WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to his homeland Australia aboard a charter jet on Wednesday, hours after pleading guilty to obtaining and publishing U.S. military secrets in a deal with Justice Department prosecutors that concludes a drawn-out legal saga.
The criminal case of international intrigue, which had played out for years, came to a surprise end in a most unusual setting with Assange, 52, entering his plea in a U.S. district court in Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands. The American commonwealth in the Pacific is relatively close to Assange’s native Australia and accommodated his desire to avoid entering the continental United States.
Assange was accused of receiving and publishing hundreds of thousands of war logs and diplomatic cables that included details of U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. His activities drew an outpouring of support from press freedom advocates, who heralded his role in bringing to light military conduct that might otherwise have been concealed from view and warned of a chilling effect on journalists. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.
Assange raised his right fist as he emerged for the plane and his supporters at the Canberra airport cheered from a distance. Dressed in the same suit and tie he wore during his earlier court appearance, he embraced his wife Stella Assange and father John Shipton who were waiting on the tarmac.
It’s a bit more than embarrassment. Some of what he exposed was absolutely just corruption. Other leaks directly compromised confidential war and spy intelligence. There had to be consequences for the latter.
it was a deliberate understatement for comic effect.
Still, though, 12 years is only considered proportionate because the the government sets the law and the government was embarrassed.
Its not a complete defence of Assange, his behaviors, his sketchy connections to Russia - but it is me saying that whistle-blowers are disproportionately published not because it’s in the public interest
I disagree that embarrassment was the motivation.
Leaking the details of classified foreign intelligence operations is considered espionage or treason. Those are not small crimes.
According to the Espionage Act of 1917, he could have been executed. Imprisonment is standard, but 12 years is far better than the maximum of life in prison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage
This is speculation by the US, they were never able to prove this.
Yes but you’re saying “it’s a big crime because the people who stand to benefit from it being a big crime say it’s a big crime.”
While I’m not saying all and any espionage/treason is good, I’m asking why one would think these memoranda are worth more than human life?
Were they? Would the world be better off with Assange dead?
For the operatives put in danger and/or killed, it was worth human life?
You seem to be ignoring that Assange either knowingly or unknowingly risked peoples’ lives, people who had often given those lives into great risk in service of their country.
When the leaks first happened, I was supportive of Wikileaks (a natural position for an anti-war person like me). Later, when it was revealed that there had been no or little due diligence to ensure the information had been vetted and scrubbed, I realized how extreme it can be on both ends of the political spectrum.
Stop trying to paint this with some large political brush.
Assange is not a hero. The US government is not innocent.
Ah yes the poor innocent Cia agents
In service of their country? Did the US make them US citizens?
Because most US informants were working against their countries in some cases even after the US invaded.
Risk, yes, but we know now that no one was hurt. It’s very different when you know what the consequences are.
The intelligence leaks were via media outlets that didn’t sanitize the publications. It was up to them to do what was needed on that front. And in the end, nobody has shown that those failures to censor information had anything like the consequences to intelligence assets that Libby/Cheney’s leaks had.
He created Wikileaks and personally hosted classified information. The release of the unredacted Afghan War Diary directly resulted in the execution of Afghani informants.
https://wikileaks.org/
Source on the executions? I found that informants were named and when warned that this could result in their deaths Assange basically said, “lol, snitches get stitches.”
That said, I couldn’t find anything about the informants actually being executed.
See “Informants named”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_documents_leak_of_the_War_in_Afghanistan
So, to clarify, since zero deaths are listed there—we don’t have a source for that claim?
Exactly my point; there have been no deaths attributed to these leaks by any credible source other than an administration that has variously tried to frame, imprison, assassinate and astroturf Assange, that is directly implicated in warcrimes and has done it’s own leaks of intelligence assets that are actually provably murderous.
This is how this whole thing has gone since the start. We still have a group that’s inconsolably upset that Wikileaks exposed their nomination tampering, and will move the goalposts at every turn that shows Assange was on the right side of history.
The Insurance section on that article is extremely interesting. I wonder if/when we will be able to crack into that potential treasure trove. But maybe it’s just 1.4GB of a picture of Julian’s asshole