Is Julian Assange guilty of espionage? good journalism? or something else?

Journalists have used information from confidential sources throughout history to inform the public of information relevant to public interest. This is exactly the same thing Julian Assange has done. Reporters are protected in many states already by shield laws, which protect them from having to disclose a confidential source.So far, an overwhelming majority of the cables do not appear to be made secret in the interests of national security.

The apparent motives for their classified status appear to be political (prevent embarrassment of a politician). Public figures give up a certain amount of privacy due to the nature of their jobs and campaigning. The content of the cables indicates a lack of transparency in the US government, long suspected by many, and revealed by wikileaks.

Also, the cables have had names of diplomats redacted in order to protect them. This is prudent. Wikileaks even asked for the US to assist them in protecting the diplomatic agents from harm or retaliation.

Leaks are always a possibility where there are human beings in an organization, and arguably Bradley Manning would not have chosen to leak documents unless he believed there were objectionable things being done in secret by the government. Bringing the documents to public light and scrutiny was Bradley's method of attempting to correct the situations. This is the usual motive behind those who leak information.

In the opinion of this journalist, the United States is overreacting to the wikileaks situation. Moving forward, it would really be best for people to act politically as if everybody is watching. Perhaps this situation will usher in a new era of more open and transparent political interaction.

Maybe governments can remember some of the lessons we all should have learned in Kindergarten, such as "Think before you act or speak. " and "Treat others as you would like to be treated." and don't forget, "If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all. " Perhaps the real motive behind the persecution of Julian Assange is to maintain secrecy, as the U.S. May be embarassed about bad judgments or actions it has made.

Some people in the U.S. Government are afraid to answer for their words and actions, and this is the ultimate definition of immaturity.It is time for ALL countries to be mature, and own their mistakes (and stop sneaking around in the dark). It is time for the public to take a renewed interest in politics, and hold political leaders responsible for their words and deeds. Wikileaks is merely a convenient way to start it all.

Julian Assange is a journalist by every definition. He and his organization fact check, weigh the consequences pro and con of reporting/not reporting, and redact identifying information of overseas diplomats for their protection. The journalism of Wikileaks is thought out well in advance, and they are being mindful of potential consequences.

Hopefully other journalists and journalistic organizations will come to his support. Unfortunately, certain media companies have a profit motive, and are influenced by the government and corporate interests more than they should be. How journalists frame Wikileaks will largely shape public opinion.

Hopefully, these journalists will remember their roots, and the critical role true journalism plays in a free society. As to the willingness of other countries to turn Assange over to the U.S. , they may want to delay this, as Assange would be likely to release the password to unlock the complete contents of the cables and release this information to the public. It would probably be in everyone's interest to allow the NY Times and the Guardian to release information more slowly to the public.

Assange has likely already considered the potential consequences of his choice to be the public face of Wikileaks, and he probably understands it could cost him his life. If a government or corporation kills him, it will only make him a martyr. They are likely to draw things out way longer than legally allowed.

Ah the price to be paid for true freedom.

I don't think it is espionage or good journalism he was handed this by someone in the military.

He didn't take the material from the military himself, it was leaked to him and he published excerpts. That makes it journalism. The Espionage Act of 1917 was a bad law to start with and certainly should be repealed.It has only be used a few times and those times were clearly abuses.

Much of it has already been replaced but there are still some parts in effect.(18 U.S.C.A. § 793) It's not clear how much of it is actually constitutional and the tests for the parts that have been ruled constitutional are unclear as well. It should simply be repealed, it serves no good purpose and it would be a waste of time to rehash it in court. Many countries would turn someone over for prosecution as long as there was no death penalty threatened.

Others might not, on a case by case basis, because charges under it can amount to a political crime. In this case he is Australian, so he has no obligation to be loyal to the USA government at all. And, he wasn't snooping around the country looking for secret documents, so he's not a spy.

The Russian suggestion that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize is going a bit far, but it's more rational than the right-wingnuts calling him a terrorist.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.