Smoke billowsout of broken windows. A man jumps out of the burning building and soon hitsthe ground, his body unrecognizable. Pandemonium is widespread and children cryas their mothers pull them away from the falling buildings and cloud of smoke.
When all is doneand the smoke settles, sirens and coughing are the only sounds that pierce thehorrible silence. This was the scene of the infamous 9/11 attack against theUnited States by Al Qaeda and we willnow remember the 10 year anniversary of the attacks.
The lives lostthat day are truly tragic however, far too often the true breadth of theattacks is incorrectly calculated. Along with the 2,996 people that immediatelydied from the attacks, tens of thousands of people all over the countrysuffered from the loss of family and friends.
But that isn’tthe full story. Forgotten in the numbers of are tens of thousands killed inAfghanistan (from Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and NATO attacks). Forgotten are theChechnyas that were brutalized by Russia after the attacks. Forgotten are theChinese Muslims in Northwest China that dealt with a brutal crackdown to quelldeclarations for religious freedoms. Forgotten are those that we call“collateral damage” in our efforts to kill Al Qaeda leadership.
Along with thetrauma of the 9/11 families and firefighters comes the trauma of discriminatedMuslims across the country. Children are bullied in school and doctors leavethe country as hate crimes abound.
Incalculable isthe discrimination faced by Europe’s growing Muslim population with bans onreligious food traditions in Greece, religious buildings in Denmark, andreligious dress in France.
The attacks hada much larger effect than we usually assume and we must remember all thosesuffering from the attacks. As we remember the families crying at ceremonies wemust remember that there are Muslim families crying with them.
As we rememberthe buildings ablaze we must remember the buildings burning as Russia used theattacks as an excuse to suppress its religious minority. As we remember thescreams of the families we must also bear in mind the cries of the mothersholding their dead children in their hands from attacks in Afghanistan and manyother places in the region.
The emotions wefeel from the attacks are truly powerful and my heart goes out to the familieswho lost family and friends to the attacks, but it also goes out to the membersof burnt and vandalized mosques in the U.S. and Europe. It goes out to thevictims of European xenophobia and discrimination. It goes out to those barelyable to survive from constant fighting around the world.
The attacksaffected far more than just the 3,000 people that were killed. Literallyhundreds of thousands of people suffered from the attacks and we must neverforget to include them in our numbers.
You can get all these page updates by "Liking" the Facebook blog page! here : http://on.fb.me/hWYYmi or by following me on Twitter! http://bit.ly/fIU3d7 Please Share on your network, email, comment or subscribe!
I haven't posted in a couple of days since I've been moving back on campus (oh Bentely...) and things have been a bit chaotic, the only thing that's calmed me down is Andy Kim's "Rock me Gently". I've also been really interested in writing a piece on Facebook, so here we go:
Social networks have existed since the beginning of man (it could also be argued with animals). From the earliest cavemen to the villagers in early Europe, Africa and more, to what we see today as the "ultimate" social network. (see History of Social network for quick video) One that exists over the internet, destroying boundaries and connecting people that otherwise never would. This ultimate social network is Facebook, and all others that it inspires in the future. Click below, or the title to read more.
Chances are, if you are using the internet (since you are reading this blog), you know what Facebook is. It's the world's largest social network and even if you don't use it (because you live in a cave or are one of "those people" who refuse take advantage of it), chances are, a friend does. I'm not going to bother explaining what it is, because, if you know what a blog is, I KNOW you know what Facebook is (plus based on what I know of my readers you guys are pretty tech savvy). I did find some VERY nice photo essays about Facebook's main headquarters, as well as Facebook around the world.
So aside from constant discussion between friends and family about newest photos on the social network or teenagers bickering of what Mike's boyfriend said about Tina or Lashandra (yes, Lashandra) Facebook comes up in the news almost every single time when it changes anything on the site. I've been on Facebook for almost 5 years, back when it wasn't cool and Myspace was still the place to be. I was mocked, and asked if I suffered some kind of mental disorder for leaving Myspace for some "nothing" website called Facebook. After I joined.... the world followed (I'm not attributing Facebook's rise to me, but well.... c'mon... let's all admit it..). Before I go on a diatribe about how all my friends who previously made fun of my use of Facebook over Myspace, today, have left the site for some time now and can't live without Facebook, let's discuss where controversy lies.
Facebook is a platform. This platform allows us to put things up on it. These "things" are personal information covering everything from your favorite movie, your name, where you work, and photos or videos. Naturally, controversy comes up when there are concerns that the "private" information we put up online is sold to companies for marketing management and it just isn't safe anymore. However, the issue of privacy isn't the only thing that creates controversy. Any changes to the layout or functionality of the website always seems to create massive outrage (and unnecessarily so). Allow me to bash on the commoner for a second:
On the issue of layout and functionality changes. Too many people complain about the "new" changes Facebook makes to its product, so what are these changes based from? Statistics that Facebook collects from it's 500 million active users when they use Facebook. The company tracks ,en masse, how many people use the messaging system, how many people use the "like" button, how many photos are uploaded, etc. Then, based on this information, Facebook adjusts the website to compliment the userbase. In other words, Facebook makes changes to the website layout and functionality based on what people use the most, and how they use it. That's not to say that they haven't taken leaps before, however, every single time they have made a major change to the website (yes there was eruption) it has made Facebook a better product. I can't think of ONE thing that has made it worse.
To those that a newer to the website, you may not appreciate what it used to be like. Simple, yes, but horribly unorganized. There was outrage when Facebook instituted the "Wall," "Like" button, new messaging system (to come), New profile, News Feed, Live Feed, Top News, Facebook Places (mobile only), requirements for basic information, allowing third party applications etc. Yest they have all enhanced our experience on the social network. What would Facebook be without the "Wall" and now-a-days, all you see on the website (and 1 million other websites) are your friends "liking" everything from a photo album to a comment. What would we do without the News Feed where all the news of my friends is neatly organized! Will I have to MANUALLY look through my 300 plus friends to know what's going on in their lives... I'm glad that day is over.
This is a cool video about what happens every 60 seconds on Facebook.
Soon the company will be releasing (to everyone) the new messaging system as well as an automated system to make tagging friends in photos easier; both of which will cause more outrage. Before it happens, I might as well say, that through my experience from the time that Facebook was the new ,but rejected website by most people all the changes to the functionality have only made my experience better. I would DIE if I had to return to the "old" Facebook as it was 4-5 years ago..... *shoulders shiver*
On privacy, I think the issues raised are serious, but again, allow me to say this. You, as a Facebook user, put up (on your own) all your private information on a website that is made for sharing. You accept Facebook's Terms of Use Policy and Privacy Policy without question. (how many people have read that? .. surprisingly.. I have!) You know that Facebook uses basic information you put up to help manage its advertisement business... yet despite all this, you complain when you are afraid that your information isn't private? Yes, Facebook should make sure your private information isn't so easily accessed, but can you blame a company for using information given to it for FREE by the user to make money? I wouldn't. Facebook has, however, adjusted to privacy concerns by simplifying it's privacy settings and giving more specificity of protecting almost every aspect of your account ( I said almost). There are also major controls to allow users to filter out spam in their news feeds in case you don't like what you are seeing. All this put together, if you don't like what they do with the information, don't put it up. (Though some would argue that it no longer isn't a choice)
I will admit, that it looks that Facebook is going to take over the world (I can also make the case for Google). Facebook is rolling out its Facebook Deals for mobile users to earn free stuff and savings by "checking in" to a location such as... a GAP Store or Starbucks Cafe. Facebook has also partnered up with Microsoft's Bing, a Google rival, to personalize the Bing search engine with your Facebook account (this is happening with millions of websites that have the Facbook social plugin like CNN.com or simple like buttons like Mashable.com). Facebook Questions is working to create a massive database of useful information generated by users so you won't have to Google Search anything anymore (A higher quality Yahoo Answers and websites like that).
If you find yourself to be the person always rambling on about the evils of this company, check out this article by TIME about the 5 steps to Facebook Happiness. Also learning some Facebook Status tricks may also please you!
On my last TECH Update, I analyzed the Coporate side of many tech companies. One of those companies was Facebook, click here for that post.
Recently, Facebook has gotten attention after TIME magazine named Mark Zuckerberg as "Person of the Year" over what many assumed would be the winner, Julian Assange. They had an interesting interview with Mark Zuckerberg to understand what he sees about Facebook.
Initially, I , like the rest, was a almost outraged by the choice, but in reading the article written by TIME and all their coverage of him (much of it linked in this blog post), I have to agree that he deserves it. I would greatly recommend reading it, though it does deserve some time since it is 10 pages long).True Jualian Assange had a huge year (for better or worse) with everything he and his organization has done, but so has Facebook. I'll leave the smaller debate for others. I considered writing a piece defending the choice, but, well, as Clarke Gable said in the 1939 movie "Gone with the Wind" -- "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."
I do have some concern (and I don't think it has gotten enough attention) that there is another tech bubble building. With Goldman Sachs' investment into Facebook, the company is valued at 50 billion dollars. Since it isn't a company, no one outside the company and its investors know the expenses and exact revenue Facebook accumulates. It is estimated that the company will go public in or around 2012, but until then, I've seen a massive amount of investment firms greatly investing in smaller tech startups while hoping that theirs will have the "big breakthrough" and become a new Facebook, Google, etc. Because of this eagerness, these firms are willing to invest huge sums of money that are worth more than what the start up is hoping that with its success they will make a profit. This kind of eagerness and valuation as seen with high profile cases with Facebook and the thousands of small start ups points to the fact that unless this slows down, we may be heading to a tech bust similar to the 90s. Here's an article questioning Facebook's value.
Facebook is the ultimate social networking tool, and for better or worse, with such an engineering-style company, it doesn't look like it will die anytime soon (though we can never be certain). It has proven useful to many while being tiresome and scary to others. Although Facebook is the largest social network, some may have noticed that I haven't mentioned things like online abuse or illegal activities that utilize social networking to make our lives worse. Although worth mentioning, I don't think they are a Facebook-specific problem, rather a larger social networking problem that even Facebook is addressing by working with some agencies to filter out illegal activities and decrease online bullying. To Mark Zuckerberg, our lives wouldn't be the same without you, to the commoner who gets mad every time there is a small tweak to the site, you are about to get a whole lot more mad since the site is forever changing, get used to the constant changes.
As I'm rediscovering an Asian girl group that looks too cheery all the time that I feel the urge to punch them in the face while also watching an episode of The Colbert Report, I've decided I should probably put up a post about Tunisia.
The man of the hour is Mohammed Bouazizi, a simple merchant turned Arab World Legend. If you believe that 1 person can't change a country, Tunisia's story may change your mind (although I can point to hundreds of people that have done so throughout history).
It was a bit difficult trying to characterize Tunisia and its political climate. You seen, President Ben Ali (now former president) too control in the 1980s after the incumbent president was determined to be too weak to lead. Since then, President Ben Ali had been elected 5 times to the office with voter turnout being 95% and with victories accouting for no less than 89% of the vote at a minimum. The idea that someone would consistently get over 90% of the vote 5 times in a row to have lead a country for 3 decades is extremely suspicious, however, when revised by African Union observers, the elections were labeled as "free and fair," however, international observers were not allowed. It very quickly reminds me of Mubarak in Egypt and many other dictators who hold elections then change the results so that they win big time. I can't say for myself, but it seems that he may hold the title of President, but is considered a dictator by most.
Mr. Bouazizi in the hospital before he died
Over President Ben Ali's rule, Tunisia has seen a crackdown on internet content, news organizations, and many other freedoms. Life was difficult in a country where you could only be successful if you had connections to the government or were rich. This was not the case for Mr. Bouazizi. One day his cart was taken from him by a policewoman, and even after paying a small fine to get it back, was refused his cart (abuse of power). With his and his 8 children's livelihood on the line, the father sought help from the government, but to no avail. As a result, the desperate merchant committed one of the most heartbreaking, gruesome but powerful protest any human can: Self immolation. He grabbed a gallon of gasoline and drenched himself with it, then lit himself on fire. After being treated at the hospital and soon dying, a revolution began, inspired by Mr. Mohammed Bouazizi. 10 days after his death, President Ben Ali, a long time dictator, fled his country. For a brief history on self immolation (greatly used in Vietnam to protest the horrible South Vietnamese government) click here. For more details about this man and his sacrifice click here.
His self burning has already been simulated in other cities to protest the oppression they live under as well as the limited economic opportunities they have. With the end of a dictator's rule, Tunisia has a chance to establish a road map for democracy. As released diplomatic cables have shown, the U.S. government knew very well about the abuses and corruption in the Tunisian government but still decided to make the President's government a pillar in their African policy. The oppressive government would also get much support by the French government which has sparked protests in France as a result.
It is important to say that the massive protests that led to the toppling of the government were "bread protests;" meaning, protests that were inspired by a lack of "bread" or ability to make a living. With no government, and no thanks to many Western countries, the people's power has helped cause changed just several days after Hillary Clinton told Arab nations to change or "be changed." I believe Tunisia's government has been changed in a way that Secretary Clinton couldn't imagine. Al Jazeera has written a good opinion about Tunisia's "roadmap to democracy" here.
There are many concerns that exist with the stability of the country and its future. Namely that it has been under oppressive government for so long, starting up a truly democratic government will be difficult. What role will the Tunisian army play in a world where military takeovers isn't uncommon?Furthermore, Islamist groups that are empowered by the poor and needed will likely be popular if they advocate reform. These Islamists are the people that the U.S. has used President Ben Ali to oppress in the past. Regardless of who takes control in the democratic system, but what's most remarkable about the uprising in Tunisia, is that it sends a strong picture of "An Arab people demonstrating, rejecting repression, revolting en masse and overthrowing a corrupt, despotic dictator... and the best part, without any foreign help or intervention."This is why this revolution is so important!
There are those that doubt that the revolution will inspire similar successful ones in other Arab or African countries like Algeria or Egypt and they make good points. However, for the Tunisian people, this change is huge and was almost no one could predict it or how quickly things would change:
Of course, the protests were easy. They were met with strong government police force as you can see:
Their struggle is inspiring and should be a reminder to anyone living under oppressive control that all dictatorships end and freedom will take hold. It should be a reminder to all in free societies that the freedoms they hold should never be taken for granted; they should be inspired to push their governments to help create a democratic Tunisia since, as Dr. King once said "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Finally it should be a reminder to all those who oppress their people that economic repression, and the oppression of natural rights are short sighed and can never maintain long term, if any, growth. People acting en masse will always succeed, but sometimes the actions from a man living a tragic life, can inspire a movement that may even be global in scale.
Today I'm going to redirect everyone to Philosophy. I've only taken one Philosophy course (and was stuck with a monotone professor at 8 am) but I've found the entire topic to be so interesting; now I want to share it with you. I want to specifically mention a political philosopher named Michael Sandel. There are several reasons why I want to talk about him: the first being that he has provided a very good answer the most of the skeptics of philosophical discussion; the general argument goes like this: We've spent thousands of years (since even before the time of Aristotle) and have not been able to conclusively solve any of the ethical dilemmas discussed, and if Locke, Aristotle and Kant can't solve them, what chance do we here today have? Who are we to think that we can so easily solve all the problems and perhaps morals are just subjective, where everyone has their own for their own actions and there is no way of reasoning it.
Ancient Philosopher Aristotle
To this most common of arguments Sandel replies, "It is true that these questions have been debated for a very long time but the very fact that they have reoccurred and persisted may suggest that though they're impossible in one sense, they are unavoidable in another... and the reason they're inescapable is that we live some answer to these questions every day. So skepticism, just throwing your hands and giving up on moral reflection is no solution." To compliment his response, Sandel cites the famous philosopher Emanuel Kant: Skepticism is a resting place for human reason where it can reflect upon its dogmatic wanderings but it is no dwelling place for permanent settlement. Simply to acquiesce in skepticism can never suffice to overcome the restless of reason."
It's with this mindset that we should all delve into the world of philosophy: a world where reason wrestles with the circumstances that humans have lived with since our inception.
Political Philosophy Michael Sandel
So who is Michael Sandel? You can find his Wikipedia page here, but to summarize, he is a political philosopher and also a Harvard professor. He graduated college from Brandeis University and then got his doctorate Balliol College as a Rhodes Scholar!!!! (to those that don't know, it's the oldest and most prestigious international award) Also interestingly, he learned under Charles Taylor.. YIKES! (Charles Taylor is also a Bentley University graduate! woo!!). To his current work, as a professor at Harvard, Sandel has taught "Justice," a philosophy course at the university since the 1980s. Over time, he's has 14,000 students go through his class making it one of the most attended classes in Harvard's history. In 2007 alone he has more than 1000 students register for the class. Now, his "Justice" class is being posted online for all to watch and has gotten considerable attention. You can take the semester with 12 videos about 55 mins each challenging your thoughts and reason. If you don't have the time or bandwidth to take all his classes, I would just ask that you take his very first course which will ignite your imagination and force you to challenge your opinions.
Sandel's Classroom
I've watched some 5 episodes and can't get enough. He has my highest recommendation. If you feel that you haven't understood anything in this post because you know nothing about Philosophy, Michael Sandel is famous for his ability to introduce philosophical questions and discussions to the public; at least watch the first episode and enjoy!! If you want to go directly to his Youtube channel, just click the title of this blog.
If you would like to see his TED Talk profile, click here.
I had been following up her story for several years now and decided that it deserves some attention on this blog. For those unaware of her story or that of her country:'s Burma, also known as Myanmar, her name is written Aung San Suu Kyi but properly pronounced as Oun Saan Su Chee; she is also widely called "Mother" or Daw Aung San Suu Kyi which means "Aunt" Aung San Suu Kyi.
So who is she and what's her story? I was reminded (and re-inspired) by TIME magazine's cover and article about her. The title of this post is the title of a very detailed and well written piece on Time.com by Hannah Beech. I would highly recommend reading the article; give it proper time and consideration to really appreciate it. To read the article click here.
One of Mother's most iconic images
Admittedly I'm not fully aware of Burmese daily life or the broad range of movements in Burmese politics, so all I can provide is what I know from following the story over the years and the sources I can provide to give you a deeper insight.
For simplicity, I'll refer to her as "Mother" for the remainder of this post. Mother was almost forced onto the political scene in her life. She was the daughter of Aung San, a Burmese General, Nationalist, who is widely credited with freeing the country from British Rule. Aung San is widely admired because of his role in Burmese independence; six days before the country was truly independent, Aung San was killed (Mother was only 2 years old). For more on her father, here is his Wikipedia page.
Mother's early education was in a English school in Burma but soon moved to India with her mother to attend college (her mother became a prominent ambassador to Nepal and India). She continued her higher education in a college in Oxford and worked for the UN for 3 years in NY before marrying her husband. Mother returned to Burma to attend to her ailing wife years later and would soon be part of the pro-democracy movement. Her husband Aris, became terminally ill but was denied a visa into Burma to see his wife despite international pressure. From her flight to Burma, the pair would never meet again in person as he died in a distant hospital and Mother refused to leave the country for fear that she wouldn't be allowed back in.
A speech in front of a massive crowd of her supporters
Upon her return to Burma, the leading General of the Burmese government had decided to step down. Short after, began was was called the 8888 Uprising in 1988 which were massive protests calling for a democratic government. Mother soon found herself talking to a crowd of half a million protesters demanding fairness in government. From here, her political leadership began. The uprising was soon suppressed and a new junta military government took form.
2 years later in 1990, the junta dictatorship allowed the first national elections. In them, the National League for Democracy, or NLD, won 59% of the votes. The NLD was Mother's political party and movement for freedom. The results were nullified and the military refused to give up control. She has already had several attacks on her life since then. Over the years, the junta has constantly placed Mother under house arrest. Here is a short list, of this list, she has spent an estimated 15 of the past 21 years under the arrest.
Periods under detention
20 July 1989: Placed under house arrest in Rangoon under martial law that allows for detention without charge or trial for three years.[45]
30 May 2003: Arrested following the Depayin massacre, she was held in secret detention for more than three months before being returned to house arrest.[57]
25 May 2007: House arrest extended by one year despite a direct appeal from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to General Than Shwe.[58]
24 October 2007: Reached 12 years under house arrest, solidarity protests held at 12 cities around the world.[59]
27 May 2008: House arrest extended for another year, which is illegal under both international law and Burma's own law.[60]
11 August 2009: House arrest extended for 18 more months because of "violation" arising from the May 2009 trespass incident.
In 2007, Buddhist monks led national protests in light of higher gas prices but soon the movement turned fro human rights and a fight against government abuses. Mother shortly showed up at the gate of the complex she had been kept under house arrest for sometime greeting and showing support to the monks in their struggle.
A brief show of support over her house gates
In 2009, some idiot named John Yettaw, former U.S. Army man swam across the lake onto Mother's property because of what he called a "divine message to warn her of an impeding attack." For the violation, Mother was sent to Insein Prison (a prison for political enemies of the state) and could have faced up to 5 years of confinement. The idiot was saved by negotiator Senator Jim Web. Mrs. Suu Kyi was sentenced to 3 years of imprisonment and hard labor, but the decision was commuted by the junta to 18 months extension of house arrest.
In 2010, the Burmese government set up a rigged election which allowed Mother to temporarily leave her house arrest to organize her party (though she, herself, wasn't allowed to run) as a constitutional amendment banned it. the NLD refused to partake in the election and the junta retained power.
On November 13 2010, as promised the military junta released Mother from her house arrest. Since then, this democratic leader has worked quietly amongst her people to make their lives better. Her constant declaration of nonviolent resistance has garnered international support and accolade. Over the years, through her years of confinement and relative freedom this icon of freedom has won the Congressional Gold Medal (US), Nobel Peace Prize (1991), Prize for Freedom, Honorary Canadian citizenship (one of only 3) as well as numerous awards for peace, human rights, and nonviolence.
Pictures like these are said to be secretly held as support by most of the Burmese
She has garnered international calls for freedom
Dozens of Nobel Peace Prize winners have showed their support for her struggle as well as resolutions from more than 80 nations in the UN and beyond declaring their support for her efforts.
For a more in-depth look at her life, see her Wikipedia page here. Aung San Suu Kyi has become more than just a symbol of freedom. Her stance in our world has matched those of Gandhi, Dr. King, the 14th Dalai Lama, and Susan B. Anthony. I was tempted to place it next to an international icon of peace: Nelson Mendela, but he has a violent side to his movement.
You can find more pictures of her and the movement in Time's slide show.
I can't properly word how highly regarded she is, so I will end this as the Committee explains their decision to award her the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize:
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 1991 to Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar (Burma) for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights.
...Suu Kyi's struggle is one of the most extraordinary examples of civil courage in Asia in recent decades. She has become an important symbol in the struggle against oppression...
...In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 1991 to Aung San Suu Kyi, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to honour this woman for her unflagging efforts and to show its support for the many people throughout the world who are striving to attain democracy, human rights and ethnic conciliation by peaceful means."
—Oslo, 14 October 1991
An older Time magazine cover of her return
See the story of capturing her essence for journalists in Burma here.
With all that has been going around with who I would call a true "International Man of Mystery," there is no way I was going to avoid the subject. But a quick recap for those who don't know much about Julian Assange and Wikleaks (I'll bullet them, so if you know all this, just skip over to the paragraph):
Basically Wikileaks is an international nonprofit organization that accepts, verifies, and publishes submitted documents via it's website and media partners, most notably the NYTimes (at least here in the U.S).
It was started by Julian Assange in 2006 and within it's first year has close to a million documents sent to it.
Wikileaks NEVER asks or knows who sends the information. The intent of the person is irrelevant if the documents are real. In 2010 it made national news when it released a 2007 video of U.S. forces killing Iraqi civilians and 2 Reuters reporters.You can see the full clip uncut and unedited here and a shorter version here.
In the same year Wikileaks released what is called the "Afghan War Logs" which is 76,900 documents about the U.S. involvement in the Afghanistan that weren't available to you and I previously.
In October 2010 it released some 400,000 documents called the "Iraq War Logs" that detailed much of the undisclosed information of the war effort in Iraq.
Finally, as of November, Wikileaks has just started releasing another 250,000 diplomatic cables that detail everything from UN relations to those between Russia and the U.S. or about different conflicts in the Middle East. All these can be seen (and downloaded if you really want to) at their website: Wikileaks.
So they are releasing these newest cables (at a horribly slow pace) to the world via their website as well as partnerships with different media partners. I won't go on about how they verify their documents but here is their own description of the process.
If you want to know more details about them to go their Wikipedia page or from their own "About Us" section on their website.
Having a better understanding of the organization, we now have the U.S. government and Sweden looking to destroy the organization because it keeps on leaking things. Why Sweden you ask? Julian Assange likes to say that the party in power and "certain leaders" are his enemies and instigated "rape charges" against him simply to get rid of him. This wouldn't be the first time that the leader of Wikileaks is under attack and has been on the run from governments; it is in his line of work. Since then, Interpol put out a red warning for the capture of Assange for the allegations. Although I'm always used to taking the side of the rape victim first, the facts seem suspicious. I won't comment further on those allegations.
The biggest issue here and now, is if Julian Assange is extradited to the United States does the Justice Department have a case against him to be sent to jail. If my legal study tells me anything, simply accepting stolen material than publishing it is perfectly legal under the Espionage Act as shown by the Supreme Court case New York Times v. United States. The Justice Department is searching to find out if Wikileaks in any way solicited Pvt. Manning (the alleged person who leaked the documents) to give them the information and break the law. If so, they can be persecuted under the Espionage Act. Furthermore, some fear that Julian Assange has talked his way into being applicable to the Act.
This all should be very interesting to watch especially when you realize that this is all history in the making. How it will end will affect generations to come in the legal applications of the Espionage Act, the explosion of whistle blower websites like Wikileaks, and our image of transparent government.
