4 ms·

Hmm, I wonder what happened to him... > The navy described his dossier as “subjective and unsubstantiated” and launched an inquiry that concluded by dismissing

Hmm, I wonder what happened to him... > The navy described his dossier as “subjective and unsubstantiated” and launched an inquiry that concluded by dismissing his allegations as “factually incorrect or the result of misunderstanding or partial understanding”...He was discharged “on the claim that my sole aim was to discredit their public image”, he says. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/17/trident-whistleblower-william-mcneilly-discharged-from-royal-navy https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/17/trident-whis...

OJFord 10y ago
> He was discharged “on the claim that my sole aim was to discredit their public image”, he says. I mean, I don't know what he expected... Part of me wonders if WikiLeaks is the modern-day Blighty wound: want to leave, can't leave for X months, make something up, get discharged for discrediting public image.
- roryisok 10y ago
  Have you read the document? There's a lot of awfully specific detail for "making things up"
  - OJFord 10y ago
    I haven't, I don't really agree with it: there's whistle-blowing, and then there's WikiLeaks, with its absurd scale. I certainly don't subscribe to "I pay my taxes; I've a right to know ...!" which is incorrect, silly, and less secure for all of us.
    - roryisok 10y ago
      Please don't be put off by this being on Wikileaks. This is not just some disgruntled British soldier dumping a few hundred secret documents. This is a single, very thorough report he wrote himself, describing in detail all the horrible lapses in security and safety he personally witnessed around Britain's nuclear deterrent. He has censored some of the most sensitive information for security reasons. This is not about "I have a right to know", this is about the risk of a nuclear accident or terrorist attack because of gross negligence, and the chain of command attempting to silence it.

OJFord 10y ago

> He was discharged “on the claim that my sole aim was to discredit their public image”, he says. I mean, I don't know what he expected... Part of me wonders if WikiLeaks is the modern-day Blighty wound: want to leave, can't leave for X months, make something up, get discharged for discrediting public image.

roryisok 10y ago
Have you read the document? There's a lot of awfully specific detail for "making things up"
- OJFord 10y ago
  I haven't, I don't really agree with it: there's whistle-blowing, and then there's WikiLeaks, with its absurd scale. I certainly don't subscribe to "I pay my taxes; I've a right to know ...!" which is incorrect, silly, and less secure for all of us.
  - roryisok 10y ago
    Please don't be put off by this being on Wikileaks. This is not just some disgruntled British soldier dumping a few hundred secret documents. This is a single, very thorough report he wrote himself, describing in detail all the horrible lapses in security and safety he personally witnessed around Britain's nuclear deterrent. He has censored some of the most sensitive information for security reasons. This is not about "I have a right to know", this is about the risk of a nuclear accident or terrorist attack because of gross negligence, and the chain of command attempting to silence it.