pretty routine stuff. 

 

When the Espionage is committed within the nations borders.

You Aussies were all over the board as well, but it seems you guys are a little are too quick to point the blame at that traitor Manning, and minimise Assange's actions. 

Actually from what I have read, most Aussies here are pissed off that Assange has put lives at risk by publishing things like the names of Afghan informants and strategically vital targets, but otherwise think that he has a right to do what good journalists everywhere are supposed to do - report the news. The fact is that leaks of this are the news, so whinging at them for doing their job is just silly. If journalists didn't report leaks, which by their very nature are stolen materials, some of the most important instances of governments being kept honest would never have happened. Anyone who has worked for government knows that a hell of a lot of material is only "classified" to prevent political embarressment as well, so getting precious about somebody spilling it just because it has "Secret" at the top of the page is a bit of a joke.

 

I would also point out that you are a little too quick to point the blame at Manning and Assange ... perhaps you should look at the complete morons you employ in the State Department who can't maintain information security. You realise that this has compromised allies like Australia and others as well don't you? I anticipate that most countries will be a lot more cautious about sharing information with you in the future ... while we are still fighting a War on Terror which relies heavily on shared information to prosecute successfully.

 

Well done. 

Assange hates the United States and wants to hurt us any way he can. 

He also reported extra-judicial killings in Kenya a couple of years ago, does that mean he hates Kenya? Should he have refrained from doing so because it might compromise Kenyan national security?

 

What about those sites that might now get bombed in Australia because he reported on them? Does that mean he hates us?

 

So long as what he is reporting is factual and any opinion is identified as such, you can't distinguish him as being unfair on the US as compared to anybody else.

My question then and now is at what point does Assange become a foreign enemy agent?  At what point does it become a matter of national security to stop someone from Assange.  I understand that many of you feel protective of your countryman, but if an American was going out of his way to hurt Australia and possibly do harm to it's soldiers and citizens I would expect you to feel the same way. 

Let me suggest to you that if a US reporter, even if he was a lying, cheese eating, left wing surrender monkey like Michael Moore, reported Australin classified information and Australians started saying that he was a foriegn agent who should be captured and prosecuted, the US public and political establishment would tell us to eff off and leave your citizen alone. If it was suggested, as the low life Mike Huckabee did, that he should be executed you would all be calling for the Tomahawking of Parliament House in Canberra.

 

Your extreme double standards are telling. It reminds me of the George Bush "you are with us or against us" or we will bomb the daylights out of you attitude that raised the US so highly in the opinions of the rest of the World. I've always supported the alliance and I still do but it isn't hard to see how the young and naive see behavior like this and draw the conclusion that we are better off without you. It might account somewhat for the rising vote in Australia for parties like the Greens, which think just that.

 I am sorry for butting in like this but i simply could not resist addressing your interesting points.

 

Actually from what I have read, most Aussies here are pissed off that Assange has put lives at risk by publishing things like the names of Afghan informants and strategically vital targets, but otherwise think that he has a right to do what good journalists everywhere are supposed to do - report the news. The fact is that leaks of this are the news, so whinging at them for doing their job is just silly. If journalists didn't report leaks, which by their very nature are stolen materials, some of the most important instances of governments being kept honest would never have happened. Anyone who has worked for government knows that a hell of a lot of material is only "classified" to prevent political embarressment as well, so getting precious about somebody spilling it just because it has "Secret" at the top of the page is a bit of a joke.

 

An interesting thought exercise, who watches the watchdog media? The answer is: nothing of comparable size and power.  Hence, my natural cynicism. Perhaps for others as well? Does anybody around the world really have a clue as to how a newsroom operates? Are we going to be seeing their secrets leaked anytime soon? What transpires after the cameras shut off? What is being said when the press stops printing? Who owns all the corporations? What foreigners have a majority share in national publications and broadcasts? Who or what gives them the right to decide diplomatic policy, treaties, the fate of nations, alliances, the world, war, peace and anything else that our spongy minds care to absorb and make our own? Anyways, is Mr. Assange a journalist? If not, then who appointed him as such? Questions, questions, questions.... so many questions and nobody to answer them all. Report the news? I'm afraid they create the news we absorb!

 

 

I would also point out that you are a little too quick to point the blame at Manning and Assange ... perhaps you should look at the complete morons you employ in the State Department who can't maintain information security. You realise that this has compromised allies like Australia and others as well don't you? I anticipate that most countries will be a lot more cautious about sharing information with you in the future ... while we are still fighting a War on Terror which relies heavily on shared information to prosecute successfully.

 

 Actually, i agree. Though i should first say, that i don't think many foreigners and apparently many Americans, understand the complexities of what just transpired? This isn't the first time our secrets have been compromised. I can't blame our allies if they are ever skittish in sharing information with us in the future.Not to say also being a bit miffed at the outed bluntness of our diplomats! No telling how many sh!t for brains "Mannings" are lurking around out there just waiting to f##k everything up beyond the normal snafu! Now, unfortunately in this instance, the opening and sharing of knowledgeable  information among various US departments was a major plus for the US after the effects of 9-11, that is given the publicly known inter-departmental rivalry and secrecy among agencies like the FBI, CIA ATF, DEA and ect.. .In a word, the information  lid is probably slammed shut for now. No telling if trust will ever be reestablished between all domestic and foreign parties effected? How that for transparency? Now i just wonder, really, really, really wonder... how many terrorist plots will slip through cracks now. It takes just one successful terrorist strike too make them relevant all over again. CRAP!

 

 

 Hate? I don't know. But putting aside the sins that all nations bear, it appears his being against them as a matter of principle, not logic, seeing as they are a Western ally since the cold war ended and this new war being thrust upon us. Should he have refrained? I don't know. How many people is he looking to p!$$ off? Does he hate Australia? I can't honestly say. I do suspect however, he would much rather Australia have nothing to do with the US; None what so ever! I'm su

Those laws are operational beyond our borders. exactly the thing you suggested nobody but the US does.

 

And espionage laws do not discriminate about national borders.

As a matter of interest, since secrets are bad -

 

I am sorry for butting in like this but i simply could not resist addressing your interesting points.

Butt away, we have freedom of speech here so long as you don't do something to piss of Sysops. 
 

An interesting thought exercise, who watches the watchdog media? The answer is: nothing of comparable size and power.  Hence, my natural cynicism. Perhaps for others as well? Does anybody around the world really have a clue as to how a newsroom operates? Are we going to be seeing their secrets leaked anytime soon? What transpires after the cameras shut off? What is being said when the press stops printing? Who owns all the corporations? What foreigners have a majority share in national publications and broadcasts? Who or what gives them the right to decide diplomatic policy, treaties, the fate of nations, alliances, the world, war, peace and anything else that our spongy minds care to absorb and make our own? Anyways, is Mr. Assange a journalist? If not, then who appointed him as such? Questions, questions, questions.... so many questions and nobody to answer them all. Report the news? I'm afraid they create the news we absorb!

The media just does in a professional manner what is every person's right, to exercise free speech. As such nobody needs to appoint a journalist, any of us can set up a rag or a website ourself and voila, we are reporting.

 

The major thing which holds the media to account is other, competing media outlets. If a media outlet spreads lies and gets found out, everybody else will jump all over them. In Australian we even have a TV program on our public broadcaster, "Media Watch", which is dedicated to keeping the media honest. They have highlighted quite a few very big ethical breaches over the years, so be assured that the media isn't a law unto itself.

 

The media also has to concern itself with defamation laws, contempt of court laws and a range of other legislative hurdles. Journalists often have to make the choice about taking a legal and sometimes physical risk to tell the story. That is why even when I don't like what some of them do, I respect it and acknowledge it as necessary.  

 Hate? I don't know. But putting aside the sins that all nations bear, it appears his being against them as a matter of principle, not logic, seeing as they are a Western ally since the cold war ended and this new war being thrust upon us. Should he have refrained? I don't know. How many people is he looking to p!$$ off? Does he hate Australia? I can't honestly say. I do suspect however, he would much rather Australia have nothing to do with the US; None what so ever! I'm sure many Australians are inclined to agree apparently, now more so than ever, i guess?

I think that most Australian's want to maintain the relationship but the sort of disclosures about what the US has said and done that have come out of Wikileaks don't help and are made worse  especially some of the thuggish reactions from senior US political figures. It is increadibly frustrating for those of us who are pro-American when things like this happen, it just makes it harder for us to make the arguement at home.

 

Where did you read that? I'd be interested to see it. I am very suscpicious that there are forces undertaking an exercise in slander against him. The rape charges are just a bit too convenient in my humble opinion, so I will be taking disclosures like this with a grain of salt. 

Not that i hate Mr. Moore personally, though i do loathe his many political positions, though not for the sake of that i say this, but if he had done anything that jeopardized Australian security, diplomatic privacy and so on, by publishing ill gotten classified information releases in such a way,  then i would be leading the charge in handing the bum over to you guy's!

That is nice of you to say so but knowing how sensitive the US Government is to protecting US citizens from suffering, legitimately or illegitimately, at the hands of foriegners I have no faith that the sentiment would be more generalised.