Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Wikileaks and Julian Assange: The moral dilemma
smitty237    8/3/2010 1:51:12 AM
Wikileaks is a Swedish-based web site that has become a sort of a clearing house for sensitive documents. Their latest venture has been to release sensitive U.S. military documents related to military operations and intelligence in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wikileaks was largely responsible for releasing the video showing a U.S. Army Apache gunship attack on a group of Iraqi men in which two Reuters cameramen were killed. Wikileaks appears to be run by a rather nomadic Australian named Julian Assange. He denies being the founder of the site, but admits to be Wikileaks' "editor in chief". Assange is viewed as a sort of celebrity in international anti-censorship circles and has appeared as a keynote speaker in a lot of anti-censorship conferences around the world. In all fairness, Wikileaks has exposed documents from a lot of different government and international companies all across the political spectrum, but most recently they seem to be focusing their attention on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and US foreign military policy specifically. Just last week PFC Bradley Manning, a twenty two year old US Army intelligence specialist serving in the Middle East, was arrested and faces court martial for releasing sensitive military data that was eventually released on Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not confirmed that Manning is the source of some of the footage and documents displayed on its site, but they have hired US defense attorneys to represent him. At this point Manning faces a maximum of fifty two years in prison. The United States government has expressed alarm over some of the documents released on Wikileaks and has said that the information could hamper our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and could result in US military and civilian casualties. The US government has asked Wikileaks to withdraw the documents and to stop displaying classified materials, but not only has Wikileaks refused to stop posting sensitive items, they have indicated that they are going to release thousands of additional documents. A spokesman for the Taliban have stated that they will review the documents released on Wikileaks to see if they can identify informants and punish them accordingly. The media pundits have been discussing what can be legally done to stop Wikileaks from releasing sensitive intelligence that could endanger the lives of military personnel. The problem is that Wikileaks has no official headquarters, and while it is based in Sweden its contributors seem to operate out of private residences or rented office spaces. Reportedly Assange was using a rental house in Iceland to release most of the recent documents and video involving sensitive US documents. Presumably Iceland could expel Assange and foreign nationals working for Wikileaks, but they would simply set up camp somewhere else. Assange is an Australian national, and has indicated that his attorneys have advised him against travelling to the United States. There have been rumblings among some circles in Australia that Assange is aiding the enemies of Australia and endangering the lives of Australian soldiers in Afghanistan. The Australian government could revoke his passport and order him to the country, but so far they have not done so, probably fearing the outcry from the media and censorship critics. What, if anything, should be done about Julian Assange and Wikileaks? If Assange were an American citizen this would be easy. PFC Manning will almost definitely be convicted of mishandling classified data and will more than likely spend the next couple of decades making little rocks out of big rocks in Ft. Leavenworth. Two MIT students that may have assisted Bradley are under investigation by the FBI, and for all we know are sweating in an interrogation room right now. An imaginative U.S. Attorney will have no problem finding something to charge them with, and most definitely have the leverage to scare the wits out of them. It is probably wise for Assange to stay out of the United States, but could the Justice Department put out a warrant for his arrest and request extradition? Should they even try? Should the US put pressure on Australia to muzzle Assange? The next question I would submit is this: What if the United States is unable to silence Assange or stop Wikileaks through legal means? At one point does a foreign national or group that exposes intelligence documents sensitive to our national security become considered a threat? You can make arguments all day long that the United States shouldn't target the citizens of foreign nationals living outside the boundaries of the United States, but at one point does a person like Assange become like a foreign terrorist? Assange may not be planting roadside bombs or planning terrorist attacks against American civilians or military personnel, but one could convincingly argue that by releasing sensitive data Assange and his ilk at Wikileaks are placing the lives of Am
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4   NEXT
appleciderus       8/8/2010 10:28:28 AM
Fatwa!
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       8/9/2010 4:24:57 AM
The sources of WikiLeaks' classified information needs to investigated and determined, then prosecuted and imprisoned.  Additional serial sentences should added if those leaks lead to the demonstrated loss of human life.  Basically start with a 10 year to 20 year sentence and add additional time till they are not eligible for parole until the 24th century.
 
Means also need to be developed to limit and track access to restricted documents at all levels (probably though the use of encryption systems), and to identify and punish deliberate leaks.  This will, of course, be complicated due to the insistence of elected and appointed officials that they, and their immediate staff, be immune (or at least extremely difficult) to prosecution.
 
As for WikiLeaks itself, I think that we have to accept that the longterm cost to our society of prosecuting them for acquiring and releasing the data exceeds the short term gains.  They are likewise immune to prosecution for the injury and death of military personnel resulting from the enemy learning about tactics and procedures from these leaks.  These are the fault of those leaking the information, and should be handled as indicated above. 
 
HOWEVER, WikiLeaks should not be immune to prosecution and/or civil suits for targeted assassinations on individuals and their relations who are identified using unredacted information contained in the documents released.  As many of the members of WikiLeaks are foreign nationals, it is extremely unlikely that the US government get their home countries cooperation be able to prosecute and imprison them in the USA, but they may be amiable to suing them into eternal poverty for reckless endangerment of identified individuals, and particularly civilians.  The Press could probably also get behind this as it reaffirms the editorial process that they have mostly followed over the years.  (By making them look good and knocks out a rival)
 
Quote    Reply

appleciderus       8/9/2010 10:06:31 PM

As a relative of a few who are serving, or have served, in areas where no stamp is required to write home, I suggest the following:

 

As public a trial as possible for Private Manning and accomplices, with the most severe possible punishment, i.e. execution or a hundred years at Fort Leavenworth turning big rocks into little rocks.  

 

Providential intervention for Julian. A heart attack in a warm bathtub, an airplane into the side of a mountain (anyone remember Ron Brown?), a gas leak, or even a simple swimming accident. I?m sure family members of those imperiled by Julian are lighting candles as I write this.

 

God bless them.

 
Quote    Reply

PPR    Issues   8/10/2010 1:20:13 AM
This case raised a good number of issues: legal, security, censorship, etc...
At the heart of it is a technological issue: computers have made information transfer so simple that this kind of leak/espionage is a fairly simple matter.
How does one prevent a repeat?  The only way I can think of is coming down on the leaker with such brutality  (i.e. the death penalty) as to intimidate other leakers into not daring to attempt it.  It would be a tough case to make, given the secrecy involved.  But given that it will take place in a military court, it is at least plausible. One could call it war-time espionage.  And if any of the sources named are killed by the Taliban (who have said they will "punish" informants)  one could attribute the deaths to the leaker.
 
Mind you, I'm not advocating this. Nor am I saying I expect it to happen.  I just don't see any plausible alternatives given the state of technology. All the documents in this case could no doubt have fit on a single thumb drive and been copied within a matter of minutes.  How could one stop it?
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       8/10/2010 1:53:40 AM

All the documents in this case could no doubt have fit on a single thumb drive and been copied within a matter of minutes.  How could one stop it?



Under most US security classifications, USB drives cannot be used to copy media off classified systems.
In those systems that do allow USB's the USB stick is part of a federated monitoring system and is password locked and encrypted to a deterrent level.  Then there are other security meaures that companion this.
 
All in all, the material released under wikileaks is of a classified nature that was not exceptional in absolute terms.
 
thats not to trivialise the nature of the material - I have a pretty firm belief that under a US process you'd seek extradition for proxy participation and endangerment - let alone numerous breaches of Federal law under extant securty provisions.
 
the man is a grub.
 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       8/10/2010 4:18:27 PM
So, from what I've heard, the dude who leaked docs to ASSange is a gay who got upset, not actually by the military, but by the other gay he used to date.
 
"Manning?s affinity on his Facebook page for 'Repeal the Ban' is also significant. It is a project of a group called Servicemembers United, which describes itself as the nation?s largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans, their allies and supporters. The group receives financial support from the Open Society Institute of billionaire George Soros," wrote AIM's editor Cliff Kincaid. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       8/11/2010 12:32:57 AM
The names of those who collaborated with NATO were not redacted from the docs which puts their lives at risk.  Either wikileaks is lazy, incompetent, or on the side of the terrorists.
 
Quote    Reply

timon_phocas    Manslaughter   8/12/2010 5:04:29 PM
I have been hearing reports that US and Taliban forces are in a desperate race to find the people compromised by the Wikileaks document dump. The US forces are trying to protect the people who cooperated with ISAF. The Taliban are trying to kill them.
 
I have heard some reports, but not on sites I think are reliable, that some of these people have already been killed. 
 
I think that every death should result in a manslaughter indictment for Julian Assange, warrants issued and foreign governments advised that he is wanted for trial in the US.
 
Just for encouragement purposes, he should be put on "no fly" lists and the US should request that his bank accounts be sequestered.  
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       8/12/2010 6:14:12 PM

How does one prevent a repeat?  The only way I can think of is coming down on the leaker with such brutality  (i.e. the death penalty) as to intimidate other leakers into not daring to attempt it.  It would be a tough case to make, given the secrecy involved.  But given that it will take place in a military court, it is at least plausible. One could call it war-time espionage.  And if any of the sources named are killed by the Taliban (who have said they will "punish" informants)  one could attribute the deaths to the leaker.
 
I don't think that the death penalty for a soldier releasing information that may cost the lives of his comrades is a tough case to make at all. It is treason and the death penalty has often been considered an appropriate punishment for that.
This is where the US's problem lies, with the way that it deals with its own security information. Sort out the leakers rather than contemplating shooting the messanger. Like I said on the Australian Board, Assange is just doing what any journalist should do with a newsworthy story, publishing it. I would caveat that by saying that I believe that publishing documents without names redacted when lives will be put at risk is unethical, if indeed this happenned (wikileaks seems to have disappeared from the web so I can't check).
 
However, with the internet if it wasn't Assange publishing this stuff it would be somebody else, probably anonymously. The US can try and fight and win a War on Free Speech if it likes, but it would not only lose in the global environment but it would do the cause of democracy a huge amount of harm in the proces.
 
Quote    Reply

appleciderus       8/12/2010 6:56:30 PM

I question Julian being a noteworthy journalist. Does he have a long history of investigative journalism? How many awards for excellence in journalism are in his portfolio?

 

Without research, I am inclined to group him with the likes of Michael Moore: a mediocre career in search of a story, no matter what the cost to others. A story that need not be useful or productive but able to hold prurient interest long enough to assure a listing in the great book of glitterati.

 

I wish upon him a plate of spoiled seafood.

 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics