4 ms·
Correct, there are a number of people that look at the actions of a contractor that exposed operational material and think - that's treason. There is a long his
by mercurialshark 10y ago
Correct, there are a number of people that look at the actions of a contractor that exposed operational material and think - that's treason. There is a long history of Pentagon leaks regarding policy decisions (ex. shifting budgetary priorities or weapon system programs). However, to expose ongoing operational details - literally in the correct sense of the word - risks lives. Lives, assets and sources which he was willfully indifferent to. Not exactly the work of a patriot, as he likes to self-identify.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jazzyk 10y agoSorry, but this is FUD. He didn't dump information on a random server somewhere. He worked with the journalists from The Guardian, The WaPo and the NYT. They said they reached out to the gov to work with them and were turned down. How much more effort would satisfy you?
- mercurialshark 10y agoOh wow, why not disseminate classified information to your priest or scout master? A foreign journalist is equally arbitrary. Being a self-identified position of authority or confidence does not endow that person with clearance or special knowledge. "He didn't dump information on a random server somewhere." - That's exactly what he did. Once it left the secure facility, it was no longer secure and vulnerable - tis the point.
- jazzyk 10y agoSo what exactly was he supposed to do? The people "cleared" to see the info are the perpetrators who blatantly violated (and keep violating) the constitution.