Australia monitering Manning/Assange case

Publicly the gov here is agreeing with the US gov's public line, that there are no plans by the US gov to extradite Julian Assange. This in my opinion is BS, and the Australian gov is simply being diplomatic in towing the US gov's line.

However, behind the scenes it appears to be a rather different picture. The Australian gov is paying close attention to the Manning case, and despite the dept of foreign affairs trying to conceal the name of the one reporting in detail about the court case it has been acquired by the media:

Although the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has redacted the name of the Australian embassy officer attending the hearings in the prosecution of private Manning, Fairfax Media has confirmed that Alli Curtis, a locally engaged senior research and liaison officer, has been responsible for detailed reporting on the court proceedings at Fort Meade. more 

There has also been a lot of attention given to the relationship between Julian Assange and Bradley Manning, with the prosecution attempting to link the two together: 

Last week trial judge Colonel Denise Lind ruled that a member of the US Navy Seal team that raided Osama Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, will be allowed as a witness in court. The prosecution has foreshadowed that the special force soldier will testify that after shooting Bin Laden in his compound, the raiders found digital files containing WikiLeaks material accessed by the former al-Qaeda leader. more  

That alone indicates that the US gov prosecution of Manning has more in it's sights than just Bradley Manning. They've already labelled Assange as an "enemy of the state", and will try and prove a connection between Manning and Assange. This would prove the charge of "Aiding the enemy".

There's just so much wrong with that. If nothing else the charges are retroactive; Assange wasn't an "enemy" until Wikileaks released the cables, so how could you charge Manning with "Aiding the enemy"? Not to mention the appreciation around the world of the conversation started and continued regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Many outside the US consider Manning as a hero.

Even within the US the commentary has drifted from the hysteria of the past to a more thought out and moderate approach. As reported here in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Los Angeles Times has raised some very pertinent questions:

On Friday the influential Los Angeles Times newspaper argued that the case against private Manning “smacks of overkill” with “ominously broad” implications for media freedom and urged the charge of aiding the enemy, which carries a possible life sentence, be dropped. “By the government's logic, The New York Times could be accused of aiding the enemy if Bin Laden possessed a copy of the newspaper that included the WikiLeaks material it published.” the newspaper editorialised. more 

Exactly. This is about freedom of the press. If they're gonna go after Assange, then they should also go after the Los Angeles Times.