week, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was released on bail from a London prison and exiled into self-described “mansion arrest” in the English countryside awaiting an extradition hearing. It’s safe to say his treatment in the United States -- were it left up to American voters -- would not be quite so magnanimous.

When voters were asked whether “the owner of the website” who received and leaked the classified government information should be arrested and put on trial, two-thirds (66 percent) think he should, according to a Fox News poll released Friday. When the focus was placed on the person who “stole and leaked the information,” the feeling is even stronger, as 83 percent favor arrest and trial.

Americans are far less harsh in their judgment of news organizations -- like the New York Times -- that published the leaked information, as only 38 percent would push for punishment of those media outlets.

There is almost no partisan divide on these questions, as majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independent voters support arrest and trial for both the owner of WikiLeaks and the U.S. Army private who allegedly stole and leaked the information.

There is also near unanimity on the question of whether these actions are treason or not. After explaining to voters that treason involves “giving aid to an enemy of the United States,” 85 percent think that stealing classified government information should fall under that definition. This position is nearly equally strong with Democrats (83 percent), Republicans (88 percent) and independents (87 percent). Back in August of this year, a slightly different question found 61 percent believed these acts should constitute treason.

On the philosophical question of whether the federal government has the right to keep classified national security information secret, almost four in five American voters (78 percent) think the government does have that right. This is the exact same percentage that felt this way in January of 2009. Only about one voter in seven (16 percent) takes the opposite view -- that everything the government does has to be “transparent” to the public.

Despite their desire to punish the perpetrators in the WikiLeaks' case, many American voters (42 percent) think the leaks of U.S. State Department cables were “just embarrassing” and did not seriously damage diplomatic relations. About one-third (33 percent) feel the leaks did serious damage -- a view most likely to be held by Republican voters (40 percent).

Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll among 900 registered voters from Dec. 14 to Dec. 15. The poll has a 3-point error margin.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/17/fox-news-poll-americans-support-arrests-wikileaks-document-release/

I could support prosecution for releasing "real" threats to National Security.

I would also like to see the folks like Gore pushing his climate change scam.

Anyone uncovered doing scams against the citizens of the US should be burned.

You don't support the soldier getting prosecuted for leaking the info? Or even JA prosecuted for publishing it?

I fully support Wikileaks.

As for the Bradly Manning, who leaked the Collateral Murder video, he's 500 times more a hero than the cowardly murderers in the Apache.

I agre americans are so propogated they have no idea how to think anymore. We are a nation of rubes. We are supposed to be born witn unalienable rights. One of them being you are innocent untill proven guilty.

Ditto

I agree innocent until proven guilty.....and the person that should actually be prosecuted is the military personnel that leaked the information. I see Assange as a media outlet as well and freedom of press and journalism the same as any paper or American news media outlet......same as Fox News and Mnbc....etc.

Faux news put out false stories again

Did you watch the video? Do you know what a war crime is?

A war crime would be what the Hitler regime did to the Jews.......other than that I don't see how a crime can be committed during a time of war........turning people into lamp shades.....etc. these people were victims and not even fighting a war.......the innocent that are tortured not the enemy that is tortured I see as crimes of war committed against.......torturing the enemy for information is war not war crimes........and there should be a definitional difference in place

Yes I watched the edited video that was shown out of context.

Why don't you watch the unedited one that is available?

Because everything put up by Wikileaks is edited.

So you're saying that Wikileaks edited the original video and that no Reuters photographers were killed, no children were wounded, and no unarmed people picking up wounded bodies were murdered? That Wikileaks just edited it in there?

i saw that video, and they did have a RPG that one was holding. War is war, and sometimes people are in the wrong place at the wrong time. now you are saying it is ok to ruin the life of a combat serviceman that dedicated his life to our protection because he shot some people during a war? get real.

how was the gunner supposed to know that the idiots had children in the van? why where those people driving up there with kids in the van? 10 people just got shot, and they come roaring in there with children... not the gunners fault

if a policeman tells you to stop, and you don't, innocent or not, whats going to happen? you will get shot....those people were warned, and they didn't stop. it is so easy for you people that have never been in a war or military for that matter to sit back and say what is right and wrong, but you really have no clue. go join up and see for yourself what takes place during a war.

Have you never heard of the Geneva Conventions. Or any laws of war at all? Or are Americans just immune to that sort of thing? What those men did was wrong in every aspect. There is no excuse.

there is no excuse for people that have never been in a war time situation to keep talking like they know what is going on either, is there? my whole point is that nobody in these forums was at the scene where those people were shot. so how could anyone say they know what happened by watching a cut up film of something that we know nothing about?