Interesting reading. martin.
Begin forwarded message: > From: Portside Moderator <[email protected]> > Date: 28 December 2010 01:07:52 GMT > To: [email protected] > Subject: Julian Assange, the Rosenberg Case and the Espionage Act of 1917 > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Julian Assange, the Rosenberg Case and the Espionage > Act of 1917 > > By Robert Meeropol > > Rosenberg Fund for Children > > http://www.rfc.org/blog/article/855 > > Rumors are swirling that the United States is preparing > to indict Wikileaks leader Julian Assange for > conspiring to violate the Espionage Act of 1917. The > modern version of that act states among many, many > other things that: "Whoever, for the purpose of > obtaining information respecting the national defense > with intent or reason to believe that the information > is to be used to the injury of the United States" > causes the disclosure or publication of this material, > could be subject to massive criminal penalties. It also > states that: "If two or more persons conspire to > violate any of the foregoing provisions ... each of the > parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the > punishment provided for the offense which is the object > of such conspiracy." (18 U.S. Code, Chapter 37, Section > 793.) > > I view the Espionage Act of 1917 as a lifelong nemesis. > My parents were charged, tried and ultimately executed > after being indicted for Conspiracy to Commit Espionage > under that act. > > The 1917 Act has a notorious history. It originally > served to squelch opposition to World War I. It > criminalized criticism of the war effort, and sent > hundreds of dissenters to jail just for voicing their > opinions. It transformed dissent into treason. > > Many who attacked the law noted that the framers of the > Constitution had specifically limited what constituted > treason by writing it into the Constituton: "Treason > against the United States shall consist only in levying > war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, > giving them aid and comfort" (Article III, section 3). > The framers felt this narrow definition was necessary > to prevent treason from becoming what some called "the > weapon of a political faction." Furthermore, in their > discussions at the Constitutional Convention they > agreed that spoken opposition was protected by the > First Amendment and could never be considered treason. > > It appears obvious that the Espionage Act is > unconstitutional because it does exactly what the > Constitution prohibits. It is, in other words, an > effort to make an end run around the Treason Clause of > the Constitution. Not surprisingly, however, as we've > seen in times of political stress, the Supreme Court > upheld its validity in a 5-4 decision. Although later > decisions seemed to criticize and limit its scope, the > Espionage Act of 1917 has never been declared > unconstitutional. To this day, with a few notable > exceptions that include my parents' case (read more > about the Rosenberg case at > http://www.rfc.org/therosenbergcase), it has been a > dormant sword of Damocles, awaiting the right political > moment and an authoritarian Supreme Court to spring to > life and slash at dissenters. > > It is no accident that Julian Assange may face a > "conspiracy" charge just as my parents did. All that is > required of the prosecution to prove a conspiracy is to > present evidence that two or more people got together > and took one act in furtherance of an illegal plan. It > could be a phone call or a conversation. > > In my parents' case the only evidence presented against > my mother was David and Ruth Greenglasses' testimony > that she was present at a critical espionage meeting > and typed up David's handwritten description of a > sketch. Although this testimony has since been shown to > be false, even if it were true, it would mean that the > government of the United States executed someone for > typing. > > But the reach of "conspiracy" is even more insidious. > It means that ANYONE with whom my parents could have > discussed their actions and politics could have been > swept up and had similar charges brought against them > if someone testified that those conversations included > plans to commit espionage. Thus, the case against my > parents was rightly seen by many in their political > community of rank and file Communist Party Members as a > threat to them all. > > Viewing the Wikileaks situation through this lens, it > becomes apparent why the government would seek to > charge Assange with conspiracy. Not only Assange, but > anyone involved in the Wikileaks community could be > swept up in a dragnet. Just as in my parents' case, the > prosecutors could seek to bully some involved into > ratting out others, in return for more favorable > treatment. This divide and conquer approach would turn > individuals against each other, sow the seeds of > distrust within the broader community, and intimidate > others into quiescence. > > This kind of attack threatens every left wing activist. > I urge all progressives to come to the defense of > Julian Assange should he be indicted for violating the > Espionage Act of 1917. > > Robert Meeropol is the younger son of Ethel and Julius > Rosenberg. In 1953, when he was six years old, the > United States Government executed his parents for > "conspiring to steal the secret of the atomic bomb." > Since 1990 he has served as the Executive Director of > the Rosenberg Fund for Children (www.rfc.org), a > non-profit, public foundation that provides for the > educational and emotional needs of both targeted > activist youth and children in this country whose > parents have been harassed, injured, jailed, lost jobs > or died in the course of their progressive activities. > > ___________________________________________ > > 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
