Julian Assange Activist or Terrorist?

Although Julian Assange is acting as checks and balances for governments, at the same time he is actually making it harder for foreign governments to work together and possibly putting innocent lives in danger. Assange is placing a strain on foreign government relations with not only the United States but with many governments around the world. He is putting secret diplomatic and military documents form the United States for all to see, that not only harms how foreign governments want to deal with the U.S. but also indangering the lives of innocent people, who are trying to help the democratic cause, in danger. The first batch of top-secret government documents were released through Assange's non-profit website Wikileaks, and did not blackout (keep classified) the names of U.S. friendlies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Showing that he will recklessly put the lives of innocent people in danger to try to get the truth out and overturn governments.

Though I think whistle blowing is a good thing, I also think it should be handled by real, professional publishers, not some lone gunman. Assange has no one to answer to and can publish anything he wants, whenever and however he wants. It is troubling when a person has tremendous ammounts of power to do something that can cause immense harm to politics, both foreign and domestic, even if they think what they are doing is right, in the long term it can actually and usually is more harmful than helpful.

Journalists at a newspaper or magazine have to make sure everything they put out for the public won’t potentially put any person’s life in harms way or put a covert operation in jeopardy. Journalists have to answer to the publisher and the publisher’s job is to make sure everything they print is “ok” and “readable” for the American people. Julian Assange claims to be a real publisher but at the same time he released the first batch of top-secret documents, that he obtained from Bradley Manning, in which he did not blac out the names of individuals that were friendly to the United States, While the New York Times released the exact same documents with those names blacked out. His claim is to be a legitimate publisher but, is bogus because while every other news agency that got a hold of the top-secret documents took the time to blackout the names and make sure it was printable, Assange put them onto the internet without even thinking of the repercussions or the danger he was putting other human beings life’s in.

While Julian Assange is indeed entitled to free speech, I think that releasing classified top-secret documents makes it harder for governments to work together while makeaking the diplomatic process of cooperation, which is already antagonizingly slow, even slower. Foreign government cooperation isn’t the easiest thing to obtain in this modern world and is made even harder when a person like Assange decides it is ok to take classified diplomatic documents and release them to the public hand and home. Its fine that he see’s himself as checks and balances to governments but I think that he could pick and choose what to release more carefully as to not slow the process of diplomatic cooperation.

Free speech as an American is a huge person entitled right, but I also think with that free speech entitlement comes the responsibility to do what is right. Julian Assange’s choice to release these documents quite possibly hurt diplomatic relations and put lives of innocent people in danger. I’m not saying that these documents should never be released, because I think that the American people have a right to know what their government is doing, all I am saying is that they should be released at an appropriate time.

Julian Assange, though acting as checks and balances for governments, makes it difficult for government coopera

tion by releasing documents on what the United States thinks about other foreign leaders and politicians. After the release of these diplomatic messages foreign government cooperation with the United States took a seemingly big blow. Not only did the U.S. compare one foreign politician “Hitler,” but also said some pretty impolite and rude things about other foreign politicians.

I agree with Vice President Biden when he says that Julian Assange is being a terrorist. He may think that he is doing the right thing and giving the world full transparency to what their governments are doing is what needs to happen but in some cases, some things are better left unsaid. When Wikileaks released the video of the Apache helicopter shooting and killing armed insurgents along with unarmed civilians and a journalist, I think everyone needed to see that and to make sure that our governments could not sweep it under the rug and cover it up. But when Wikileaks released the United States embassy cables, they really did more harm that good. Most Americans already knew what the cables had told us and in reality it only made foreign relations more difficult. Julian Assange is a vigilante who thinks that he can do whatever he wants and there won’t ever be any consequences for his actions and that other people will take the blame for him. While Bradley Manning is guilty of treason, Julian Assange is just as guilty because he was the one who carelessly published top-secret documents without a thought to how they would affect not only the United States but also the world.

When Clinton said that Wikileaks should be dealt with just like the Taliban, I agreed because I genuinely feel that Julian Assange and his partners are using this information to help overthrow governments and create political unrest in a time that is already uneasy, through virtual terrorism. They are more like a terrorist organization than a political activist because in my eyes they want to create political upheaval and bend governments to their will. When Julian Assange said if there ever was an attempt on his life that he would release all the classified documents that he is still holding that have yet to be released. I felt like he was blackmailing governments to leave him alone or he would release things that are potentially damaging. When he said that he changed from a political activist to a cyber terrorist in my eyes and in the eyes of many American citizens. He should be brought to trial for the crimes he has committed not only against the United States but also all the other countries that he has released classified documents against.

Assange never released anything about his home country of Australia which if he really was an activist and not a terrorist than he would. He is biased to what he releases even though everything he has released about the United States I am sure that Australia has done in its past as well. While Assange pretends to be a publisher, he is in fact terrorizing governments around the world and putting i

nnocent lives in danger through his recklessness. While some think that he is giving citizens of the United States transparency to what our government is doing, I think that most people think he is actually doing more harm than good.

Where did all of our info go?

Although Julian Assange’s unprofessional behavior regarding government secrets has degraded his reputation, the government activities Wikileaks exposed should be public knowledge. We live in an age of paranoia and deceit, where it is hard to trust information coming from the national security world.

For example, ever since the war with Iraq was declared, U.S. top officials deployed numerous amounts of disinformation and deceit to convince the public that Saddam Hussein was a threat to national security (this information supposedly coming from a “reliable” top-secret source). Unfortunately, these are not the first leaders to present lies to the citizens of America. The lies continued throughout the war, as former Washington Post Baghdad bureau Chief Ellen Knickmayer explains in her report.

On the other hand, it isn’t an exciting feeling to see individuals inside the national security bureaucracy ignore the classification policy and decide to leak large quantities of information to people without any clearances. Although the courage of whistle-blowers, like Daniel Ellsberg and Stanely McChrystal, deserve much praise, our government agencies can’t operate without a certain degree of discipline and the threat of leaked materials causing a great risk to the public is always possible. Even if Wikileaks hasn’t released any sensitive information about sources aiding us in the war with Iraq and Afghanistan, it may still occur.

With these reasons, people may think that leaking classified information is a crime, but it still happens in our everyday life. Top officials leak classified information whenever it suits their political purposes. If former Afghan commander Stanley McChrystal can successfully tie a president’s hand by leaking a confidential report to call more troops, then what is wrong with Wikileaks to share information that they believe the public should know about.

The reason people have as to why Assange’s website is getting attacked for publishing its articles is unconstitutional. Wikileaks is still an online media site and should still be entitled to the same protections as mainstream media when it releases information, as Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas states in his argument in favor of Wikileaks.

The Founding Fathers built this great nation in hopes of creating a free society. I say that if we are truly a “free society”, then do we not have the right to know the truth? The current government act of charging whistle-blowers and truth-seekers for treason is ridiculous. These good Samaritans who try to reveal the truth to the public are currently getting prosecuted for attempting to give the citizens of this country information that they should already rightfully possess.

The mentality that the public is shocked because someone actually received classified information and revealed it to the public is a common one. In my opinion, the reason this leak has brought such a big shock to citizens is because it shows that there are many hidden activities that are not being shared with the public.

Careerists in America’s intelligence agencies, military, and consular offices largely operate behind a veil of secrecy. The U.S. taxpayer is funding a vast amount of secret activities that they are only dimly aware of. They are ignorantly paying for these operations, whose value they have been asked to take almost entirely on faith. If some of these decisions are misguided, then we are not only stuck with the bill, but we are paying for activities that may threaten our security.

The public is a blind man who is led by the guide dog of the government. We can only trust our guide dog because other governments may lie and deceive us with their propaganda.

Moreover, if we don’t have any idea what our government/private contractors are really up to, then Americans won’t understand why other countries have so many strong feelings against the United States. If we remain ignorant with all of these “bad stuff” and operations our government does in these foreign countries, then we will think that they hate us for “what we are” and “what we believe in” rather that “what we do.”

A perfect example is the conflict in the Middle East. Arab and Muslim hostility to the United States really shouldn’t be a mystery. Given the policies that the United States has affirmed toward many of these religious societies over the past few decades, do you really expect Iraqis to be grateful that the United States invaded their country and set off a civil war that caused thousands of people to die, and millions more to become refugees?

A complaint about the security Julian Assange has developed from the checks and balance system the government developed may give people the wrong imprecision. These protections are to prevent a branch of the government from forbidding him from posting information that we as citizens must badly know about. The government is just trying to cover their reputation as the “good guys.” If the true information gets out to the public, then their view of the government may change drastically. We need to know the truth without this fake curtain covering our eyes.

Some people may say that the government is keeping us ignorant for our safety, but this only proves that what they are doing over-seas involve violence and may cause foreign retaliation. This does not sound like our government is keeping our safety their number one priority. As Eric Alterman has documented, historical records prove that governments lie for a variety of reasons. If you are willing to stay ignorant and believe that the person in charge is always right then please continue to sit on your couch and agree with all of these angry politicians complaining about the flow of security leaks caused by Julian Assange.

In my opinion, people shouldn’t be negative and not supportive to any organization that tries to bring more facts to light. Having more information at our disposal can only benefit us. There is nothing wrong with having too much information to make a decision.

If people begin to say that there is just some terrible violence in the world we shouldn’t know about, how do we know that our government isn’t the cause of a majority of the violence in the world? Our government could have attacked a facility or assassinated a political figure in a foreign country for all we know. If these types of operations have occurred in other nations, then we deserve their hate and attacks on our soil. All of these possibilities could have been avoided if we had access to the necessary intelligence that was responsible for our government’s previous actions. Instead, we casually live our daily lives with ignorance, thinking that everything is fine, and are surprised when a terrorist bombs a bus, or an armed foreign militia angrily attacking somewhere in the United States.

For those of you who believe that my point is completely wrong because the only people who could possibly be running our government are fair, intelligent people, then you need to wake up and smell the huge flowers around you. Let’s be realistic, our government is not a shinning knight in armor protecting us from the evil dragon. We are all capable of making our own decisions and opinions without anyone trying to put words in our mouths.

To be frank, human beings are more likely to misbehave if they think they can shield what they are doing from the public view. This is true about everyone, including the people we’ve elected in our governmental positions. For this reason, I believe that if we are truly a democratic society, then we need to have plentiful information to decide or adopt better policies in the future. The goal is to get to the point where the government can’t determine which facts are available to the public and which are classified. Since a democratic society should be free and have enormous information accessible by the public, Wikilieaks is going with the ideals of our Founding Fathers as I mentioned earlier and giving back to the public what should already be ours.

Given the great power the United States possesses, the people who run foreign and defense policies may become drunk with power. They need to know that what they are doing might be exposed to the public, so they can think twice about whether the policies they are supporting or pursuing are correct in the moral and practical grounds. Having access to more important information could have avoided a lot of conflict and violence in the past.

If the information was accessible, then we could have avoided the war with North Korea in 1964 from the Gulf of Tonkin incident or we could of known the truth about Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program before we invaded Iraq. With these many examples and information we are currently learning from the war with Iraq, this knowledge can help us avoid similar conflicts that may devour the lives of many Americans.

If our government, elected officials, representatives, or politicized media won’t tell us about what we already have the right to know, then we need more sources such as Wikileaks to gather and share the information that will prevent us from being ignorant and help us make a better decision in the future. I am personally glad that Wikileaks has the courage to lead this revolutionary revision of how much information the public should know about.

Secrets Don't Make Friends

It is impossible to live as a responsible human within a society without knowing truth. Julian Assange, distributor of the truth, rightfully shares a basic characteristic of truth-whether you like it or not, you cannot deny its presence (and trust me, many a politician have tried. Whoops.) Assange’s brain child, wikileaks.org, is a plethora of highly sensitive information, “sensitive” in the fact that the government will blatantly lie to you. While the media and other figures have negatively viewed Assange, questioning the motives behind his actions, Assange has more notable honorable qualities than negative. Why else would Time magazine place Assange in the running for the Time’s “Man of the Year”? This is because Assange’s main platform, if you will, on promoting transparency is “You have to start with the truth. The truth is the only way we can get anywhere. Because any decision-making based on lies or ignorance can’t lead to a good conclusion”.


It leads to the question, can an ill-informed society produce and elect leaders on issues society is unfamiliar with or better yet knows not of? Not without deceit and not without repercussions. While wikileaks offers a variety of information, some of it fairly useless to the public, the more ground breaking and secretive ones, such as the so called “Collateral Murder”, report the death of the two Reuter news casters who died among of over a dozen Iraqi civilians. The Iraq War Logs, one of the biggest leaks, offer up the truth. Truth in deaths reported, such as the 60% or 66,000 deaths of Iraqi civilians, of the war crimes and torture, of inhumane practices and procedures, and much more. Even if the sources are compromised and the whistleblowers are silenced, it will not bring justice to those who suffer. Their voices should not be silenced. The government is essentially acting as our parents when we were little, tricking us into believing that facade of Santa truly does exist. That is, if Santa went around doing secret operations and killing people before he shimmied his big red bottom down your chimney.

Assuming Assange is a criminal for his cause, let us play the “who said what” game. Who said, “We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.” If you answered Julian Assange, you’re wrong. This is President Obama’s memorandum to the United States stating that the government should be transparent, participatory, and collaborative. Why then is Assange being persecuted for enabling the public to utilize transparency in its purest form when the President himself promises the same thing? Right, I forgot, it’s because at the very bottom of the memorandum it states that the document is basically useless and its only credibility is an empty promise. On December 16, 2010, the government launched the Foreign Assistance Dashboard, a public site displaying how much and on what the State and US Aid has spent on foreign assistance, in order to improve transparency. This is a smart act on the government’s part, seeing as how this site highlights and puts their

achievements on a pedestal (that is, if they are even reporting accurate numbers). If you cannot trust a governmental source however, you need things like wikileaks or transparency.org, a global coalition against corruption, to tell you the truth.

It all breaks down into a metaphor- you don’t break the TV if you don’t like the shows that air, just like you don’t blame Assange for being the medium of information. Rather than blaming Assange, blame the sources (and by sources I don’t mean the whistleblowers). Blame the corrupt politicians and officials who keep the public in the dark or blame the murderers who kill innocent people (because it still amazes me that the difference, and let me be politically correct, between “murder” and “killing”, depends on what side of the fence you’re on).


Assange himself is merely the poster boy of wikileaks, but his presence represents and is symbolic in the sense that he is the face of transparency. Assange behind bars is not just putting a man in jail, but making a global statement against all he represents. Fallacies oppress truth, liberties, promote injustice, and is exactly the thing that is keeping Assange’s trial behind closed doors, away from the public eye, and without the pressure of an unbiased opinion in order to swerve from ethical or moral standards. It is not a secret that his trial consists of more than just a rape charge, but is garnished by ulterior motives. The U.S. Intelligence, specifically cyber counterintelligence and army counterintelligence, planned on destroying Wikileaks by claiming their existence was a threat of terrorism. Other countries aren’t jumping the gun to give Assange a proper trial either, but are simply looking the other way to these proceedings. Even people like Glenn Beck are public about their distaste about wikileaks, but maybe he thinks that by speaking unnecessarily slowly and pronouncing wikileaks as “liki-leaks” will do the trick in order to sway the masses. The fact of the matter is, that the United States does not have jurisdiction to control or shut down wikileaks since it is hosted by a Swedish-based company called PRQ whose policy is not to question, only host. So Glenn Beck, the problem struggles on, how will liki-leaks and Assange be silenced? Apparently not ethically.



Wikileaks is not “anti-American” because it does not just target American intelligence but any global intelligence that may mislead or misguide its people. Assange, originally from Australia, still posts about leaks in his own country, as well as from Germany (which wouldn’t matter to only English speakers anyway since it’s all in German...), Kenya, and several other countries, people, or stories. There are even leaks for (are you ready for this) the cheating Tiger Woods! But really, who is even surprised by this?


The fact of the matter is that the use of transparency is a something used much like how a buffet functions, people pick and choose what they like in order to suite their particular tastes or in this case, beliefs. However, how does one determine what is suitable for the rest of a society since their are so many controversial issues? Not one person has the jurisdiction to decide what is right for the general population to know the truth about or when to lie, and that is why we cannot allow other people to choose the information we are fed, but rather sort through it ourselves to form our own opinion. In order to know what we must do to ensure the wellbeing of our future, we must first take look into the history books. Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany commenced with the genocide of all people of Jewish descent after proclaiming that the Aryan Gene was superior during World War II. Sound familiar? A whole nation brought down by a leader’s word. Such is the power of false information. Things like this will be our consequence if we simply accept and absorb all information given to us without question.

Sources of truth like Wikileaks are necessary in order to keep the power balanced between the people and its figureheads, and people like Julian Assange need to exist to counterbalance and look past all the deceit. The main problem, however, is not that the information is available to the public, but that people tend not to care enough of the truth and would be content being lied to if it were for the sake of comfort and a clean conscious. But how does it feel to know that there a difference between the war that is actually being fought, and the war that is reported by the Pentagon and media? It is important to be aware of the truth and be progressively active and participatory in what is going on in the world around us. Do not be blinded by all you are told and let injustice sway your opinion. As Julian Assange said, “It is the role of good journalism to take on powerful abusers, and when powerful abusers are taken on, there's always a bad reaction. So we see that controversy, and we believe that is a good thing to engage in.” Through controversy, we will enrich our lives by learning the truth and using the truth to make informed decisions.

Julian Assange Corruption

Julian Assange, one of the most

controversial and influential people in the world now…A candidate for Time Person of the Year…Loved by some, hated by more, has changed government politics all over the world since 2006 with the creation of his whistle blowing website Wikileaks. With the leaks of major governmental secrets over the last couple years, Julian Assange has jeopardized public safety to multiple countries because of his attempt to propagate transparency in governments around the world.

Though Julian Assange’s original intentions may have been ethical, they inevitably led to corruption. In Assange’s original Introduction, he states “we as people need to understand and find new technology that will change us…setting us forth above

our predecessors…we need to set forth with a position of clarity to replace the structures of bad governance.” What does he mean by position of clarity? As we know Assange as a child and young adult was know as one of Australia’s most infamous computer hackers, charged with multiple counts by the Australian government for hacking. He criticizes governments for their unethical polices yet he hacked into multiple governmental organizations.

To this day Assange claims he leaks more governmental information then the combined press of the rest of the world, and these leaks? All based completel

y on anonymous tips. So why Assange? Why don’t people leak their tips to other major forms of mass media? Is it a coincidence that a highly experienced hacker is anonymously receiving more leaks then combined press of the rest of the world? His intentions of informing the world by government transparency may be clear…but his acquisition

of this information is still uncertain.

As Wikilinks continues to grow…the effects of future leaks could lead to drastic disruption in major governments around the world. Recently, the Tunisian government collapsed. Many people speculate it was impart due to food price inflation and unemployment. Many also believe the Wikilinks released in regards to corruption of Tunisian’s president Ben Ali had a major role as well. These leaks could potentially lead to a democratic future of Tunisia, but what gives Assange the right to play god with these countries? Controlling the fate of a whole nation, with just one click of the mouse, is too much power for one man.

Julian Assange has stated he will release a “Damaging secrets if killed or arrested”. If these are true, how is he the only person to have these secrets and what gives him the power of God to damage all if he is arrested/assassinated? Many believe there isn’t such a secret out there, that it’s all a hoax…but you don’t want to completely discredit him because of his past experience in acquiring secret information…This sense of fear he evokes in people is more power to him, giving him the ability to drastically effect more people in the world whether they take it as positive or negative information. Many times this causes anger and fear in the people towards the governments.

With the current economic state our country is in, altercations between the people and the government are not what we need. There are multiple issues at hand that the American economy is being effected with right now. We are currently not creating enough goods to sustain ourselves, importing most of our goods, which in turn puts us in great national debt. The real estate economy is currently dealing with the subprime mortgage crisis, which is crippling the US economy. The government passed a law, which lowered the qualifications and credit necessary for home loans. The intentions of this act were good, giving more people the ability to purchase homes…unfortunately these people were never qualified enough to pay for a home…which eventually led them to bankruptcy putting hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure and leaving Fannie Mae in debt of over $5.4 Trillion. This debt will then be passed on too our generation as we grow and current generations pass.

As all this and other things are happening with our economy, our people need to unite with our government to create stability for the future and our generation…not fool around with petty governmental leaks. These leaks create unnecessary tension between people and governments.

Julian strives to release classified information yet some governmental secrets are meant to be classified for public safety. As Julian Assange releases this information, which is directly affecting people and governments around the world…public security is at risk with revolutions occurring and people dieing in the process. Public safety groups put the death toll of the Tunisian revolution at 66 people. These deaths were unnecessarily caused and as Assange releases more information the potential for more unnecessary deaths will increase.

This goes back to the power he has created for himself through is ability to change peoples views. His influence is changing governments and causing death to innocent people. This power can lead to further corruption and social distress.

Americans assume transparency is necessary without understanding the consequences of this act. The truth can be told…but this will not keep the people happy. More often than not, the truth will upset the people and cause up rage and rebellion. We as the people can attempt to change this corruption…but who ever we end up replacing, will inevitably be corrupt in some other way.

American is set up in a system of checks and balances between the government and the people. As Government grows the system of checks and balances tilts too one side and we as the people of America lose some of our power. It changes in exponential proportion…The strong (rich) get stronger and the people (mid-class Americans) become weaker and as we lose this power we lose value of our basis in the American constitution.

As the government gains more power…corruption follows…power corrupts, ultimate power ultimately corrupts. Julian Assange can leak this information of corruption, but ultimately we as the people have only so much power against this new known power of “Corporate America”.

Our country is too the point now where oil barrels are more important than the lives of our citizens. We spend trillions of dollars fighting an oil war in Iraq to support the income of these corporate entities with the false impression we are fighting a war of terrorism.

The public wants the truth, but they plainly can’t handle government transparency. Corruption happens every day from the macro level of government decisions…to the micro level as well. For example, your girl friend asks you if she looks fat in her dress…regardless of how she looks you will tell her she doesn’t just too keep her happy. We lie every day to ourselves to keep ourselves happy. Every human on earth strives for happiness.

Discovering leaks and corruption in our governments are known truths that regardless of what we do will not change, and inevitably will hinder our happiness. We can continue to fund Assange’s website and continue to find these leaks in regards to these government corruptions, but ultimately will it really change us for the better?

Assange is a very smart man, which has granted him a lot of publicity and attention around the world, but his actions are jeopardizing the safety of people around the world.

We as Americans need to accept that there will always be corruption in our governments, no matter who is in office. We must move on and make best of the opportunities we posses each day of our lives. If we ultimately make decisions that could affect other people’s lives, whether it be 1 person’s or 1,000,000 people’s, we must err on the side of popular well being. If you side with greed…well your not the first person to do so, and definitely not the last. Follow your heart, and don’t let the actions of one man…or one government, hinder your god given right…the pursuit of happiness.

Targeted for Termination: Wikileaks and Julian

In an age where the flow of information is more powerful and fluid than ever, there must be vanguards against those who would attempt to stifle and pollute these currents, whether the powers that be like or not. The unfortunate reality for these protectors is that they are on the receiving ends of character assassination attempts, campaigns of disinformation, and plots that ultimately undermine their credibility. How unlikely is it that Julian Assange, a man who in a few short years has punctured numerous holes in the United States' veil of secrecy surrounding illegal military operations overseas and at home, would be the most current target?

The United States government has made no question of their intent in the pursuit of Assange. Senator Mitch McConnell stated that Julian Assange was a "high-tech terrorist". "He's done an enormous damage to our country, and I think he needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," Sen. McConnell said. "And if that becomes a problem, we need to change the law. I think it's done enormous damage to our country and to our relationships with our allies around the world." This statement alone leads to a dangerous path of the government being able to retroactively prosecute individuals under laws that did not exist at the time of the so-called crime being committed. The fact that Senators Joe Lieberman, Scott Brown and John Ensign have put forth legislation that would make Julian's actions illegal (after the fact, of course), when coupled with McConnell's statements are really what draw the line. Newt Gingrich blatantly calling Julian Assange an 'enemy combatant' highlights further that those in power are actively trying to do anything within their power to discredit Assange and brand him in the most wicked of light.

And there are few things more wicked than the act of rape, a charge leveled squarely at Julian Assange in August of 2010 by two women in Sweden. Since the moment of accusation, Mr. Assange has adamantly denied these allegations which were dropped shortly later, the Swedish police citing a 'lack of evidence'. Several months later the case was mysteriously reopened with a new fervor, this time landing Assange on Interpol's Most Wanted List. Rapists walk free every day, yet Assange is wanted by one of the world's most renowned law enforcement branches for a rape case the was once dismissed over a lack of evidence? And what new evidence did Interpol have?

Was it the fact that one accuser, Anna Ardin, had written a '7 Steps to Legal Revenge' including the line, 'For example if you want revenge on someone who cheated or who dumped you, you should use a punishment with dating/sex/fidelity involved.'? Was it the fact that Anna Ardin had boasted about sleeping with Assange the day following the 'rape'? Was it the fact that Anna Ardin only felt it was rape once she realized Assange had also had sex with Sofia Wilen, a friend of hers? Or perhaps it was the fact that the women only went to the police calling it 'rape' after speaking to each other at length about the time line of events and planning their next move. Now, no one is contesting that this wasn't a bit of a dick move on Julian's part, but it most certainly was not rape if they consented to sex.

The issue that rears its head is Sweden's murky-at-best rape laws that constitute everything from 'unlawful coercion' to 'surprise sex'. The grim reality is though Julian Assange may have done absolutely nothing that would even be entertained as rape in the rest of the civilized world, that may not be the case when he has two scorned harpies who want to see him suffer.

Speaking of trumped-up charges, the United States government has made the attempted capture and detainment of Julian Assange a priority through numerous channels. Attorney General Eric Holder stated that Justice Department will seek to prosecute Julian Assange and members of Wikileaks through a probe of the leaks that show a violation of United States law, despite the fact that publishing classified documents that they, themselves, did not steal is not illegal under United States law as previously established by the Pentagon Papers, New York Times vs. United States Government case, which itself has been cited numerous times during this convoluted mess by members of the media.

Offering Bradley Manning, the US soldier who initially leaked the menagerie of documents to Wikileaks, a plea deal if he named Julian Assange as a co-conspirator by the US authorities also has dire implications. Conveniently ignore that no evidence exists that such a relationship ever existed between Manning and Assange, and this would seem like a sticking argument. The problem that arises is that other governments around the world are not as blood-thirsty as the Americans are when it comes to detaining Assange. His home country of Australia concluded that he did not break Australian law by releasing United States documents, much to the chagrin of the United States. Russian Prime Minister and All-Around Man's Man Vladimir Putin suggested that Julian Assange should be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize and that his arrest is undemocratic.

Undemocratic is a phrase that gets tossed around a lot these days, but few things are more undemocratic than the intimidation of private citizens and businesses by the powers that be for information, especially when the availability of private information is what the government is so furious about. Take Columbia University for example. A State Department official "recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter" in reference to the leaked diplomatic cables by Wikileaks. Now, in fairness, the State Department did eventually back-pedal, prompting SIPA Dean John Coatsworth to say the students "have a right to discuss and debate any information in the public arena...without fear of adverse consequences." What's said was said, however. The State Department made their intentions clear with a blatant warning to University students in the 'freest country on Earth'.

And what would freedom be without bullying private businesses? The case of Amazon is a prime example. Amazon hosted WikiLeaks from its servers for a period of time, but once the heat was turned up on the hunt for Assange, Amazon dropped WikiLeaks from their hosting servers. Amazon said that claiming the United States government had some involvement in the dropping of WikiLeaks from Amazon servers was 'inaccurate', but that WikiLeaks had 'violated terms of service' because Amazon requires content "will not cause injury to any person or entity." In related news, The Anarchist Cookbook is still avaiable on Amazon for $17.12 instead of the usual $29.95. And please, take no mind to the fact that no lives have been put in danger to date by the leaks as conceded by the United States government.

PayPal, most famous for butchering eBay orders, was also a part of the blockade against WikiLeaks, also claiming that WikiLeaks was violating their terms of service. PayPal froze the account of a website accepting donations on the behalf of WikiLeaks, stating PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity". Again, the definition of what WikiLeaks has done that would constitute 'illegal activity' is left open to interpretation, but I am most certain that it is far worse than the Ku Klux Klan, who you can still donate to via PayPal. It's worth mentioning that Mastercard, Visa, and Bank of America all acted in a similar fashion, but the irony of PayPal's statements regarding the reasoning and subject were hypocritical to the highest degree and most certainly imply a government hand.

But not every business intimidated by the government gave in. Twitter had a pair. The government issued a confidential order to the social networking site of Twitter, demanding Twitter hand over information on four WikiLeaks supporters. The information demanded included private messages, contact information and the credit card information of Julian Assange, among others. Twitter, instead of bowing out like children, fought the request and was able to rebuke a gag order that the government had placed about the request. It is theorized that similar demands were made of Facebook and Google, but these rumors have not been verified by anyone possibly due to similar gag orders.


But despite how hard the government tries, you can't put a gag order on the whole internet. People the world over have shown throughout this whole incident that they refuse to turn away from a man and an organization that are doing everything in their far-reaching power to show the cruelty and malice this government would hide from it's own people and the rest of the world behind a facade of well-wishing and do-gooding while refueling it's bombers and reloading it's rifles with the delusion that everyone is out to get it. And though 'The Man' may try again and again and again, people will always find a way to make sure the truth is heard.

Breaking the Ties that Bind

Globalization has created a world without borders. We all now posses an ability to experience culture and learn from the values other societies, this was unimaginable even a generation ago. Change takes place more quickly than ever before, and ideas both helpful and hurtful travel as fast as a mouse click. These changes have enabled individuals to amass power which before was only realized by our globe’s strongest governments. “Leaks” sites have enabled the general public the ability to peer into corporate and government secrets. The most notable of which is Wikileaks, run by Julian Assange. Despite the flattening effects that one might initially see, this website works to destroy the progress of globalization and create further conflict.

Wikileaks can be described in many ways, in theory it operates as a media watchdog. The website acts as a catalyst to exposing international secrets, but in doing so it also creates many negative externalities. These include but are not limited to future declines in trade, censorship of the internet, and worst of all the threat of slowing future growth and progress. In its harshest connotation some might feel that this website is a global terrorist. Though many of the documents released threaten the US government most significantly, a decrease in trade or potential conflict can harm the entire globe. We commonly attempt to create scenarios where all boats rise, this is certainly one where all might ships sink. A downfall of the US economy could eclipse the contagious effects of The Asian Financial Crisis many times over. Today’s interconnectedness ensures that profit windfalls and market collapses are felt around the world.

Terrorism is not new, but the power that individuals now hold is greater than ever before. Their actions now have repercussions that none will soon forget. In particular the attacks of September 11^th 2001 effectively destroyed many of the bonds that countries had created. As a result, world trade decreased significantly after years of growth all in the name of national security, undoing many years of increasing cooperation. The combined efforts of many is now at threat from actions of few. Damage to international relations can be just as detrimental as physical terrorism.

Many feel that the work of Wikileaks is treasonous, and by definition they are factually incorrect. Assange is not an American citizen and therefore treason would not be a valid charge, but if we view Assange as a Global Citizen treason might be an accurate claim. Though anyone most would call him a cosmopolitan, his actions run contrary to international progress. No one is better off because of the works published by Wikileaks, if anything we are all worse off. From the downturn in trade that is a result of poorer international relations to the uncertainty that is created as governments threaten to further regulate the internet, the true damage which might result is still unknown. In recent decades physical barriers to cooperation have decreased significantly, low cost air travel connects countries and the fall of the Berlin Wall connected families. There are no longer societies on earth which have not been in contact with modern society. The idea of the small island country working to be self sufficient free from the international market is no longer possible, we are all connected and have the ability to exploit this physical connection to our advantage.

Today we worry that technological barriers which be increased as a result these new leaks sites. In a recent trip abroad I personally saw the effects of China’s “Great Firewall”. Walking outside of the Forbidden City, my travel companions were disappointed to find that they could not research our next destination. Though we can stand foot on a location where brave students attempted to stand up to their oppressive government, we were unable to easily learn more. Tiananmen Square information cannot be easily accessed in China, in an attempted to suppress history the country filters much of what can be accessed by its people.

I feel that Jagdish Bhagwati’s metaphor is exceptionally relevant in this case. In his book In Defense of Globalization. He likens rapid globalizing change to a door which is opened so fast that it slams shut. Assange’s tactics, though with somewhat noble intentions, do nothing but destroy international relations. Rushing into too much far too fast is weakening the ties that we have worked so hard to forge in recent years. World governments are now scared. Talks of internet censorship are becoming more likely to result in future regulation. Just as the doors of globalization have swung open they are now at the risk of slamming shut.

We have reaped the benefits from globalization for years and centuries even. From the time of the silk trade to the bounties of Portuguese explorers such as Vasco de Gama, we have found that our daily lives experience more variety. Simply because you are a German that does not mean you are forced to drink German beer or eat the traditional national cuisine. Rather you are now able to enjoy delicious chai tea with spices from India, or fresh sashimi sourced directly from Japan. Globalization grants us economic stability through interconnectedness, and significant gains from trade that even Adam Smith would blush to imagine. Much of this bounty is at threat from tightening regulations by fearful governments. The spreading of government secrets only stokes these flames threatening future prosperity.

Thomas Friedman’s book The World is Flat goes into detail in explaining how today’s technology has connected us all and how it will continue to become more and more relevant in our exponentially adapting world. His analysis of the current trends is excellent and for time being offers a fairly accurate depiction how individuals are able to interact seamlessly without regard to borders or distance. In one of his articles on Wikileaks he mimics the style of US cables but writes them from the perspective of the Chinese embassy. This satire mocks mock the sheer ignorance of American politics to international issues. If we continue to work against ourselves we will likely find that Lincoln’s words were indeed accurate. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” This is true not only nationally but also internationally. The ties that bind us are more important than ever before. The real problems in our world should not be addressed on national lines, but rather as global issues. More than forty percent of the world lives on less than two dollars per day, this cannot be resolved without unity and cooperation.

If we continue to blindly follow the new mores of free flowing information without first referring to our moral compass, we will continue on a path of destruction. One can only hope that I might be wrong and is this rather a case of creative destruction, though even in this case it would still be at this expense of the US. As individuals and nations beat their chests with intense bravado it is unlikely that true progress will be made. We are squandering the true value of technology, and it is possible that it will be too late for us to realize this. The globalizing value of the internet has been realized many times over, but its ability to destroy international relations is likely to be found sooner than later. Rouge individuals like Assange threaten our future, and their actions are resulting in the separation of us all.