Ron Paul on Wikileaks

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

Damaging a country isn't treason either.

Everything I've read has been stuff that should either be in the public domain or is tittle-tattle. There's been nothing about where the nukes are stored or what the US-ians plan to do next in Afghanistan.

It's just not treason.

In asymmetric rather than traditional warfare, what is the difference between where the nukes are stored and where the smallpox vaccines are secretly manufactured?

Generali

Interesting response from some interviewees on Fox News:

http://www.prosebeforehos.com/video-of-the-day/12/10/fox-news-calls-for-assassination-of-julian-assange/

Generali

vivatifosi wrote: »

In asymmetric rather than traditional warfare, what is the difference between where the nukes are stored and where the smallpox vaccines are secretly manufactured?

Not a lot. Has he revealed that?

Mr Assange isn't a US citizen BTW. I'm not sure you can commit treason against a country other than your own.

tomterm8

Generali wrote: »

Not a lot. Has he revealed that?

Mr Assange isn't a US citizen BTW. I'm not sure you can commit treason against a country other than your own.

You can commit treason against a country other than your own, if you are resident in that country (other than diplomats ) you owe a bond of allegiance (basically fealty) to that country.

Mr Assange isn’t a resident in the US, so he has no allegiance.

mostlycheerful

tomterm8 : “Treason is an old fashioned crime, and it relies on a specific duty of fealty that doesn't exist between an Australian and the UK.”

Ok, sure. But that’s just splitting hairs. Even if it’s not actually technically treason as such it’s still akin to treason. It’s an Australian and an American damaging the interests of Australia, America, UK and Europe and indeed possibly also the whole world if it ends up further destabilising our control of various unstable dangerous warmongering undemocratic dictatorship countries and various fragile balances of power currently keeping them under our control so that’s treason in my book and I would expect most peoples’ as well. I want Europe and America and the British parts of the Commonwealth such as Australia and New Zealand and our other allies to continue to dominate the rest of the world and I don’t want anything undermining that.

tomterm8

No, it is not splitting hairs. Treason means a specific legal crime: you either commit treason or you do not.

Given that the penalty in the US for treason is death or life imprisonment, it's a rather important distinction.

It is perfectly possible to act in a way that damages your countries national interest or harms democracy without commiting treason.

Generali

As far as I can see, the cables contain some embarrassing stuff about how dreadful some foreign leaders are, details of lobbying of various sorts, the bleeding' obvious (eg Russia is a !!!!! run state, Burlusconi is corrupt, Third World leaders are corrupt and often mad) and how large corporations try to get Governments in their pockets so they can make more money.

Which bit is even surprising let alone should be a criminal act to release in a country whose constitution guarantees the right to free speech. BTW, why aren't the Yanks going after US citizens and residents (eg Editor of the NY Times) for printing the same stuff?

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

Not a lot. Has he revealed that?

Mr Assange isn't a US citizen BTW. I'm not sure you can commit treason against a country other than your own.

I don't think he's committed treason.

He has however revealed the location of the smallpox vaccine plant along with the location of lots of other strategic sites on the "100 most strategic sites" list which has been talked about a lot without mentioning what's actually on it. A lot of people talk about it as though it is a list of palaces etc, but it is far more infrastructure than anything else.

I do think there is a parallel between where the nukes are hidden and where the smallpox vaccine is hidden because they can both ensure a nation's survival: one through the threat of hitting back and the other in terms of reduction of the impact of biological warfare. It is precisely this sort of information that shouldn't be released.

Just for you Gen I watched the Fox interview (five mins of my life I'll never get back;)) which was illustrative of the kind of right wing claptrap that is regularly spouted on the station. The strange thing is, they honestly believe that assassinating Assange would be the end of this, not that the information will now be backed up and held in safekeeping against such situations, nor that if Wikileaks didn't leak the document, a similar site (which they don't seem to realise exist) would. Scary.

mostlycheerful

tomterm8 : “It is perfectly possible to act in a way that damages your countries national interest or harms democracy without commiting treason.”

Ok, yes, perhaps I should drop the handy word treason from my vocabulary about this subject if in fact I’m using it incorrectly or unnecessarily or inappropriately and just stick to phrases like “damaging interests” and “undermining the west’s military power” and such like. Yes, I’m willing to listen and learn and I’m interested in attempting to express myself correctly and I don’t know much about any of this, just a superficial awareness of it via the media so thanks for pointing that out and explaining it.

JP45

julieq wrote: »

Wikileaks are trickling information out with very careful redacting.

So far most of it demonstrates the US has an astute, sophisticated and well informed diplomatic service. It may be uncomfortable reading in some quarters, but it's accurate, incisive and unsensational. If anything the US comes out of this very well in general. I'd rather have these diplomats running the show than Sarah Palin and her ilk, and like Gen I found Ron Paul's contribution excellent.

It's faintly ridiculous to suggest lives are being placed at risk from terrorism and that this is treason. It's embarrassing some politicians and they are showing themselves ever more eager to press the "terrorism" button to relieve any pressure and create a populist furore.

I agree with almost everything you say, particularly the favourable impression of the US diplomatic service, which I don't think even Sarah Palin (God forbid) could undermine.

I also, like you, think it's a little extreme to talk of these leaks in terms of treason, certainly with regard to Wikileaks. The act of treason lies with the original theft. The apparent ease with which the data was stolen, the sheer volume of data involved and the rank of the alleged perpetrator suggests a staggering failure on the part of US intelligence.

But I do think Wikileaks went a step too far in releasing the list of sites considered vital to US national interests. Such information is surely of interest to terrorist organisations, particularly as many of the sites may well have been 'off the radar' prior to the release. At the very least - given the large number of sites involved - it provides terrorists with a much wider and potentially easier range of targets to attack.