Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikecane | Hacker News Reader

If the State Department were to declare Wikileaks illegal, would that make everyone holding Wikileaks Insurance an Enemy of the State?

View on HN

Luckily, the State Department doesn't have the power to declare something illegal. Please stop adding to the hyperbole of the already heated reactions.

If by something you mean "act", well, they do, it just has no legal effect.

On the other hand, they do have the power to declare organizations terrorists. This is 8 USC 1182, thanks to the patriot act.

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/list/

Feel free to add me to that list.

I'd say that's a pretty safe bet.

If this be treason, make the most of it. -- Patrick Henry (who might not have actually said it, depending on which source you go to, but the sentiment stands nevertheless)

Julian Assange is no more subject to US law than a US citizen is subject to Iranian law.

US citizens are most certainly subject to Iranian law. Just try to commit a crime there and see what happens.

Note: I am not a fan of Assange. I think his indiscriminate leaking of everything, however inconsequential, harms the whistleblowing process and makes it all too easy to gloss over the real abuses exposed.

But he has not committed a crime in the US. Even if disseminating state secrets is a crime (and the jury's still out on that one, to boot) he didn't do it here.

Would you bet your freedom on that? I haven't seen the dude strolling about in the States...

He's going to pay a big price for his academic experiment. The US government has justifiably killed people over less serious attacks, and citizenship has nothing to do with it. And that's before you get to what has been done without justification (look up Ruby Ridge). When you pick a fight with a giant, you can expect to lose.

Justifiably or self-justifiably? In these days of warrantless searches, crotch invasions, and GPS tracking, it seems "justifiably" lacks the "justice" part. You know, that safeguard called the court. The CIA, for example, was prevented from foreign assassinations after the Church Committee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_committee

[typo edit]

Oh don't get me wrong, I fully expect the US to do... interesting... things to Assange. Still doesn't mean they have a legal case around it, though.

The best they have on him are questionably well-timed sex crime charges.

That's the fascinating part to me. He's operating in this international legal grey area, all the while behaving as if the law will protect him.

He's got the insurance file, though, which sounds like he's not entirely counting on the law protecting him.

And I'm fairly certain the law is fairly low on the CIA's radar of priorities.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com