Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:00 AM ET, 12/15/2010

Prosecuting WikiLeaks

By Ann Telnaes

Related stories:
--Attempts to prosecute Wikileaks endanger press freedom
--Don't charge wikileaks

By Ann Telnaes  | December 15, 2010; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  National security  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Rep. Boehner cries again
Next: The Afghanistan Report

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:

Comments

Meanwhile, Private Manning is subject to torture and solitary confinement:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning/index.html

'Merica! Beacon of Democracy! Rah rah rah!

Posted by: alarico | December 16, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." From the Novel-1984

Posted by: Taylorsucram | December 16, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

As Americans should we not seek the complete and absolute TRUTH!!! Let no one stand in the way of that. Especially not our Government or the Military. There is nothing unpatriotic about revealing corrption!

freespeechlover~~~ I completely agree with your comments.

Posted by: JONAHandtheFISH | December 15, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Where does one draw the line on freedom of speech? Who will decide what is proper to censor and what is not? Not is the slipper slope of any proposal to control what the people should read, see and hear. A great example happened in China when a leader harassed Google because he did not like what he read when he Googled himself. Another example was Nixon when he created enemies list because he did not like what was said about him! I can understand when lives are at stake or true national security is threatened but who should make the decision?

Posted by: MyVoice3 | December 15, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Well, for those who do not like Julian Assange personally, there's always another answer--the press could do its job. Unfortunately, however, it has been shown to fail at this since 9/11. All the major mainstream media institutions in the US failed and continue to fail the public by being too proximate to political elites. Thus, the NY Times, Judith Miller, Michael Gordon, and the invasion of Iraq. Thus, the difficulty of embedded reporters being able to criticize military leaders and the stupid response to the Rolling Stone article on McCrystal. Thus, the infantile reaction of U.S. reporters in print and on t.v. to wikileaks and the endless defensiveness found in harumping over his not being a "journalist." Oh really? Now, they're concerned about journalism? After they've treated their own profession with cavalier shrugs when asked to reflect on their coverage leading up to the invasion of Iraq?

The village goes on its merry way, repeating mantras about wikileaks, like they've released thousands of cables, in the same way they did about Iraq's supposed WMDs.

If the press was doing its job, wikileaks would not have emerged in the dramatic form and manner it did. Americans in particular with their characteristic self-regard should be glad that something is there to make public what has been kept secret and which we pay for with our taxes and need to know, whether we like being political grown ups or not.

Posted by: freespeechlover | December 15, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Ann, but not this time. The military staff who leaked the info to Assange should be tried for treason & Assange himself, as a foreign national threatening the national security of the U.S. richly deserves to find himself suddenly hooded & riding in the back of a van, never to be seen again. This is not the Pentagon papers, it is not even a leak with any demonstrable purpose to inform the public or expose wrong-doing, it is simply a blind attack on America that we would do well to treat seriously.

Posted by: SageThrasher | December 15, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, prosecute military contractor DynCorp, providers of "boy play" in Afghanistan:

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_helped.php

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/213720

Posted by: alarico | December 15, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I don't know why people who love the first amendment are accused of not loving America.

It seems some conservatives like to skip the 1st and go straight to the 2nd amendment.

Posted by: egc52556 | December 15, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

WikiLeaks hasn't published anything the New York Times hasn't as well. So why should the NYT be protected but WikiLeaks shouldn't?

Posted by: egc52556 | December 15, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

is wikileaks the press...
I think not...
love of country is lost on you...
if she falls...
you will too...
on your knees before your foreign master...

Posted by: DwightCollins | December 15, 2010 7:07 AM | Report abuse

Big shocker that Telnaes, Moore and the rest of liberal America is rushing to the defense of someone who hates America and whose goal is to weaken it.

Birds of a feather...

Posted by: bobmoses | December 15, 2010 6:58 AM | Report abuse

Ann, such a beautiful display of the liberal's selective press freedom outrage. Very nice.

Posted by: billybeer6 | December 14, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Tough Call.
I think that the Leaker is a worthless slimy amoral yellow journalist cretin, but ... Freedom of the Press should remain sacrosanct.

However, I draw the line with the "religious" scumbags who protest gay soldiers' funerals.
There it's a clear case of "Your Freedom Ends Where My Nose Begins". They should be forcibly removed from the area. Their disgusting protests are an infringement on the veterans' family and friends right to privacy!

Posted by: lufrank1 | December 14, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company