Julian Assange is an Australian born man that has recently shot to prominence as the founder of the controversial website Wikileaks which has released thousands of documents onto the internet that embarrassed many different governments and notable public figures with information that they would normally prefer to keep secret.
The leaks have been as varied as embarrassing the Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd with the information that the US embassy in Canberra believes that he is a 'control freak' to documents which indicate that the war in Afghanistan is not going nearly as well as the US government has hoped or had been reporting because of the larger number of casualties on internal documents than was released in official figures.
As a public figure, Assange is now a hero to some and a villain to others.
Some claim that he is a champion of freedom of speech and that his website is a fantastic tool for enhancing the accountability of governments.
The freedom of speech that these advocates so vociferously protect is one of the core values of the United States as well.
It is ironic that some of Assange's fiercest critics also call America home.
Members of the United States Senate have said that execution would be a penalty too light for Mr Assange if they caught him and were able to prosecute in relation to the breach of the national security laws he is alleged to have breached through the publication of the documents on his website Wikileaks.
Assange's supporters argue that the value of freedom of speech is the true strength on which America should rely to fight the forces of the Taliban rather than the military muscle which it appears to rely on at the moment.
Nevertheless, it is certainly possible that some of the information released through Wikileaks could have endangered the operations of friendly forces in the War in Afghanistan and this is no small matter which must be considered when assessing how the Wikileaks website should be treated going forward.
It seems that Mr Assange and his website are likely to remain controversial in the future.
The leaks have been as varied as embarrassing the Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd with the information that the US embassy in Canberra believes that he is a 'control freak' to documents which indicate that the war in Afghanistan is not going nearly as well as the US government has hoped or had been reporting because of the larger number of casualties on internal documents than was released in official figures.
As a public figure, Assange is now a hero to some and a villain to others.
Some claim that he is a champion of freedom of speech and that his website is a fantastic tool for enhancing the accountability of governments.
The freedom of speech that these advocates so vociferously protect is one of the core values of the United States as well.
It is ironic that some of Assange's fiercest critics also call America home.
Members of the United States Senate have said that execution would be a penalty too light for Mr Assange if they caught him and were able to prosecute in relation to the breach of the national security laws he is alleged to have breached through the publication of the documents on his website Wikileaks.
Assange's supporters argue that the value of freedom of speech is the true strength on which America should rely to fight the forces of the Taliban rather than the military muscle which it appears to rely on at the moment.
Nevertheless, it is certainly possible that some of the information released through Wikileaks could have endangered the operations of friendly forces in the War in Afghanistan and this is no small matter which must be considered when assessing how the Wikileaks website should be treated going forward.
It seems that Mr Assange and his website are likely to remain controversial in the future.