Assange Vs. Libby

[iamjoy]

Why is Assange a hero for releasing confidential information but Scooter Libby a scoundrel for outing a CIA agent?

I haven't been following this too closely, so I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on the matter. If spying/secrets are a bad thing, where do we draw the line?

[niyad]

1. well, libby worked for the govt, assange doesn't

[DisgustipatedinCA]

6. Right. Libby not only worked for the government

He had access to Top Secret information. Assange is only dealing in Secret, so far as I know. Anyway, Libby had Top Secret information, and he used it to blow the cover of an active CIA operations agent, putting lives at risk.

Assange: not a US citizen, not working for the US Government's Executive branch. He didn't have permitted access to Top Secret information. The information he's released hasn't brought harm to anyone, at least according to recent reporting.

It is not possible for an Australian citizen to commit treason against the United States of America. But treason is precisely what Scooter Libby committed when he blew Plame's cover.

The differences are pretty huge and obvious.

[iamjoy]

7. But Who Is His Source

perhaps Assange to Novak would be a better analogy.

My question is more about the information rather than the person. Why is wikileaks ratting out the sausage making of diplomacy good, but exposing an undercover agent bad?

[NuclearDem]

2. When information's released to punish someone for dissent, it's wrong

When it exposes war criminals, I'll let it pass.

[Capitalocracy]

15. Makes me wonder why people ask this question.

The answer seems so obvious. (No offense to the OP). Ever heard of something called context?

Also, to add a little more about why it's different, the Bushies put someone's life directly and deliberately in danger, where Assange has taken care not to include anything that would put people in danger. And the government is abusing its power by classifying anything not related to national security. We have a right to almost all if not all of this information.

[ProudDad]

3. Motive

Libby/Cheney did it to destroy the truth by showing Mr. Wilson, the source of an inconvenient truth exposing bush/cheney lies trying to start a war, how fucked-up evil they could be...

Wikileaks is releasing documented Truth to expose and maybe halt the crimes being done under the secret cover of the USAmerican Empire...

BIG FUCKIN' DIFFERENCE!!!

[Swamp Rat]

4. and MC Rove

[LostInAnomie]

5. Some DUers hated Libby, but they love Assange.

See the difference!?

[ProudDad]

8. Facile (n/t)

[LostInAnomie]

10. Yes, they are.

[ProudDad]

16. Edumacate yourself...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9657585

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Jesus H Christ, you live in a binary simpleton's world

Not everyone's thought processes are as....well, skip it. OK, the OP asked about differences in Assange and Libby in the eyes of DU'ers. Your answer doesn't make sense at all. Say what you mean--riddles aren't working out for you. Get to the point, why is it that some DUers hated Libby, but love Assange, in your estimation?

[JVS]

9. Assange didn't release it, Manning did. Assange is the equivalent of Judith Miller.

[bemildred]

12. Libby outed an active CIA agent, deliberately, as payback. nt

[peacetalksforall]

13. Libby was being paid by American ciitizens and he broke the law

and took the fall for his political friends. He brought down Brewster-Jennings for the purpose of closing down the investigations of nuclear weapon trade by his boss and other weapons dealings that were intelligence and profit driven as well as set-ups.

Assange is not working for the American citizens. He doesn't represent political buddies that we know about.

Libby knew the gains would serve a few. We learned plenty, but not enough about manipulations surrounding steps that would allow earth resources to be extracted and owned by friends, the war industry for weapons to be tracked and exposed, and for friends to profit off another war.

Assange wants to expose truths, but its definitely too early to say that. We don't know that he wasn't working for someone. In piecing it together, we'll learn alot about manipulation. If not worse.

So far there is no clue about wealth for himself, he hasn't done it for the multi-national corporate rulers (that we know of.

The revelations cross borders. So far his goals seem more altruistic and he doesn't take things out of the ground and get rich by them and doesn't make his friends rich. His goals don't involve regime changes, that we know of. He hasn't spilled blood. That we know of.

[Luminous Animal]

14. You do understand, don't you, that Libby broke the law, Assange has not.

If you need to make a comparison, it would be between Manning and Libby.

[ProudDad]

17. Here's a thread that answers your question very well...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9657585