1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

To Mr. Banerjee - In response to "Questions" - Why Assange is a criminal at least

Reader comment on item: Islamist Turkey vs. Secular Iran?
in response to reader comment: @Mr. Zala

Submitted by Michel C. Zala (Switzerland), Dec 21, 2010 at 16:09

Thank you for your condescending remarks.

I elaborated in detail, why Assange must be considered as a criminal. I can not help you, if you did not get my point or have as problem grasping the complexities of a longer article.

Happy to oblige however - here the dumbed down version for the representatives of the shallow end of the gene pool:

From a US legal perspective, one can make the argument of espionage, as he published classified material, he knew, were the result of a crime according to the US Law, where a person with security clearance, such as the Pentagon analyst, who submitted the docs to Wikileaks, is going to be prosecuted for high treason and or breaches of contract law, such as confidentiality agreements. Considering international law he may be subject of a criminal investigation and prosecution for at least negligent homicide, aiding and abetting or conspiracy, if based upon that material an attack should occur.

Depending on the possible list of soft terror targets, he published, the country attacked may prosecute him for conspiracy to commit murder or aiding and abetting terrorists. In America even the awareness of such a possiblity constitutes a federal crime and "intent".

As outlined in detail in my for you too long piece, there is a moral and a legal dimension to the topic. Should WL have published the upcoming bombing of Coventry, or would they have endangered the outcome of the war? If WL had existed during WWII and acted, as they do today, Assange would have been hanged by the Brits after a military tribunal. No matter, if he was Australian.

America could make a solid argument accordingly, as she is currently at war with Terror. The publication of that list could very well be understood as the actions of an enemy combattant and accordingly be prosecuted. The law says that all members of a group, commiting a crime, resulting in the harm of an innocent person, are equally guilty of the murder, not just the perpetrator pulling the trigger.

Should in fact American lives be lost because of one of Assanges publications, with a clear and proven link between crime and cause, Assange will become subject of a prosecution in America proper and international warrants for his arrest will be issued with a good chance for him to get life in prison at least, since it is unlikely to get an extradition to America, if the death penalty is in play.

Fact is, that Assange is abusing the Freedom of the Press on a legal as well as moral level. It is irrelevant, if the info is important or not. The documents were illegally obtained and in full knowledge of that fact and utter negligence of any potential consequences on human life published.

Consider this: WL publishes some document, in which an Austrian Ambassador to his peers condems the action of a regime harshly in a confidential memorandum. Due to the uproar and resentment caused by the publication of that document, some (offended) people of that country go ahead and kill several Austrians. Where will you place the legal and moral responsibility?

The press is granted some tremendous Freedoms in our society. With such Freedoms comes also responsibility to not abuse the Freedom, if it harms innocent people. So far, no evidence has been presented, that WL directly caused the death of anyone. But the day is young and at some point it seems to be unavoidable to draw a direct line between the death of an innocent human being and one of WL's publications. It is only a matter of time.

Take for instance the brutal and inflammatory video of an American gun ship, blasting seemingly innocent civilians in Iraq, subsequently killing them. No analysis of the facts (that would be too much work for a serious journalist, wouldn't it?), no explanations offered, no chance for the "accused " to defend their actions. Pure and simple propaganda in service of an anti-American ideology and the individual Napoleon Complex of Assange.

It looks terrible and for sure will further gush oil into the fire of anti-American hatred, which in turn will result in further attacks on Americans. It is only a matter of time, until one of the Islamists will blow himself up, referencing exactly that video on WL. Innocent people will die, because voyeurs like you, feeding the lowest human need of a bottomfeeder for scandals and blood and guts justify Assange as Journalist and hero of the suppressed.

If you want to get a chill, watch a horror movie, but do not defend your need for watching misery as Freedom of the Press.

Lastly, Assange is also clearly an anti-American Ideologue. 95% of the documents published, concern America, the rest is moral high ground window dressing, to disguise that fact.

I look forward to the day, when Assange publishes confidential Indian memos, endangering Indian lives or causing PAK fanatics to kill Indians because of a perceived offense. When Indians die, due to such an irresponsible outing, will you still defend Assange as a hero for civil liberties?

I think not.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to To Mr. Banerjee - In response to "Questions" - Why Assange is a criminal at least by Michel C. Zala

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)