4 ms·
I did read your entire post - several actually. So if you were not referring to the slide with Al-Qaeda related operational details (referenced in your John Ol
by woodman 10y ago
I did read your entire post - several actually. So if you were not referring to the slide with Al-Qaeda related operational details (referenced in your John Oliver link), what did he neglect to redact? If that is not the thing you want to see him prosecuted for, can you state it more clearly? I assume you aren't wanting him prosecuted for "the potential dangers of the approach he took", such hypotheticals would be an even more dangerous precedent.
We aren't going to agree though, as I believe that he should have dumped it all - unrestricted public access. Whatever potential good end a kindly king can apply state secrets is far outweighed by the potential abuses (a great imagination isn't required, lots of historical examples exist).
- lewisl9029 10y ago> So if you were not referring to the slide with Al-Qaeda related operational details (referenced in your John Oliver link), what did he neglect to redact? The thousands of documents that he didn't even read (or even try to redact) before he handed them off. > We aren't going to agree though, as I believe that he should have dumped it all - unrestricted public access. You're right. We'll have to agree to disagree.