With Cannons and Paragraphs

An Internet activist with dubious motives about the pursuits of Washington has stepped up to be the martyr. So far America has responded, with strong words, to the WikiLeaks releases, and it is now looking to make Julian Assange face its judicial system.

The sometimes-hated party divide in Washington rarely reaches American diplomacy, and certainly never the armed forces. At home, the Republicans and Democrats squabble over every effort; outside, in the rest of the world, American diplomats and soldiers usually join forces, working in concert with one another. These “brawny” foreign and security policies, through which the United States pursues its national interests, usually bring about the desired result: The young nation became stronger and stronger, and today is still no longer weak.

In the fight over the publication of the classified and classified information from the Pentagon and the State Department, through the investigative website WikiLeaks, the reigning Democrats have, just like the opposition Republicans, equally supported the fight against the Australian WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange, but this has weakened Washington’s position overall.

The Current Strategy Failed

There is a consensus among American commentators that the heavy reactions from Washington to the revelation of the field reports and dispatches through WikiLeaks have caused more damage than the actual content of the classified reports themselves. An Internet activist with dubious motives moved from being under the loose control of Washington to a sitting martyr of the Internet age, and meanwhile President Barack Obama has just revamped the “empire,” which has again showed its ugly head. Deranged politicians and journalists shrilly call for the U.S. to chase down Assange like a terrorist or simply let him be killed.

There is some evidence that the government knew beforehand that they would accomplish nothing with their current strategy in the war against Assange and WikiLeaks. If the State Department, credit card companies MasterCard and Visa, the pay-platform PayPal, the Internet company Amazon and the banks seemingly bring to an end their business relations with WikiLeaks and Assange, this then captures a global audience. Naturally, they expect a fight in the manner of David versus Goliath.

Trial of Likely Source Has Yet to Occur

In addition to that, even the possible source of the WikiLeaks classified information so far must be held as innocent because the trial against him begins early in the new year. The 22-year-old Army Corporal Bradley Manning, who served as a member of a reconnaissance unit in Iraq since the middle of 2009, is supposed to have downloaded classified information from the Defense and State Departments. He accessed the information through service computers. Manning has waited in the Marine Corps Brig. in Virginia since July for his trial by military court martial. He is accused of disclosure of secret information and copying of secret information. Manning, who is defended by a court-appointed attorney from the Army, denies the claims and hasn’t cooperated with the military investigators.

How to Instigate the Betrayal of State Secrets?

On Thursday, the Justice Sub-Committee of the House of Representatives reported on the WikiLeaks incident. Attorney General Eric Holder and his investigators banged their heads together for weeks about how to legally prosecute Assange and WikiLeaks. The basis for a likely charge would be the Espionage Act from 1917 and the Computer Fraud Act of 1986.

While treason and theft of classified information can be punished, the publishing of such leaked documents through the media is protected by the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and press: No journalist has ever been prosecuted on the grounds of the “Espionage Act” of 1917.

Therefore, Holder’s investigators are attempting to prove that Assange aided Manning with the betrayal of secrets through direct communication and made this possible through technical means. That means that Assange also is a co-conspirator — different than the newspapers and magazines, who fall under the protection of the freedom of the press, that published the documents released by WikiLeaks.

So, WikiLeaks has preemptively changed the entries on their website so that no more secret or confidential information will be revealed. The contributors to the website will now be called “journalists,” and the site will broadcast “news” instead of secret information. The American media reported on Thursday about the call for information from the Justice Department about bringing a charge of conspiracy against Assange. That would begin the long and hard — but ordinarily fair — process. But this would be a loss for Washington. This is different than the normal political-life cannon fire against Assange because it is not an entirely hopeless affair.