The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Julian Assange, The Rosenberg Case and the Espionage Act of 1917

Julian Assange, The Rosenberg Case and the Espionage Act of 1917
Posted by Marcello (Guest) georgiomalik@yahoo.com - Thursday, December 30 2010, 10:39:30 (UTC)
from 71.104.223.183 - pool-71-104-223-183.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net Network - Windows XP - Internet Explorer
Website: http://us.mg1.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.gx=1&.rand
Website title: Redirect

Julian Assange, The Rosenbergs
and the Espionage Act of 1917
by Robert Meeropol

Rumors are swirling that the U.S. is preparing to indict Wikileaks Julian Assange for conspiring to violate the Espionage Act of 1917. The modern version of the act states among many, many things that: "Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States" causes the disclosure or publication of this material, could be subject to massive criminal penalties. It also states that: "If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions ... each of the parties the parties to such conspiracies will be subject to the punishment provided for the offence which is the object of this conspiracy." (18 U.S. Code, Chapter 37, Section 793.)

I view the Espionage Act of 1917 as a lifelong nemesis. My parents were charged, tried and ultimately, executed after being indicted for Conspiracy to Commit Espionage under that act.

The 1917 Act has a notorious history. It originally served to squelch opposition to World War I. It criminalized criticsm of the war effort, and sent hundreds of dissenters to jail just for voicing their opinions. It transformed dissent into treason.

Many who attacked the law noted that the framers of the Constitution had specifically limited what constituted treason by writing it into the Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort" (Article III, section 3). The framers felt this narrow this narrow definition was necessary to prevent treason from becoming what some called "the weapon of a political faction." Furthermore, in their discussions at the Constitutional Convention they agreed that spoken opposition was protected by the First Amendment and could never by considered treason.

It appears obvious that the Espionage Act is unconstitutional because it does exactly what the constitution prohibits. It is, in other words, an effort to make an end run around the Treason Clause of the Constitution. Not surprisingly, however, as we've seen in times of political stress, the Supreme Court held its validity in a 5-4 decision. Although later decisions seemed to criticize and limit its scope, the Espionage Act of 1917 has never been declared unconstitutional. To this day, with a few notable exceptions that include my parents' case (read more about the Rosenberg case at http://www.rfc.org/therosenbergcase), it has been a dormant sword of Damocles, awaiting the right political moment and an authoritarian Supreme Court to spring to life and slash at dissenters.

It is no accident that Julian Assange may face a "conspiracy" charge just as my parents did. All that is required of the prosecution to prove a conspiracy is to present evidence that two or more people got together and took one act in furtherance of an illegal plan. It could be a phone call or conversation.

In my parents' case the only evidence presented against my mother was David and Ruth Greenglasses' testimony that she was present at a critical espionage meeting and typed up David's handwritten description of a sketch. Although this testimony has since been shown to a be false, even if it were true, it would mean that the government of the U.S. executed someone for typing.

But the reach of "conspiracy" si even more isidious. It means that ANYONE with whom my parents could have dicussed their actions and politics could have been swept up and had similar charges brought against them if someone testified that those conversations include plans to commit espionage. Thus, the case against my parents was rightly seen by many in their political community of rank and file Communist Party Members as a threat to them all.

Viewing the Wikileaks situation through this lens, it becomes apparent why the government would seek to charge Assnage with conspiracy. Not only Assange, but anyone involved with the Wikileaks community could be swept up in the dragnet. Just as my parents' case, the prosecuters could seek to bully some involved into ratting out others, in return for more favorable treatment. This divide and conquer approach would turn individuals against each other, sow the seeds of distrust in the broader community, and intimidate others into quiescence.

This kind of attack threatens every left wing activist. I urge all progresives to come to th defense of Julian Assange should he be indicted for violating the Espionage Act of 1917.


Robert Meeropol is the younger son of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. In 1953, when he was six years old, the United States Government executed his parents for "conspiring to steal the secret of the atomic bomb."



---------------------


The full topic:



Accept: image/gif, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave-flash, */*
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?.1Uar.
Accept-language: en-us
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6.3; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; yie8)
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Content-length: 5483
Connection: close
Cache-control: no-cache
Cookie: *hidded*



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9