Speaking today on MSNBC in an interview with Cenk Uyguy, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange expressed serious concerns about the Obama Administration’s interests in censoring his website’s publications, warning that the erosion of the First Amendment isn’t going to stop with him.
Speaking of the “quite deliberate attempts to split off our organization from the First Amendment protections that are afforded to all publishers,” Assange cautioned that other journalists should be worried because “they’re going to be next.”
The State Department insisted last week that Assange wasn’t a journalist because he “has an agenda,” though of course the First Amendment guarantees of Freedom of the Press do not include any restrictions to a specific class, nor does US law provide any system to officially license approved journalists.
Assange also condemned the repeated calls by US politicians to assassinate him, insisting that they raised serious questions about the United States as a country dedicated to the rule of law.
Assange also rejected the notion that he was guilty of ‘conspiring” with Bradley Manning, insisting that “isn’t how our technology works” and that he had never even heard of Bradley Manning until he was arrested and had literally no idea who provided WikiLeaks with the leaked classified data.
He did say, however, that most other media outlets covering classified stories do have to deal directly with their sources, and if the publication of the documents was grounds for a conspiracy charge it could be the basis for mass censorship of US media.
17 thoughts on “Assange Warns US Media of Government Censorship Attempts”
The Mod Squad has no evidence, this is another big lie by the PTB.
Mark Thiessen of the Washington Post says that Assange is not a Journalist saying "It is a criminal enterprise. Its reason for existence is to obtain classified national security information and disseminate it as widely as possible…. Wikileaks has leaked information in relation to the Dumping of Toxic Waste and thereby saving the lives of those people that that it was being dumped near.
The State departments arguement is that Assange has an Agenda, Well doesnt FOX NEWS and its sycophants have an agenda "The overturning of the Obama or any Democratic Party Government", and they sure as hell have had released their fair share of Classified leaks, does that mean that immediately after they get Assange they will go after RUPERT MURDOCH, and the advantage is that Murdoch isnt an Australian Citizen anymore he is an American and as such IS subject to the laws of the United States even if he does things overseas.
Look at how the narrative on WIkileaks is bringing self censorship. Is it Business doesn't want controversy or they are just cowards or have a anti democracy political view?
While the government is trying to act brave it seems they are the ones running scared. This interview leaves a lot of questions unanswered in reference to the rule of law in the United States. I believe Huckaby's position on this issue is going to be his undoing.
Assange "wasn’t a journalist because he “has an agenda,” ? Hell. I guess if I used that sort of pretzel logic it means Obama and company aren't representing the American people because…..
Wait. Come to think of it…..
Sadly, Phil Donahue, Montel Williams, Ashley Banfield, etc. etc. etc. have already felt the wrath of the corporate media. Oppose their wars and off TV you go…
Every journalist has an agenda of one sort or another. Let us be honest.
Does that mean if FOX news publishes a leak about Dems or MSNBC publishes a leak about Republicans, then they are not protected by the First Amendment because they are little more than partisan outlets? Of course not.
And because these are TV publications, as are 60 Minutes and Frontline, does that mean they are not protected by the First Amendment? Of course not. So does the new technology of the Internet make it different. Of course not.
Assange should be a hero but the other day I heard a commentator on the syndicated NPR program "On Point" refer matter of factly to Assange's "unusual crime." She did not bother with the usual "alleged." No one contradicted her, but this liberal had already tried and convicted Assange in her mind. And on another NPR program the host mentioned that the media might just "have to hold its nose" and report Assange because the competitors would do it anyway. What kind of journalist is that and what kind of sentiment.
This is all very dangerous, because the strong point of the US is its domestic freedom of speech. This is under severe attack right now – at least as severely as in the McCarthy era.
John V. Walsh
"Crimes" by accusation or crimes by reason of fact? And even if declared a "fact" one need only see who interprets alleged facts as being crimes and wonder if they themselves do not have an "agenda". Pot calling kettle black sort of arguments.
Legitimate though probably simplistic question-why would people who aren't Americans even care about whether the first amendment protected them or not? I mean, why do we seem to be taking for granted that non-Americans are subject to American laws anyway? Julian is not American and I would think he would owe no allegiance to America and be under no obligation to obey American laws as long as he isn't in America.
Bingo! You deserve a cigar for pointing out the obvious. Now if only more Americans would realize the same thing.
Yea its scary to me that most people just take it for granted that the US government has jurisdiction over everyone and everything on the planet. This is a good preview of what a one world government will be like.
About 339 results for "WikiLeaks to publish Israel files on Second Lebanon War, Dubai assassination"
i guess all we can do is wait and see.
When you poke a stick into the "I" of Sauron you'd better watch out. This is where things get interesting.
"…repeated calls by US politicians to assassinate him."
This, and many other quotes, must be repeated over and over again until it sinks in the minds(?) of those who criticize Julian and WL remaining blind on the real threats.
Public disclosure of leaked documents from Iran would be consider a heroism. But from the US, it is a crime, a treason. Why? Just because one Palin or Liberman said so? Would any of them do anything even half-heroic in their lives? No answer needed.
The US media requires no outside censorship because it voluntarily censors itself in order to remain in the good graces of the political regime running Washington and Wall Street. Does the name Helen Thomas ring a bell?
I'm still waiting for the court jesters… aka Big Media, to ask for Clinton's resignation in light of the FACT she advocated criminal activity. Hmmmm?
YeaI thought about that too. I didn't hold my breathe or anything though.
Comments are closed.