2 ms·
Just because something is a secret doesn't mean it has to be exposed Why does everyone suppose WikiLeaks is being naive about this? I'm sure there are plenty
by Confusion 16y ago
Just because something is a secret doesn't mean it has to
be exposed
Why does everyone suppose WikiLeaks is being naive about this? I'm sure there are plenty of files that they won't leak, because they think it will endanger more people than it will save.
In this case, the safety of a few Afghan informants could be considered collateral damage: you can't expect WikiLeaks to keep their hands completely clean, when they are trying to out pools of blood on the hands of others. There isn't an optimal solution; they will have to make case-by-case judgments. If you don't like that and want them to censor the documents: by all means, start volunteering for them to read all the stuff. In the mean time, putting this out in the open may save countless Afghan civilians in the years to come.
- elblanco 16y agoIn this case, the safety of a few Afghan informants could be considered collateral damage: you can't expect WikiLeaks to keep their hands completely clean, when they are trying to out pools of blood on the hands of others. I wonder if wikileaks will start posting some videos (hopefully edited and annotated out of context) of the deaths of the people they just caused.