Scary action against Democracy in USA .... martin.
Begin forwarded message: > From: Portside Moderator <[email protected]> > Date: 17 December 2010 03:19:11 GMT > To: [email protected] > Subject: Conspiracy Charges Against Assange and Manning? (multiple posts) > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Conspiracy Charges Against Assange and Manning? (multiple > posts) > > 1. A sad day for the US if the Espionage Act is used against > WikiLeaks (Stephen M. Kohn in the Guardian) > > 2. U.S. Conspiracy Charges Prepared Against Assange, Manning > (Tom Hayden - The Peace and Justice Resource Center) > > 3. Global Support for WikiLeaks is "Rebellion" Against U.S. > Militarism, Secrecy (John Pilger - Democracy Now!) > > ========== > > A sad day for the US if the Espionage Act is used against > WikiLeaks > > Resurrecting the 1917 law would be a mistake: it has a > history of being used to suppress dissent > > by Stephen M. Kohn > > Guardian (UK) > > December 15, 2010 > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/dec/15/wikileaks-us-espionage-act > > Numerous US officials are calling for a resurrection of the > US Espionage Act as a tool for prosecuting WikiLeaks. The > dusting-off of the old law is all but certain. But the > outcome of the constitutional dust-up that is sure to follow > will result in triumph or tragedy for the US bill of rights. > > In 1917, in the midst of a war hysteria, the United States > passed the Espionage Act. The law has nothing to do with > prosecuting spies. From its inception, it had everything to > do with suppressing dissent. The Great War was unpopular > with many Americans, very like today's engagements in Iraq > and Afghanistan. > > Make no mistake about it. The Espionage Act targeted > political dissidents. Senator Kenneth McKellar of Tennessee > offered a simple defence of the law when it was introduced > to Congress: "If we cannot reason with men to be loyal, it > is high time we forced them to be loyal." Others, such as > Congressman William Green of Iowa, were more blunt. His > statement resembled modern calls supporting the execution of > the suspected WikiLeaks "whistleblower" Bradley Manning: > "For the extermination of these pernicious vermin no > measures can be too severe." > > The Espionage Act wreaked havoc on the American political > left, destroying the young American Socialist party and one > of its most progressive unions, the Industrial Workers of > the World. Many others, including intellectuals, > journalists, film producers and pacifist religious figures > were also prosecuted. Prison terms were long, and some > political prisoners died in federal jails. The abuses under > the law were legendary, and mark a sad day in US history. > > Why is the threat to prosecute WikiLeaks under the Espionage > Act so potentially destructive? The law is not restricted to > properly prohibiting the release of classified information. > The law is not restricted to protecting legitimate > government secrets. The law broadly prohibits any > publication by anyone (newspapers included) of information > related to national security, which may cause an "injury to > the United States". > > Who determines whether national security is actually at > stake? Who determines what constitutes an "injury to the > United States"? In 1917 the courts bent over backwards to > permit the justice department to indict and prosecute > thousands of dissidents. Loyalty to America meant nothing. > The first amendment's protections for freedom of speech were > mocked. Opposition to US war policies dictated who was > jailed. > > There are responsible mechanisms policing truly abusive > leaks. The Espionage Act is not such a tool. > > The attorney general should stop trying to resurrect the > Espionage Act, and instead dust off his copy of the US > constitution. If he has any question as to the meaning of > the first amendment, he should read James Madison's 1789 > speech, in which he introduced the bill of rights in the > first Congress of the United States: "Freedom of the press, > as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be > inviolable." > > [Stephen M Kohn is an attorney and a leading advocate for > corporate and government whistleblowers. A respected scholar > as well as a litigator, he has testified in Congress on > behalf of whistleblowers and worked with the Senate > Judiciary staff to draft corporate whistleblower protections > under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.] > > ========== > > U.S. Conspiracy Charges Prepared Against Assange, Manning > > by Tom Hayden > The Peace and Justice Resource Center > > December 15, 2010 > > http://tomhayden.com/home/us-conspiracy-charges-prepared-against-assange-manning.html > > Inside sources say the U.S. Justice Department is preparing > charges of conspiracy to violate espionage and computer > protection laws against Julian Assange, in order to avoid > bringing charges against mainstream media outlets such as > the New York Times. > > The indictment is being prepared by a secret federal grand > jury organized by the Justice Department in Alexandria, > Virginia, and is expected to name imprisoned American > soldier Bradley Manning as a co-conspirator. Other American > professors and technicians will likely be charged with > accessory roles. > > The government has intercepted email communications between > Assange and Manning over a period of time. > > Those who say there is no basis for the prosecution are > "dead wrong," says one source close to the proceedings. "The > government is going to avoid all the freedom of the press > issues," the source added. > > The 1917 Espionage Act includes a provision on conspiracy. > In addition, a 1985 law dealing with computer protection > will be employed to gain the indictment. > > The speed of the U.S. grand jury process underscores the > legal and political importance of any extradition hearing in > the UK or Sweden, where Assange is facing possible charges > of non-consensual sex. An extradition hearing now is > scheduled for January 11 in London > > [Tom Hayden is a leading voice for ending the wars in > Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, for erasing sweatshops, > saving the environment, and reforming politics through a > more participatory democracy. He currently writes for The > Nation and organizes, travels and speaks constantly against > the current wars as founder and Director of the Peace and > Justice Resource Center in Culver City. He also recently > drafted and lobbied successfully for Los Angeles and San > Francisco ordinances to end all taxpayer subsidies for > sweatshops. Hayden served 18 years in the California > legislature, chairing key committees on the environment, > higher education and labor, has recently taught at > Scripps College and Pitzer College in Claremont, California, > Occidental College, and Harvard University's Institute of > Politics.] > > ========== > > John Pilger: Global Support for WikiLeaks is "Rebellion" > Against U.S. Militarism, Secrecy > > Democracy Now! > > December 15, 2010 > > http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/15/john_pilger_journalists_must_support_julian > > The award-winning investigative journalist and documentary > filmmaker John Pilger is one of many high-profile public > supporters of Julian Assange and his organization WikiLeaks. > Pilger has attended Assange's court proceedings in London > and has offered to contribute funds for his more than > $300,000 bail. Pilger's latest film, The War You Don't See, > includes interviews with Assange. Pilger says that WikiLeaks > is revolutionizing journalism and galvanizing public opinion > to stand up to global elites. [includes rush transcript] > > LISTEN - WATCH > > Real Video Stream > http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2010/dec/video/dnB20101215a.rm&proto=rtsp&start=00:25:12 > > Real Audio Stream > http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2010/dec/audio/dn20101215.ra&proto=rtsp&start=00:25:12 > > AMY GOODMAN: We're continuing with John Pilger, the famed > Australian filmmaker who has lived in Britain for decades. > John, your film, The War You Don't See, premiered last night > on ITV in Britain and in theaters throughout Britain. The > film features your interview with Julian Assange. This is an > excerpt. > > JOHN PILGER: In the information that you have revealed > on WikiLeaks about these so-called endless wars, what > has come out of them? > > JULIAN ASSANGE: Looking at the enormous quantity and > diversity of these military or intelligence apparatus > insider documents, what I see is a vast, sprawling > estate, what we would traditionally call the military- > intelligence complex or military-industrial complex, and > that this sprawling industrial estate is growing, > becoming more and more secretive, becoming more and more > uncontrolled. This is not a sophisticated conspiracy > controlled at the top. This is a vast movement of self- > interest by thousands and thousands of players, all > working together and against each other. > > AMY GOODMAN: That is an excerpt of the new film that > premiered last night in Britain, The War You Don't See. John > Pilger, you know Julian Assange. Talk more about what he's > saying and about the media's coverage of what WikiLeaks has > done, from the release of the Iraq war logs to those in > Afghanistan to now this largest trove of U.S. diplomatic > cables ever released in history, John. > > JOHN PILGER: Well, what Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is > doing is what journalists should have been doing. I mean, I > think you mention the reaction to him. Some of the > hostility, especially in the United States, from some of > those very highly paid journalists at the top has been quite > instructive, because I think that they are shamed by > WikiLeaks. They are shamed by the founder of WikiLeaks, who > is prepared to say that the public has a right to know the > secrets of governments that impinge on our democratic > rights. WikiLeaks is doing something very Jeffersonian. It > was Jefferson who said that information is the currency of > democracy. And here you have a lot of these famous > journalists in America are rather looking down their noses, > at best, and saying some quite defamatory things about > Assange and WikiLeaks, when in fact they should have been > exploiting their First Amendment privilege and letting > people know just how government has lied to us, lied to us > in the run-up to the Iraq war and lied to us in so many > other circumstances. And I think that's really been the > value of all this. People have been given a glimpse of how > big power operates. And they're-it's coming from a > facilitator, it's coming from these very brave > whistleblowers. And in my film, Julian Assange goes out of > his way to celebrate the people within the system who he > describes as the equivalent of conscientious objectors > during the First World War, these extraordinarily courageous > people who were prepared to speak out against that > slaughter. All the Bradley Mannings and others are > absolutely heroic figures. There's no question about that. > > In my film, I also went to Washington, and I interviewed the > Assistant Secretary of Defense, Bryan Whitman, the man who's > been in charge of media operations, as they call it, through > a number of administrations. And I asked him to give a > guarantee that Julian Assange would not be hunted down, as > the media was describing it. And he said he wasn't in a > position to give that guarantee. So, I think we're in a > situation here, Amy, where people have to speak out. This is > a very fundamental issue, and the people we need to speak > out most of all are those with the privilege of the media, > with the privilege of journalism, because this is about free > information. This is about letting us know truths that we > have to know about if we are to live in any form of > democracy. > > AMY GOODMAN: The nationwide warning that has gone out has > been remarkable, John. Democracy Now! obtained the text of a > memo that was sent to employees at USAID, thousands of > employees, about reading the recently leaked WikiLeaks > documents. The memo reads in part, quote, "Any classified > information that may have been unlawfully disclosed and > released on the Wikileaks web site was not 'declassified' by > an appropriate authority and therefore requires continued > classification and protection as such from government > personnel... Accessing the Wikileaks web site from any > computer may be viewed as a violation of the SF-312 > agreement... Any discussions concerning the legitimacy of > any documents or whether or not they are classified must be > conducted within controlled access areas (overseas) or > within restricted areas (USAID/Washington)... The documents > should not be viewed, downloaded, or stored on your USAID > unclassified network computer or home computer; they should > not be printed or retransmitted in any fashion." > > It's gone out to agencies all over the government. State > Department employees have been warned, again, not only on > their computers where they're blocked at work, but at home. > People who have written cables are not allowed to put in > their names to see if those cables come up. Graduate > schools, like SIPA at Columbia University, an email was sent > out from the administration saying the State Department had > contacted them and that if they care about their futures in > government, they should not post anything to Facebook or > talk about these documents. > > And then you have Allen West, one of the new Republican > Congress members-elect, who called for targeted news outlets > that publish the cables. In a radio interview, > Congressmember West-well, Congressmember-elect West, called > for censoring any news outlets that run stories based on the > cables' release. This is what he said. > > ALLEN WEST: Here is an individual that is not an > American citizen, first and foremost, for whatever > reason, you know, gotten his hands on classified > American material and has put it out there in the public > domain. And I think that we also should be censoring the > American news agencies which enabled him to be able to > do this and then also supported him and applauded him > for the efforts. So, that's kind of aiding and abetting > of a serious crime. > > AMY GOODMAN: And speaking of crimes, another Congress > member, longtime Congressmember Peter King from here in New > York, has called for the classifying of WikiLeaks as a > foreign terrorist organization. I did my column this week > talking about "'Assangination': From Character Assassination > to the Real Thing" and the calls of Democratic consultants > like Bob Beckel on Fox Business News for Julian Assange to > be killed. He said he doesn't agree with the death penalty, > so he should be "illegally" killed, maybe taken out by U.S. > special forces. John Pilger? > > JOHN PILGER: Look, Amy, I thought you were reading out there > several passages from 1984. I don't think Orwell could have > put it even better than that. Surely, we mustn't think these > things. I'm thinking it at the moment. So if I was over > there, I must be guilty of something, and therefore I should > be illegally taken out. > > Look, there's always been-as you know better than I, there's > always been a tension among the elites in the United States > between those who pay some sort of homage, lip service, to > all those Georgian gentleman who passed down those tablets > of good intentions all that long time ago and a bunch of > lunatics. But they're powerful lunatics. They're-perhaps > "lunatics" is not quite right. They're simply totalitarian > people. And up they come in anything like this. I see-I read > this morning that the U.S. Air Force has banned anybody > connecting with it from reading The Guardian. So, everyone > is banned from doing things and banned from thinking and so > on. > > They won't get away with it. That's the good news. They are > hyperventilating, and they're hysterical, and so be it, but > they won't get away with it. There are now two genuine > powers in the world. We know about U.S. power. But that > great sleeper, world public opinion, world decency, if you > like, if I'm not being too romantic about it, is waking up. > And the scenes outside the court yesterday went well beyond, > I think, just the WikiLeaks issue. It is something else. > WikiLeaks has triggered something. And I don't think it will > be the proverbial genie being stuffed back in the bottle, > either. So, you know, world opinion is-when it stirs, when > it moves, when it starts to come together collectively to do > things that are important to us all, it's a very formidable > opponent to those totalitarian people who you've just > quoted. So I'm rather more optimistic. > > The immediate thing is to free Julian Assange. And I'm > hoping that will happen tomorrow at the High Court. I should > just add, you know, Mark Stephens was very eloquently > describing the case. But, you know, the absurdity of this > case is that a senior prosecutor in Sweden threw this thing > out. And I've seen her papers. And she was left-she leaves > us in no doubt there was absolutely no evidence to support > any of these misdemeanors or crimes, or whatever they're > meant to be, at all. It was only the intervention of this > right-wing politician in Sweden that reactivated this whole > charade. So, in a way, it is perhaps symbolic of the kind of > charades, rather lethal charades, that we've seen on a much > wider scale in relation to the invasions of Iraq and > Afghanistan and other issues that have involved the deaths > of literally hundreds of thousands of people around the > world. So, what we're seeing is a rebellion. Where it will > go, I'm not quite sure. But it's certainly started, I can > tell you. > > AMY GOODMAN: John Pilger, I'd like to ask you to stay with > us as we talk about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as we > talk about the power of the U.S. government. This week we > reported on the sudden death of Richard Holbrooke, who has > played such a key role through four Democratic > administrations, from Vietnam to Yugoslavia, from Timor to > Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. And we'd like to talk about > his legacy and about U.S. foreign policy. You have done a > number of documentaries related to the areas where he > worked, and we're also going to be joined by Jeremy Scahill. > > I also want to say, when you talk about a wave of reaction > against what has happened to Julian Assange, I mentioned > Columbia's graduate school called SIPA that warned students > not to post things to Facebook or deal with these issues > raised by WikiLeaks, but there has been a reversal. Clearly, > the administration at Columbia has been seriously > embarrassed, and the dean there has now issued a new > statement saying that he encourages the discussion of > issues, wherever those issues may take one. John Pilger, > stay with us. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The > War and Peace Report. Back in a minute. > > ========== > > ___________________________________________ > > Portside aims to provide material of interest to people > on the left that will help them to interpret the world > and to change it. > > Submit via email: [email protected] > > Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3 > > Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq > > Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe > > Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive > > Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
