Should Billy the Kid Be Pardoned?

Outgoing New Mexico governor Bill Richardson is giving consideration to pardoning Billy the Kid for his crimes during his years as an outlaw in the 1800s.

And the question being asked is this: Should the Kid be pardoned?

Two words as far as I’m concerned: HELL NO. 

He killed several people before murdering a Sheriff and two deputies during his short life, before being gunned down by Pat Garrett.  And they’re still unsure of how many murders that the Kid actually carried out.  Some have attributed over twenty murders to Billy the Kid.

I don’t care that his life has been painted as heroic by Hollywood in recent years. 

He was a cold blooded killer who is undeserving of consideration of a pardon.  I also think that the governor of New Mexico (or any state for that matter) can pardon someone more deserving of it.

Many people who are pardoned today got into trouble, spent time in jail, came out, and never got into trouble again.  In fact, some of the more recent pardons were given to people who became model citizens after they paid the price for whatever they did to get put into jail in the first place.

The Kid kept killing after his murder of the two deputies who were manning the jail that he was locked up in.  This is not my idea of a model citizen.

Give the pardon to someone else.  I’m hoping Governor Richardson chooses not to act.

WikiLeaks Founder Fears U.S. Indictment: Why Should He Be? What Was He Expecting?

The founder of WikiLeaks fears that the U.S. government is about to issue an indictment over his posting of classified materials on the Internet.  Couple of questions and observations over his being worried about a potential U.S. indictment:

If he was afraid of being indicted, then why did he go WAY out of his way to post classified U.S. government materials online?

Why is he afraid?  Judging from his  bombastic statements, he obviously thinks that he can win a court case.

No, I think he was angling for a U.S. indictment all along.  No one is above the law, and the malcontent Julian Assaunge is no exception.

Measuring Julian Assaunge: His Threat to Release “Doomsday” File if He’s Arrested to Stand Trial for Sex Crime Charges Proves the Kind of Man He Really Is

If we were to judge what kind of person that WikiLeaks founder Julia Assaunge is based on his current behavior, what kind of conclusion are we forced to reach?

Consider: He’s releasing classified documents that don’t belong to him, and without any concern as to who gets hurt because of his releasing them.

Consider: He’s forcing our State Department to deal with the global damage caused by his reckless disregard for the consequences, thereby distracting the State Department from conducting American foreign policy both at home and overseas.

Consider: He was accused of serious sex crimes in Sweden and fled the country, which lead Sweden to file a warrant with INTERPOL for his arrest and extradition back to Sweden to face trial.

Consider: He’s threatened to release unredacted U.S. material—all of it—if he’s arrested to face a sex crimes trial in Sweden. In other words, he’s threatening to violate a ton of laws if he’s arrested for breaking laws in Sweden. In his mind, it’s all right for him to threaten the U.S. with severe damage if Sweden has him arrested for breaking Swedish laws.

What conclusion comes to mind about Assaunge when you consider all the above factors?

Here’s my read:

He’s a white-collar criminal who's out there blowing his own horn and saying "look at me!" And now he’s now threatening to use his ill-gotten gains to make demands of the U.S. government, “or else!” That’s classic blackmail, which is also illegal. An argument could be made that he’s also a terrorist, by holding our government hostage to these documents. Those documents are WMDs, and they’re definitely in the wrong hands.

The sooner they arrest him, the sooner they can get this man and his organization out of the headlines.

U.S. Government Denies Trying to Take WikiLeaks Down: But They Should Pin a Medal on the Hacktivist Who Is!

I am not a fan of WikiLeaks.  Let me make that abundantly clear before I proceed any further. 

I do think that this web site needs to go away, before any of the data that the site is releasing gets anyone killed, or before WikiLeaks volunteers start being targeted for assassination by various intelligence agencies from around the world.

Remember, Russia poisoned one of its enemies with radiation a couple of years ago.  The KGB used to carry out hits around the world.  The Israeli intelligence agency has a very active hit squad as well, and has used them to maximum effect both inside and outside of Israel.  Our own CIA is currently firing missiles at terrorists in various areas of the world.  There are dozens of other intelligence agencies who could really get nasty if their government orders them to take out a few key WikiLeaks people.

While I don’t think that a drone strike against WikiLeaks would happen in Great Britain, or in Sweden, or any other U.S.-allied country, it’s entirely possible that a foreign power might not feel the same restrictions in conducting an operation in a U.S.-allied country.

We do have some sort of patriotic hacker who is attempting to hurt WikiLeaks, in the same way he’s taken down jihaddist web sites spouting al-Qaeda propaganda.  The U.S. government shouldn’t move against this person, even if he is breaking the law to stop a group that is also breaking the law. 

He’s doing the U.S. government a huge favor.  Pin a medal on him!

While no one has yet died from the WikiLeaks data dumps, it’s only a matter of time now, and the U.S. government SHOULD be waging cyberwar on WikiLeaks to prevent U.S. soldiers, spies and diplomats from getting killed. 

I also believe that it’s not in U.S. national interests to have foreign leaders toppled due to WikiLeaks data dumps.  The Yemeni President is particularly vulnerable, as are Arab leaders who publicly denounce the saber rattling between Washington and Tehran, but secretly pressure the U.S. to bomb Iranian nuclear sites.  The Saudi King is of particular interest.

This is not about the First Amendment.  The press in this country is covered by the First Amendment, as are its citizens, but not a foreign-owned (private) company that is headed by an anarchist. 

We can make due without WikiLeaks.