Naomi Wolf: Use of Espionage Act in WikiLeaks Case Would Amount to Criminalizing Journalism

[Amerigo Vespucci]

December 25, 2010 06:00 AM
Naomi Wolf: Use of Espionage Act in WikiLeaks Case Would Amount to Criminalizing Journalism

By Heather

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/naomi-wolf-use-espionage-act-wikileaks-cas



Digby has more on this exchange on CNN's Parker Spitzer and Jeffrey Toobin tying himself in knots trying to defend Attorney General Eric Holder's statement that the US government might use the Espionage Act to go after Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, so go read her whole post over at Hullabaloo. I just wanted to highlight something Naomi Wolf said during that discussion on how dangerous it is if the government does end up taking that route.

SPITZER: And back to Woodward, where does Woodward fit in to this?

SHIRKY: So I think that Woodward is not a criminal for publishing leaked documents but I also think that Assange is not a criminal for publishing leaked documents. However, I also, also think that if I'm wrong about that, that the way in which I would be wrong is going through the court system. Not through an extra legal running of WikiLeaks off the network.

The damage to me -- Jeffrey to your earlier point about the slippery slope, the non-slippery slope argument is the State Department has currently committed itself to making it very difficult for autocratic governments to force information off the Internet. And we're suddenly providing not just a recipe but a rationale that's making everyone from Lubchenko (ph) to Kim Jong-il laugh.

TOOBIN: But see, you know, again, this is a slippery slope argument.

SHIRKY: No.

TOOBIN: It is, it is. Because the fact that someone takes United States government documents, secret, no foreign distribution, and says that shouldn't be on the Internet. To say that North Korea shouldn't have a free press, to say that Russia shouldn't allow journalists to -- I mean, I think it is easy to draw a distinction between the two.

WOLF: Jeff, can I talk about the Espionage Act because that's really what's at stake now that they've invoked it. I predicted in my book "The End of America" that sooner or later, journalists would be targeted with the Espionage Act in an effort to close down free speech and free criticism of government. And we have a precedent for that. In 1917, the Espionage Act was invoked to go after people like us who are criticizing the first World War. Publishers, educators, editors. Wait, and people were put in prison. They were beaten. One guy got a 10-year sentence for reading the First Amendment. And that intimidation effectively closed down dissent for a decade in the United States of America.

The Espionage Act has a very dark and dirty history. And when you start to use the Espionage Act, to criminalize what I'm sure you've handled classified documents in your time as a serious journalist, you know perfectly well that every serious journalist has seen or heard about classified information and repeated it. When you start to use the Espionage Act to say reporting is treachery, reporting is spying, it's espionage, you criminalize journalism. And that's the history that our country has shown.

TOOBIN: I recognize there is that history. And I'm familiar with the red scare, too. America is different now.

WOLF: Oh, it's worse in some ways.

TOOBIN: Well, I would disagree.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

1. The First Amendment of the Constitution, is about as respected as the Fourth by our government

[DeSwiss]

2. K&R

Today we use paper proclamations to denote a person's so-called 'rights.' And just like laws, they are culturally biased, artificial concoctions which attempt to solve recurring problems by simply declaring something with words on paper. Rights, in fact, have been invented to protect ourselves from the negative byproducts of the social system itself. And once again instead of seeking a true solution to a problem, we invent these patches by way of paper proclamations in an attempt to resolve them. This does not work. It has never worked. There is really no such thing as an inalienable right outside of the culture in which it is assumed. We are making this up. Therefore liberties need to be inherent in a social system by design not alluded to ambiguously on paper.

In the Bill of Rights of the United States, there is an attempt to secure certain freedoms and protections by way of mere text on paper. Now while I understand the value of this document and the temporal brilliance of it in the context of the period of its creation, that does not excuse the fact that it is a product of social inefficiency and nothing more. In other words, declarations of laws and rights are actually an acknowledgment of the failures of the social design.

There is no such thing as 'rights' - as the reference can be altered at will. The fourth amendment is an attempt to protect against state power abuse, that is clear. But it avoids the real issue, and that is: Why would the state have an interest to search and seize to begin with? How do you remove the mechanisms that generate such behavior? We need to focus on the real cause.

I’m not saying that laws and rights are not needed at this time. They certainly are. But we need to hone our focus toward solving the actual problems. And by the way for all the nationalists out there, I'm not attacking the US Constitution. However, it's not the answer. It's naive to think that this document has that much relevance. I am a fan of people like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, I believe that there is a place for the work that they do. But it's not the answer. The history of America is just like the history of every other country on this planet: It is a history of deception, fraud and corruption. There is nothing to 'return to' for the integrity was never there to begin with. We must move forward, not backwards.

We have to understand that government as we know it today, is not in place for the well being of the public, but rather for the perpetuation of their establishment and their power. Just like every other institution within a monetary system. Government is a monetary invention for the sake of economic and social control and its methods are based upon self-preservation, first and foremost. All a government can really do is to create laws to compensate for an inherent lack of integrity within the social order.

In society today the public is essentially kept distracted and uninformed. This is the way that governments maintain control. If you review history, power is maintained through ignorance. ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPmHaTirnCc">Peter Joseph

- The sleeper must awaken......

[truedelphi]

3. Well, that is probably the whole point.

The Powers that Be wanna kill two birds with one stone.

Over the last forty five years, the CIA has eliminated "real journalism."

With more and more TV stations but with fewer and fewer real owners, and with news budgets in the toilet, most journalists in the Corporate World are covering stories about the tortilla with Virgin Mary's face on it, if it happens locally, then informing us as to what is happening inside the world of the Big Bankers.

[PufPuf23]

4. WikiLeaks is journalism and not espionage.

Think of all the anonymous government officials that leak propaganda or lies?

Or the "paid generals" on cable news? Or CNN having Fort Bragg PsyOps at CNN in Gulf War I? Or be imbedded or have an extremely high death count of journalists?

Recall "Fitzmas"? That was a scam to protect crimes.

Sobering about WikiLeaks is that there are much higher levels of security plus a huge body of compartmentalized, privatized, and sometimes rogue -- of whatever the "official" media narrative and political Kabuki.

There have been few surprises in the WikiLeaks so far for me because I already assumed the truth of the Honduran coup and that POTUS Obama and his administration would not address high level crime in war nor finance. Since I became adult, the USA public relations and intelligence services have distorted finance and war, domestically and internationally, for special and global interests. We had the opportunity to do much better.

The rich need much austerity and fair payment to other citizens for natural resources, infrastructure, education, and environmental costs. The various levels of government should be of appropriate size for conditions present. War and militarization need to be greatly reduced. The destruction of the public commons (wild lands, water, other natural resources, air, ocean, infrastructure, institutions, education) long fought for and necessary for our survival much less the divinity of existence. Etc. Human hubris not in scientists nor mystics but in politicians, crony or class administrators, and the purveyors of religious dogma for power and profit.

Rant. Rant. Peace out on the Holidays. !!