Wikileaks has been in the spot light because its purpose and following raises many issues. Although there are many aspects to this issue that make it controversial, such as national security, what it really comes down to is the fundamentals of our government. If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the first amendment and the independence of the internet? Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on Wikileaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy than it is about national security? There is a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in a time of declared war, which is treason, and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death and corruption. Assange has the right to have Wikileaks and continue to publish information on his site because he isn’t targeting an enemy and what he is doing is not treason, but rather something nobler that gives checks and balances to our government and others.
Patriotism is something that we should ponder in order to better understand what wikileaks is doing. However it is also what defines both sides of the argument. It seems, if you consider yourself a patriot, Assange is doing something that is putting national security at risk, and that risk alone is enough for our government to step in and do something. On the other hand, was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it is wrong? Assange isn’t even trying to rebel against our government, more so he is using our principals in government (The 1st Amendment) to publish information that exposes the reality of our government and its decisions.
Governments want to get there hands on Assange badly, to stop what he is doing, because he is exposing the dark side of government and because of that he shows weakness within it. The better question is - Why is hostility even directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our government’s failure to protect classified information? What all governments need to do, in any case, is to re-examine what should – or should not – be marked as confidential or secret. Governments are accountable to people, not the other way round, and therefore they must become more transparent. They need to make a case to the people why certain things are confidential, instead of marking every document as confidential.
The predicament that Assange has procured is now something that despite all his allegations (for Sex crimes in Sweden, where there rules are much more strict) and the controversy of Wikileaks. He is doing something contemporary that restricts government more and gives the people more power. He has the right to do this, because we should have the right to know what our government is doing. He should not be under pressure of limited of his right just because governments are afraid of information being seen.
"The WikiLeaks Controversy - Hurriyet Daily News." Hürriyet Daily News Bringing Politics, Diplomacy, Economy News, the Official Web Site of the Newspaper HDN. Web. 12 Nov. 2011. <http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=the-wikileaks-controversy-2010-11-30>.
"THE WIKILEAKS CONTROVERSY: WHAT’S THE TRUTH?…;)." Project World Awareness. Web. 12 Nov. 2011. <http://www.projectworldawareness.com/2010/08/the-wikileaks-controversy-whats-the-truth/>
"Nine Questions about Wikileaks." Rainy Day Patriots. Web. 12 Nov. 2011. <http://www.rainydaypatriots.org/profiles/blogs/nine-questions-about-wikileaks>.
No comments:
Post a Comment