Poll: People behind WikiLeaks should be prosecuted

[im1013]

Source: McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Americans overwhelmingly think that WikiLeaks is doing more harm than good by releasing classified U.S. diplomatic cables, and they want to see the people behind it prosecuted, according to a new McClatchy-Marist Poll.

"Clearly people are very unhappy with it," said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., which conducted the national poll.

The survey found that 70 percent of Americans think the leaks are doing more harm than good by allowing America's enemies to see confidential and secret information about U.S. foreign policy.

Just 22 percent think the leaks are doing more good than harm by making the U.S. government more transparent and accountable, the stated goal of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

The greatest opposition to the leaks comes from Republicans, 81 percent of whom call the leaks harmful. The strongest source of support is liberals, 35 percent of whom think the leaks do more good than harm. Even among liberals, though, a solid majority of 58 percent called the leaks more harmful than helpful.

The poll also found that 59 percent of Americans think those who publish secret U.S. documents should be prosecuted, while 31 percent said the publication of secrets is protected under the First Amendment guarantee of a free press.





Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/10/105106/poll-people-behind-wikileaks-should.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_term=news

---

Really??

As I posted on the site: Hmmm... I smell bullshit.

[smiley]

1. since when does anyone on DU listen to the polls?

... right?:eyes:

[Amonester]

55. I predict more than 70% will LOVE Wikileaks when they'll post that

BOA criminal CEO's hard-drive content...

To the point I think they should have dumped it long before.

Nobody's perfect.

[Ruperto31]

79. And there is much, much more. Those poll numbers will slide.

The American people have been sold a bill of goods about US freedom and democracy. Now they will see how the place really runs. And many of them will wake up.

[SkyDaddy7]

2. It is not bullshit...

Eventually folks around here will figure out this country is not Liberal minded or left leaning...Most Americans do not think when it comes to stuff like this.

Seriously, Ron Paul & a few Democrats are the only leaders in this country who have had the "balls" to say the truth...Everyone else has been calling for extreme unconstitutional solutions! This is not much different that the so-called mosque not at ground zero in terms of how most Americans think! SAD!

[Curmudgeoness]

10. Sad, but true, too many Americans just do not think.

It isn't really a question of "how most Americans think", but IF they do.

[glinda]

31. Public is under-educated, under-informed and most do not even understand the Constitution.

Most of the public watches Fox also.

[Curmudgeoness]

32. I like to believe most do not watch Faux. Just the most vocal of the

uninformed. I know too many people who watch or read NO news, which scares the crap out of me---they still vote. But you are right about the rest of it.

[trud]

38. lousy schools, lousy teachers

That's where I put the blame. In my day, if schools were cranking out semi-illiterates heads would have rolled.

[atreides1]

89. No

Schools teach to pass tests, not critical thinking. Teachers in order to keep thier jobs, must follow the required agenda.

Not saying that there aren't bad teachers, just saying that it's more then that one thing.

[No Elephants]

59. Fox gets the highest ratings among cable news stations. Not sure what that means.

[glinda]

71. It means people get fed crap and they believe it. They love to have their hate

justified. Faux does that and also reinforces it as well as makes suggestions. The whole Corp should be shuttered and jailed.

[Goldstein1984]

47. Yes, it's true

We're in the mess we're in because the majority of Americans support the government when push comes to shove.

People get angry whenever I write this, but we are a democratic republic. I understand why "terrorists" targeted American civilians. In theory, at least, we are responsible--not innocent--for a predatory foreign policy of exploitation. When our government kills innocent people to secure priority access to limited resources, we are responsible. We pay the taxes that fund the military. We elect the representatives that write the budgets and pass the resolutions supporting war crimes.

Today I've been feeling some hope that the workers are waking up, but I'm haunted by the thought that there may be too many sheep.

[No Elephants]

58. Yet most Americans voted for a man who ran hard on no more tax cuts for

the rich and federal health care reform, including a public option with no mandates.

If you poll people based on labels, they avoid "liberal" because Replicons and other corporatists succeeded in making "liberal" a dirty word. However, if you poll people based on issues, they lean liberal, as the "poll" of November 2008 should have proven.

Obama ran left of both Hillary and McCain. So, America voted for the candidate America believed to be the most liberal in the field.

However, when elected officials of both parties and the media keep selling something, yes, many Americans buy--at least at first. That's how we got public approval of an unconstitutional Patriot At and an illegal invasion of Iraq.

Americans elected many Democratic Congresses, until Dems began acting like Republicons. Now, Amerians have lost faith in both sides, so you get anti-incumbent voting, no matter who is in the majority at the time.

[Hissyspit]

3. Is this the same majority of Americans who in past polls said the Press had too much freedom?

Bill of Rights doesn't say anything about how much. It says "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of the press."

Or the same majority of Americans who historically have suppressed gay Americans' human rights?

There really actually IS a thing called the tyranny of the majority.

[im1013]

7. Maybe it IS time to leave then...

I often have this little argument in my head:

Screw this country filled with morons & controlled by fascists....

but then again... Screw them! This is MY damned country!!!


:banghead:

[caseymoz]

29. Hey, I would get out if I could.

I'd go to Canada cause it's close and there's no real language barrier, and I'm poor. Unfortunately, I'm too poor to leave.

I will say, though, Canada will probably be a great place as Global Warming takes place. It has a sparse population and a lot of land under that ice.

[Liberalynn]

9. Its like the saying

"never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." The majority of the public right now IMHO can't even remember what their best interests are let alone vote for them.

[sulphurdunn]

13. It's also demonstrable that

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." H.L Mencken

"There's a sucker born every minute." P.T Barnum

These gentlemen are my favorite American philosophers incognitos. :patriot:

[indimuse]

4. yeah..? AND BUSH WAS PRESIDENT!!! DUH! nt!

[No Elephants]

62. No one said Diebold was any smarter than voters, or the SCOTUS any less corrupt.

[24601]

87. Not sure what you mean - when this poll was taken, Bush was out

of office almost 2 years. This reflects opinion from December 2010, not 2008.

[southmost]

5. in other news

corporate propaganda works

[nenagh]

36. Exactly .....

Corporate propaganda shapes viewpoints..

So the Faux suckers hear about Government Run Health Care, not the Public Option..

It might be amusing if it wasn't so sickening...

[No Elephants]

61. And the rest of us suckers heard "only a sliver."

[Ex Lurker]

6. Wikileaks erred with the scattershot approach

it left them open to charges of putting Americans at risk, whether rightly or wrongly. A focus on domestic issues would have avoided much of this. Spotlight the corporate criminals and their government enablers. Hold off on foreign policy leaks at first, except for the most egregious wrongdoing.

[im1013]

8. Very true.

And I would have enjoyed it even more.

I love when someone outs the corporate scum!

[pnwmom]

15. I agree. Where they went wrong was in the non-discriminate release of thousands of emails

simply BECAUSE THEY COULD, without regard to whether the release interfered in important and delicate negotiations (such as with China regarding North Korea), or whether the release put individual allies at risk (blocking out names isn't enough to protect identify).

[boppers]

26. The press are the ones vetting/cleaning the documents (which aren't emails).

Furthermore, the international media are under no obligation to make sure that China and North Korea are happy with each other.

[Tunkamerica]

41. you've commented on a lot of the wikileaks stories posted here

how is it that you still don't grasp the basic facts of the story? do you even read the excerpts of the articles you comment on?

[boppers]

24. A focus on *whose* domestic issues?

They're releasing cables deemed important by Spanish, German, and UK press... because those are the ones who are vetting the information.

[msanthrope]

45. That's a very interesting perspective...

I suspect you might be right. A 'Robin Hood' approach would have gone over better--further, who is doing more harm to Americans right now? B of A, or the diplomatic corps?

[marasinghe]

11. and almost 80% of americans supported the massacre of iraqis, in dubya's orgy of mass murder ....

.... iraqis who had done nothing to the usa & posed absolutely no threat to americans.
so what's new? lemmings & lynch mobs - the story of america.
the story of the human species, in fact.
with very few exceptions.

[TheWatcher]

12. Well, this is either one of two things.

1. The Media and those who control them are desperate to set a precedent of Propaganda that surpasses even Soviet Pravda at it's peak.

2. The American people are so brainwashed, so stupid, so COMPLETELY Compromised, sheeplike and child like, such doting, nodding cattle, that they are very close to being beyond redemption, if they have not crossed that rubicon already.

I sincerely hope it's #1.

If it isn't then to quote the late Dandy Don.....

Turn Out The Lights, The Party's Over.....

[pnwmom]

16. The third possibility is that you are wrong and that many Americans

have good reason not to be happy about Wikileaks releasing emails, for example, that interfere with conversations we are having with China about North Korea, or with other countries about Iran, etc. Millions of Americans understand that diplomatic negotiations usually have to be conducted with some secrecy until the FINAL agreements are made. We don't need Assange -- or any other self-important attention-seeker -- sticking his big fat nose in the situation. None of us elected him.

[EFerrari]

19. Yes, a good many Americans are completely ignorant

of how truly destructive our foreign policy is, of how it has put us at risk of terrorist strikes, of what was in the wikileaks or of how our government has lied about them.

You bet.

[TheWatcher]

27. Well, you can coninue to proudly wave your flag for The Establishment all you wish.

But when some "self-Important attention-seeker" is doing far more to expose the corruption and the rot that this country is responsible for than any of our "elected officials" it speaks volumes about just how far across the rubicon we've gone, and who our "elected officials" are really working for.

Because it isn't you and me.

Go sell this tiresome dialogue to someone who still believes lock-step in the Fake Theatrical Joke that is the Political Process and Government in this country, as well as your precious "elected officials", who care infinitely more for Corporate Persons and their own narrow agendas that have little or nothing to do with the interests of We the People. who elected them.

I no longer have any use for it.

*click* (Should have done that long ago)

:hi:

[MedicalAdmin]

43. We don't elect any of the press.

JA by releasing through the press and allowing them to vet , redact, and release is acting as a member of the press.

You may want to consider why you don't support the first amendment .

[TorchTheWitch]

60. actually, it makes him acting like a source not the press

If he were acting as a member of the press he would have had Wikileaks do the due diligence in what to release, what to redact, how much to redact, when to release, etc. and released it themselves. Giving the docs to other members of the press makes him a source, not a member of the press. However, anything that he/Wikileaks releases themselves and not through the press is acting as the press.

I think it was a huge mistake to act as a source to the press rather than as a member of the press in having given all the docs to the media and making it THEIR responsibility to decide what to release, what to redact, when to release it, writing the articles that accompany the docs, etc. as that behavior in the issue with these docs makes him not behaving as a journalist but as a source. And in that situation, the US has a point in not viewing him as a journalist but as a mere source concerning these docs.

The reason that journalists are so very protective of the identity of their sources is because those sources AREN'T protected by freedom of the press rights because they AREN'T acting as the press. Had Wikileaks done all the work themselves in releasing the docs and released them themselves instead of handing that responsibility off to other members of the press, then the US really have to view them and him as the press with the rights of freedom of the press.

[NeoConsSuck]

23. Great Post!!

And unfortunately, I think it's both #1 & #2.

[marmar]

82. selfdelete, responded to wrong post

:dunce:

[GodlessBiker]

14. I assume the same goes for the NY Times since they released the cables, too.

[SharksBreath]

17. I'm sure the Germans didn't want all their dirty little

secrets exposed either.

[pmorlan1]

18. Not really surprising

I'm not surprised. One need look only at the corporate media coverage about Wikileaks to understand the response to the poll. Sadly, the majority of our citizens do not look any further than their TV news for news. If that's all you rely on you end up being totally ignorant of what is going on in the world.

[SoapBox]

20. Are these the same polled persons, that didn't know...

that the RushThugs had taken control of the House?

Let's face it...America is stupid.

And if all they know is what FoxNooseChannel tells them...well, they are STUPID.

[Joanne98]

21. 70% of Americans are idiots!

[Bigmack]

28. YES, and the ignorant

RUN this damned country. Heaven help us all, not that invisible friends are much help.......l Ms Bigmack

[frylock]

22. yet, ask these same people to list a SPECIFIC harm that has come about from wikileaks..

and they'll stand there, glassy-eyed and slack jawed, because they FUCKING can't list anything.

[onethatcares]

25. I wish they'd poll me.

this is like saying 58% of Americans would vote for palin.

Jeeeesssssussssonajetski, 58% of Americans don't even read a newspaper.

[hay rick]

34. Don't have to..

Sarah reads them all for'em.

[snot]

30. We need to take this seriously and do what we can to enlighten our fellow citizens.

Isn't McClatchy one of the last remaining, independently-owned newspaper firms in the U.S.?

As usual, the corporate media have catapulted the propaganda, and as usual, it's working.

[NutmegYankee]

35. enlightened - cute.

I along with several other DUer liberals who opposed the leaks were enlightened all right. We were lit up with the Flammenwerfer 1941!

[Wednesdays]

52. So then, you're a ghost typing on DU now?

:shrug:

[NutmegYankee]

66. Not yet.

I'm a bit scarred, but I'm not going to let the bastards keep me down.

I'm just pissed off that i can be a complete economic/social liberal fighting against the republicans and just because I disagree on one or two issues, I'm persona non grata.

[movonne]

33. With all the the thing that is going on here in the good old usa ...I

wonder how hard it would be to fix a few polls...

[TroubleMan]

37. About 95% of the people I know think otherwise, and I know a lot of righties at work.

Only one guy out of the 50 or so I talked to about this thinks Assange is doing a bad thing. I wonder who these people are polling?

[im1013]

39. That's my point exactly!

I have lived in Mississippi for the past 10 years, and I don't even run across too many of these reddest of the
rednecks that thinks it's a crime in some way. Maybe I'm just too much of an idealist, but I have a very hard
time believing those numbers.

[NJCher]

91. most callers on C2C support Wikileaks

And we all know what a right-wing oriented show that is (Coast to Coast).

Having said that, however, I will take the results of the McClatchey poll straight up. I believe Americans really are that ignorant.

This newspaper chain was, I recall, one of the few that did not distort headlines when bush stole the election the first time.


Cher

[PufPuf23]

40. Earth has entered a 21st Century version of the Dark Ages

Sober thought is that WikiLeaks does not include Top Secret and other higher classifications much less compartmentalized memos in covert operations and a variety of agencies.

Worry about how the internet as now could be limited. Google USCYBERCOM (gone active 10/31/10) not that DoD and intelligence agencies haven't used the internet to form consensus reality and propagandize policy (that we may not know because of National Security) for some time and increasingly in scope.

WikiLeaks is journalism in the internet age. NYT, Guardian, and other papers then are equally guilty. Every unnamed government/ inside source to a reporter is as guilty.

I have only read one memo in entirety, the US Ambassador to Honduras regards to the legality (not) of the Honduras coup but have read many WikiLeaks thread here at DU and links to articles.

So the DOJ and State Department go Kooky when their relatively casual lower level classified communications reveal the the USA is not an honest nor consistent broker and bigger crimes (espionage at UN and Honduras coup) by our government than anything that could be hung on Assange are already revealed.

The most I worry about WikiLeaks is that hot spots could escalate into hot wars and go global geographically parallel to USA global DoD / Intelligence agencies presence in the world because of exposure of reality between parties. There is an opportunity for "foes" because of USA domestic and economic problems and that we are already spread thin. In other words, WikiLeaks has the potential to intensify or cause new strife but this possibilty tempered is that those close know reality more than we learn from various media. I watched several videos of Assange (humble, smart, and not self-serving), but WikiLeaks and similar are a trend more than a personality and not any different than the release of the Pentagon Papers.

Hard for me to approve of the revenge attacks on Visa, Amazon, et al; however, the cyber community is not an organized entity and has many actors, some brilliant. Concurrently, common practice is for covert agencies to build or fake radical events to incite control bounds.

[JDPriestly]

42. I'm really on the fence about this -- and vacillating.

There are downsides.

Fact is, there is a great deal of honor in respecting the privacy and the secrets of others. And that honor was not afforded here. That suggests weakness in our government probably dating back to the Bush adminsitration. That is bad.

I know, some will ask me why honor should be shown to people if you think they are being, well at least -- sneaky and inconsistent in their application of law and their use of their power. But, still while we don't know where this information came from, either someone abused a trust, it was stolen or it was released accidentally-on-purpose meaning intentionally and there is something troubling about that.

Was the abuse of trust/theft/accident-on-purpose/intentional release justified? I am not sure. Of course this information ultimately belongs to the American people, but still, I haven't read anything so new or important that it justifies the breach. In fact, there is so much information that very few if any people will read all of it.

On the positive side, the revelations about what the US has learned about the attitudes of Iran's neighbors in the Middle East toward Iran might wake someone up in Iran. The leaders of the Iranian government probably already know how unpopular their country really is, but what about others in Iran? Might they find solace or encouragement in these Wikileaks? Might some citizens of countries (like Italy and Burma) wake up and risk or do more to end corruption or dangerous policies in their governments? Might some Americans?

Similarly for other releases, we really cannot judge what effect the leaks will have other than to destroy a lot of hypocrisy not just in D.C. but in the governments of some other countries. The Vatican, for example.

But the most important reason that I am on the fence is that this is history in the making, and we cannot see into the future. We cannot know what end result making this information public will have.

Who would ever have thought that the shooting of the Austrian crown prince in Sarajevo by a rag-tag anarchist (and maybe his friends) would result in WWI, the final destruction of the once-great Austrian empire and a cataclysmic shift in world power?

The Wikileaks might start a period of openness as more and more government bureaucrats decide to chuck the pretense of secrecy. There are, after all, a lot of angry people out there including a lot of bureaucrats in sensitive positions with a lot of information to release. But, on the other hand, this could set off conflicts that we cannot imagine or cause foreign governments to distrust our leadership when in fact if they looked in the mirror, they would see much worse behavior in their own ranks.

If this information was really leaked by some American, that person will pay a very high price. I do not doubt that.

And, no doubt, a lot of governments and companies are double-checking the security of their communications as we speak.

So the one unquestionably good result that we can predict with certainty (I know I'm contradicting myself. Too bad.) is that the Wikileaks will at least create jobs for some deserving technology wizards.

So, I am on the fence.

I just know that the release is a reality that probably can't be changed. We and our government will have to deal with it. It is best to be realistic not only about our inability to see into the future but also our inability to change the past.

[elias49]

48. Nicely expressed summary...

but can I suggest that, in reference to your "...most important reason for being on the fence..." -
Shouldn't we risk it? Let's take the chance that, wherever this steers us - we'll be up to the challenge as the human race.
I feel like we need a good, sound shaking to break out of out international stupor.

[ooglymoogly]

44. I know no one who thinks this, but adamantly the opposite.

Would need to see the actual questions posed. Question:..."If wikileaks does massive damage to this country; do you think they are good or bad? etc.

[The Flaming Red Head]

46. Nobody asked me

I count for at least mmmmmmmmmmmm a couple ah million. (Free Julian! chant Free Julian!) Call me assholes. You know they won't call anyone like me. When you conduct a poll you already know what answer you want to get and you always get it.

[daleo]

49. Polls said most people liked being felt up by security at airports

Polls are easy to bias, via question wording, priming, etc.

[Spider Jerusalem]

50. Poll: Americans idiots who think US law applicable to non-US citizens in other countries.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. Oh god, they are?

All I have heard from other places is a collective MEH!!!!

Mexico is a good example. Leaks said that there was no coordination between the Army, the Navy, Federal, State and locals in the war on drugs...

That is news?

What is more, that deserves classification and NoFor? Really!!!!

And 99% of the leaks at of that level.

[Blaze Diem]

53. they're lying

P e n t a g o n P a p e r s

[earcandle]

54. Opinion and point of view are not equivalent to constitutional law, folks and don't you forget it.

[Sirius1]

56. Good News. n/t

[Imagevision]

57. Republican Americans overwhelmingly think that WikiLeaks is doing more harm than good

[melm00se]

63. 1st amendment and classified documents

In its broadest interpretation, the 1st amendment does protect the release of classified information.

HOWEVER, in practicality, the government does have the ability (and it could be argued: the obligation) to restrict access to and the release of classified documents.

Originally the FOIA codified the ability of a person to obtain government documents and the government's obligation to release them. The FOIA, however, specifically excludes documents that apply to national security and foreign relations. Congress did put a safety valve in the FOIA to prevent the Executive Branch from "classifying" documents unrelated to the above situations unless they were specifically classified under an existing Executive Order.

The latest revision to the Executive Order (and yes, it was by Bush in 2003 but that does not make the previous versions nor this revision of the underlying Executive Order invalid) allows the Executive Branch to classify certain documents that include the following topics:

- military plans, weapons systems, or operations;
- foreign government information;
- intelligence activities, intelligence sources/methods, cryptology;
- foreign relations/activities of the United States;
- scientific, technological, or economic matters relating to national
security;
- federal programs for safeguarding nuclear materials or facilities;
- vulnerabilities or capabilities of national security systems; or
- weapons of mass destruction.

It appears that at least one of the above,(the bolded ones), if not more.

So Pfc. Bradley Manning will not be able to raise a 1st Amendment defense at any future trial stemming from his alleged conduct. (if PFC Manning did steal and transmit these documents and is convicted, the kid is in for a world of hurt)

What is unclear, however, is the ability to enforce such laws in an international environment. Is Mr. Assange guilty of a US crime if he releases US documents (or any other country's documents) while outside the USA? He might be, but the US courts, technically, have no jurisdiction in other countries unless specifically addressed by treaty.

Mr. Assange and his associates have built for themselves quite an interesting defensive position. By essentially stating "release me, don't put me on trial or else" he can make even the largest power pause. Additionally, Mr. Assange's public protestations of innocence and claims that he is being railroaded for "crimes" creates a strong possibility for a heavily tainted potential jury pool making a fair trail extremely difficult. Plus, Mr. Assange's public statements can and will raise questions (as can be seen innumerable times here at DU) of the veracity of any evidence brought against him.

BTW, sex with a sleeping/unconscious woman (as alleged by Miss W: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40551118/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/) can be rape. A sleeping/unconscious woman does not have the ability to grant consent to sexual contact and non-consensual sex is the foundation of any rape case. If the Miss W's statement is accepted as valid testimony by a grand jury or the Swedish equivalent (irrespective if folks believe she is a "honey trap" or not), then the presented evidence will provide a strong foundation for a charge of rape.

[Bragi]

65. How does an excutive order trump the First Amendment?

It doesn't, does it? If so, then Bradley will still be able to make a First Amendment defense, yes?

[melm00se]

74. I need to clarify me comments from above:

the Bush Era Executive Order did not create new law but rather clarified definitions of existing legislation.

to answer your question specifically, an Executive Order trumps the 1st amendment when the Supreme Court either rules that it does or declines to address the issue. The USSC is the ultimate arbiter of Constitutional Rights. While we, collectively, decry those rulings, the USSC's power to interpret Constitutional Rights is a settled issue dating back to Marbury vs Madison and there is no way to go back and undo that power without creating a staggering amount of chaos.

The Supreme Court is loathe to inject itself on National Security and Foreign Relations issues except in the most extreme cases. The reason for that is that National Security and Foreign Relations are powers specifically delegated to the Executive Branch (both aspects by virtue of Article II, section 2. The only place in those aspects that Congress can get involved is in respect to Treaties, Ambassadors and declarations of war - please note however that the "advice and consent" component is left vague, the Constitution does not require the traditional votes that take place in the Senate).

In addition, PFC Bradley appears not to have made an FOIA request to gain access to the documents but rather copied them, illicitly, from the government's secure network.

Where the USSC has ruled on classified documents is during the Pentagon Papers affair. The press has a 1st amendment right to publish the documents but the person(s) who provided those documents do not have the same protection.

[Bragi]

64. I suspect a majority opposes the First Amendment

I doubt very much that the First Amendment would get the votes needed to become law, let alone a core constitutonal right, if it were proposed today and not already in existence.

In fact, from conversations here in the past, I doubt it would pass a vote among DU members if they understood it is what legally allows a Fred Phelps to mount his offensive demonstrations.

I do believe that eventually these rights will be repealed, or at least become so diminished as to be meaningless. This will hapen because the authoritarian state is powerful, and the people are ignorant and biased against their own interests.

This poll is just another small reminder that the great American "experiment" in demoracy and freedom is so over.

[The Flaming Red Head]

67. UGH a sample of 1029 adults does not represent the entire country

Gawd I hate polls.

What were their income levels, education, ethnicity? How were the questions worded? Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!

[buckrogers1965]

68. Ummm, yeah.

But those people that want charges against wikileaks seem to want to file treason charges against Julian Assange.

Protip: Treason charges can only be filed against American citizens by the USA.

And even if Assange were an American citizen: The first amendment of the constitution states clearly, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The New York Times was attacked by the feds for publishing the pentagon papers and the supreme court found that the press has the right to print even the most secret documents of the federal government, as long as the press did not ask anyone to commit a crime for them.

Oh, and I am a Republican.

[krabigirl]

69. Who cares? Most Americans polled agreed with the Iraq War at the time..how about now?

So tired of polling and the way it is done in this country. So if most people agree with something, that must make it right? Lmao.

This empire is declining quickly.

[goforit]

70. PROPAGANDA!!!...Once again.

[Creative]

72. I think that most Americans believe that a member of the Armed Services with a security clearance

should not release classified information to a third party. That's the easy part.

On the other hand, whether or not Wikleaks has committed espionage cannot yet be discovered with the information that is available on the surface. The hard part will be the digging that takes place below the surface. And even when that is completed, we may not have a complete understanding of this matter.

However, one thing that is certain is the fact that this will change the way classified information is handled by every government in the world.

[elias49]

73. If it comes to Assange being tried on some charge by/in the US

how much light do you suppose is going to shine on the proceedings? Calling witnesses, deposing 'persons of interest', taking (and sharing?) statements.
Sounds, sadly, like a military court.:thumbsdown:

[Creative]

80. That remains to be seen. However, it would be interesting to learn if any money changed hands

and where it came from/went to.

There is still a lot to be learned and it is for that reason that Assange will probably at some point, find himself in a US court room.

[Downwinder]

75. As they say. I'm WikiLeaks.

[Cal Carpenter]

76. The propaganda is working

What harm has it done?

[sendero]

77. More proof..

... that our democracy is doomed because most people in America are drooling morons.

[and-justice-for-all]

78. If KKKarl Rove is not going to prison for outing Valerie Plame Wilson

or Bush and Cheney for their illegal wars; then Mr. Assange should not even be considered for prosecution

[rucky]

81. I'd like to see a global poll on it.

as another example of how out of step Americans are with the rest of the world.

[marmar]

83. Never misunderestimate the gullibility and reality-aversion capacity of the American public......

:dunce:

[Le Taz Hot]

84. Not difficult to figure out.

The MSM has portrayed WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization and Assange as the worlds worst terrorist and most people get their "news" from the MSM.

[lynne]

85. Probably accurate. I agree and know of few outside of DU that don't -

- most of what was released was just garbage with no impact other than a red face. However, when information vital to American interests and safety is stolen and released, then I feel a line has been crossed and they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I have no doubt that others on DU feel the same as I yet won't express it for fear of retribution.

[Ruperto31]

86. "American interests?" There is no such thing.

There are the interests of the bankers and big businessmen and their political servants, and there are the interests of the working people of this country, and the two have nothing in common.

[fascisthunter]

88. lol... yeah, it's bullshit

[TomCADem]

90. Aren't We Also Citing A McClatchy Poll To Attack Obama On DU?

[fasttense]

92. And if they had polled everyone before passing civil rights legislation,

they would have found most people didn't approve of it.

Rights are not usually popular, until you have to use them.

[Anakin Skywalker]

93. Just who the hell did they poll? Teabaggers?

[USA_1]

94. Prosecuted? Remember the Pentagon Papers

Thanks to them the Vietnam war was ended. Wikileaks papers should put a stop to American imperialism today.

[katty]

95. For What? and what about the NYT? where does it end?!!