It's about freedom of information, not expression

All over the world, governments, journalists, editorial writers and the media in general have proved exactly that which the WikiLeaks organization set out to prove: mass ineptitude.

Tom Oleson's column Assange is no Solzhenitsyn, or Liu (Dec. 12) displays exactly this. Oleson waxes about the possibility of Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, obtaining his personal emails and phone calls, repeatedly asserting that Assange is doing the world, politics and diplomacy no good, and calls his backers "brainless."

Oleson's opinion is based on a foundation of factual errors.

We can start with the fact that WikiLeaks operates on a submission basis and does not seek to hack or illegally obtain documents. Oleson could have found that out by using Google, but instead worries that Assange might leak his email. He could have checked the WikiLeaks web page, where the entire philosophy behind the organization is available for all to see and read.

He might have discovered that this is not, at all, about freedom of expression. WikiLeaks provides the platform for "freedom of information" to everyone, and not just certain parties.

We are able to see for ourselves and learn of the United States government's gross misconduct and blatant war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. And it was all due, if found guilty, to one Private First Class Bradley Manning. It is Manning, not Assange, that should be compared to Solzhenitsyn. To ignore this obvious comparison is troubling.

Manning has been placed in solitary confinement and faces up to 52 years of prison if found guilty of providing the information that became known as the Afghan Diaries, Iraq War Logs, and U.S. Embassy Cables. This is not including the death threats, and calls from politicians abroad for his execution on the basis of treason.

Manning is America's modern-day Daniel Ellsberg. Some have called his actions treason, but there is nothing treasonous about exposing war crimes.

Within the Iraq War Logs lies the media story of the year: FRAGO 242, the U.S. Army's operational directive to ignore witness reports of torture. Within the same logs lies the second media story of the year: the Iraq War body count, which the Pentagon has denied the existence of since the start of the Iraq War in 2003. And within the U.S. Embassy Cables lies the third media story of the year: that Hillary Clinton signed an order authorizing the acquisition of biometric data and credit card numbers from UN Leader Ban Ki-moon.

Members of the media have characterized WikiLeaks revelations as "drowning us in useless facts." This, however, is precisely what WikiLeaks aims to accomplish.

They are not the ones to decide which facts are important and which are not. Rather, simply, they are facts, and in the interest of freedom of information (not expression), should be available.

Assange hopes to start a new age of journalism, which he calls "scientific journalism." The basic premise is that journalists can write the stories, but I, the reader, or the critic, or perhaps even the editorial writer, can view all the primary document sources themselves. You can make up your own mind on what is true and what is not.

I have viewed FRAGO 242 with my own eyes, as well as many other documents and embassy cables. I have also visited the WikiLeaks website, read their "about" page and watched interviews with Assange from around the world with various news organizations on YouTube. This is the new age. The information age.

The Internet has come a long way in just a handful of years. In 2002, I sat in a high school classroom and learned how to mine the archives of EBSCOhost, and how to subsequently determine if the information I was viewing was legitimate.

Now, in 2010, as a citizen in a democratic country, I expect my government to provide all details of our ongoing mission in Afghanistan.

Assange's vision and the WikiLeaks organization have allowed people with a moral conscience all over the world, and especially those of us in Western countries, to expose the wrongs we might be a part of and hold people to account.

In an interview alongside Daniel Ellsberg on Oct. 25 at the Frontline Club in the United Kingdom, Assange made a powerful and succinct statement, summing up what this is all about and what WikiLeaks hopes to accomplish.

"You never know what the outcome is, but the truth is always the best place to start. Because in the end, without that, we have nothing."

Anyone who ignores the truth and hard facts in this new era of scientific journalism will be unceremoniously left behind.

Graham Hnatiuk blogs about civic issues at:

progressivewinnipeg.blogspot.com

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition December 26, 2010 A19