Wikileaks Founder Advised To Avoid American Gov't

eldavojohn writes "Media darling Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, has been told by his lawyers to avoid the United States on the grounds that the US military would like to ask him a few questions about his source of the Collateral Murder video. Assange claims to be holding yet more video (of a US attack on a village that allegedly killed 140 civilians in May of 2009), as well as a quarter million sensitive cables relating to the current foreign war operations from the US State Department. Assange surfaced for the cameras in Brussels while speaking about the need for the freedom of information. Can he build a high enough profile to protect himself from danger?"

Comments

Re:The Whistleblowers' Blues

[MrNaz]

Or perhaps a bathtub in a motel.

Re:I am not very sympathetic and here's why...

[slyborg]

And you have the information to back up this "often" claim, besides the one example you claim?

I know a guy who worked for a number of years for Reuters as a communications tech in war zones all over the world, and he never "worked both sides" whatever that means to you but whose life was endangered on a number of occasions. He was paid for it and he accepted the possible consequences. However, he, along with I would suspect are the majority of Reuters employees, did not work for for Hezbollah, and didn't, as you appear to suggest, deserve a couple of 30mm shells for doing his job.

Since this is the Internet, though, people who disagree with you of course deserve death, I suppose.

Re:The Whistleblowers' Blues

[TheCarp]

> The reality is that there's a lot of information that doesn't belong in the public domain, and it's in the best interest of the
> country/corporation/individual to keep secured.

For an indivudual, or a corporation sure. However, a corporation has share holders and/or trustees. There is no legitimate reason for a "corporation" to withhold information from them. They are the owners, the final deciders.

With a government, or at least, any organization that I am willing to consider as such in a legitimate fashion, the people are the share holders, we are the board. There is no legitimate reason to hide information from even the lowest of us. We OWN IT. It is OUR SECRET.

Keeping information (with the VERY narrow exception of individuals personally identifiable information like tax, employment, or social security records) is corruption. plain and simple. Justice Roberts claims the government deserves a lot of "leeway" in "national security" matters. I argue it deserves no leeway at all, ever, in any circumstance.

The single most important function of government is to provide checks and balances against its own corruption. Even defense should be secondary.

-Steve