-whatever you think of WikiLeaks, they've never been charged with a crime, let alone indicted or convicted
That's true. It's also true that it's very obvious that they have committed espionage, and are brazenly bragging about it.
-They've been essentially removed from the internet, not just through a denial of service attacks that are very sophisticated, but through political pressure applied to numerous countries.
I say, so what? This happens to terrorist web sites and illegal piracy databases all the time. Hosters and governments have choices about what to ban and what to allow and they've chosen to take this down. I have no problem with that, and it's not the message isn't out and getting out. The papers are printing this stuff on their home pages.
-Their funds have been frozen, including funds donated by people around the world for his - for Julian Assange's defense fund and for WikiLeaks's defense fund.
Again, funds are frozen all the time. It's the banks and the government's decision. They made a choice.
-Leading politicians and media figures have called for their assassination, their murder, to be labeled a terrorist organization
The people doing that are idiots in search of headlines. I don't agree with their calls, nor do I agree with it being covered. It's stupid.
And as a media person, what do you think of the extralegal prosecution of wikileaks as described here:
I've seen nothing extralegal.
If they want to prosecute them, they should go to court and do it through legal means. But this extralegal persecution ought to be very alarming to every citizen in every one of these countries, because it essentially is pure authoritarianism and is designed to prevent the internet from being used as its ultimate promise, which is providing a check on unconstrained political power.
I'd really like to hear your opinions here.
You seem to labor under the illusion that the internet is a plaything and speech should have no restrictions and that information should belong to no one. That's ludicrous, of course. And it's a position that is not supported by law, in America and elsewhere.
Additionally, I wonder how you would respond to news today that hackers are now illegally attacking the corporations, such as Mastercard and Paypal, who are distancing themselves from the leaks. Those companies have a right to make that decision and the fact a bunch of geeks on computers are exacting a puerile 15-year old's kind of revenge on them is further undercutting any claims to moral superiority wikileaks has.
Of course, these people are not officially a part of wikileaks, but then they are the sort who on the one hand are moaning about free speech and liberty and truth -- while at the same time, restricting speech and liberty and ignoring the larger picture of what has happened here. Indeed, the defense of wikileaks sounds an awful lot to my ears like the defenses I used to get from people about their RIGHT to steal music from the internet (some of which were on this site).
The fact the debate, both here and abroad in the real world, is now more about complicated legals issues and media rights all but proves what I have been saying from the start: The leaks themselves are empty, unimportant and little more than a dangerous publicity stunt. All countries seemed to be united against them precisely for the reasons that have been outlined here.
But the anti-everything Lefties, like you quoted, will never attempt to wrap their warped brains around the concept that diplomacy -- which leads to things like trade agreements, cultural understanding and PEACE -- was harmed by these leaks and will continue to be harmes so long as people are encouraged to finger-in-the-eye world governments under some mistaken mission for "truth."
