As his lawyer alleges a grand jury in Virginia is working up charges to file against him, Julian Assange has found a powerful ally—or, at least, defender—in his homeland: the press.
On the same day that nineteen faculty members from the Columbia Journalism School signed and sent a letter to President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder warning that prosecuting WikiLeaks and its founder would “set a dangerous precedent for reporters in any publication or medium, potentially chilling investigative journalism and other First Amendment-protected activity,” ten board members of the Australian SPJ-equivalent, the Walkley Foundation, along with twenty-six of the nation’s leading journalists and editors, sent a letter to Prime Minister Julia Gillard voicing their concerns about the government’s rhetoric and talk of charges.
The letter can be found here or at the website for the Walkley Foundation, which initiated it. Some highlights:
The leaking of 250,000 confidential American diplomatic cables is the most astonishing leak of official information in recent history, and its full implications are yet to emerge. But some things are clear. In essence, WikiLeaks, an organisation that aims to expose official secrets, is doing what the media have always done: bringing to light material that governments would prefer to keep secret .
The volume of the leaks is unprecedented, yet the leaking and publication of diplomatic correspondence is not new. We, as editors and news directors of major media organisations, believe the reaction of the US and Australian governments to date has been deeply troubling. We will strongly resist any attempts to make the publication of these or similar documents illegal. Any such action would impact not only on WikiLeaks, but every media organisation in the world that aims to inform the public about decisions made on their behalf. WikiLeaks, just four years old, is part of the media and deserves our support.
Already, the chairman of the US Senate homeland security committee, Joe Lieberman, is suggesting The New York Times should face investigation for publishing some of the documents. The newspaper told its readers that it had ‘‘taken care to exclude, in its articles and in supplementary material, in print and online, information that would endanger confidential informants or compromise national security.’’ Such an approach is responsible — we do not support the publication of material that threatens national security or anything which would put individual lives in danger. Those judgements are never easy, but there has been no evidence to date that the WikiLeaks material has done either.
There is no evidence, either, that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have broken any Australian law. The Australian government is investigating whether Mr Assange has committed an offence, and the Prime Minister has condemned WikiLeaks’ actions as ‘‘illegal’’. So far, it has been able to point to no Australian law that has been breached.
To prosecute a media organisation for publishing a leak would be unprecedented in the US, breaching the First Amendment protecting a free press. In Australia, it would seriously curtail Australian media organisations reporting on subjects the government decides are against its interests .
To aggressively attempt to shut WikiLeaks down, to threaten to prosecute those who publish official leaks, and to pressure companies to cease doing commercial business with WikiLeaks, is a serious threat to democracy, which relies on a free and fearless press.

Common sense:
If it takes the government a year to determine if you did something illegal, then you didn't do anything illegal.
#1 Posted by Drake Sherpa, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 02:58 PM
Thank god SOMEONE has a conscience. And balls. Predictably, it's the Aussies. Your UK and US media brethren are bought and sold by the government and corporate indluence to such an exent that even in private talks many kowtow to the fake official rhetoric.
So there's no HOPE that the US or UK papers will follow the Aussie lead. But what about other countries? This story affects them ALL. And most certainly not just the English-speaking ones either.
Will NO ONE dare follow these brave souls from Down Under?
#2 Posted by Paul Sedkowski, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 04:49 PM
WikiLeaks is doing the job the rest of the news media should be doing.
#3 Posted by Joel Martin, CJR on Fri 17 Dec 2010 at 11:23 PM
A lot of women feel ashamed of their looks simply because of their breast size. Even more will do anything under the sun to have a breast that will make them stand out.
http://breastenlargementwarning.com/tips-for-breast-enlargement-workouts/
#4 Posted by Tips of Breast Enlargement, CJR on Thu 23 Dec 2010 at 10:49 PM
I saw a tabloid headline the other day. It was claiming that Falwell's last, dying, words were "I am sorry, Tammy Faye."
I was almost home before the full meaning of how ridiculous that was sunk in.
I have no love for what the Bakkers were or what they did while they were grabbing televangelist gold. The greed and corruption were one thing, but the spreading of intolerance and prejudice were something else.
In her later years I think she actually managed to make up for it. Especially with all of the good she did for the gays.
Serving prison time seems to have had a good effect on her ex husband as well.
Too bad we don't send more of the televangelists to jail.
#5 Posted by Lucas Forbes, CJR on Fri 24 Dec 2010 at 11:37 PM
I think most people would agree that Julian Assange from Wikileaks is a dirt bag for releasing sensitive military and government documents to twist to suit his own narcissistic ego and political beliefs.
http://enhancexl.org/
#6 Posted by Feliciasmith smith, CJR on Tue 15 Feb 2011 at 03:29 AM
I think Julian Assange is correct & I agreed with you but the whole world wide accept it ! I hope that It will be solved out soon !
http://www.naturalherbalsreviews.com/xtreme-no
#7 Posted by stevecarton, CJR on Thu 22 Sep 2011 at 04:58 PM