3 ms·

Here's my assumption: Somebody released classified information. Somebody committed treason, violated their oaths, etc. Assange most likely was not the one.

Here's my assumption: Somebody released classified information. Somebody committed treason, violated their oaths, etc. Assange most likely was not the one. There is nothing wrong with Wikileaks, but I find it to be wrong that somebody leaked classified documents. Supporting Wikileaks is not wrong directly, but sites like Wikileaks provide incentive to those with classified information to leak it. That is not something I want to see happen.

fooandbarify 16y ago
I find it to be wrong that somebody leaked classified documents. I think it's more complicated than that. "Following orders" is not an acceptable defense, and for that reason I think leaking classified documents is not only sometimes justifiable but that it is sometimes an absolute necessity (ie. in the case where classified documents are the only evidence of a crime). Most of the time, though, you're probably right - classified documents should remain secure. Sites like Wikileaks provide incentive to those with classified information to leak it. Part of my point in the previous post was that if there is a weak point in an organization, there will be a leak. I think there is enough incentive for information leaks without Wikileaks - I have no source for this but I suspect that the diplomatic cables alone would have been worth millions in the black market before the leak. Wikileaks is actually one of the safest places for this information to go.