5 ms·

The irony in your argument is absolutely breath taking. The footage of the US Military murdering a dozen people, of which 2 worked for the press, was part of le

The irony in your argument is absolutely breath taking. The footage of the US Military murdering a dozen people, of which 2 worked for the press, was part of leaks for which he now faces charges. "How dare he show the US murdering journalists! That could lead to more journalist getting murdered."

cyphar 7y ago
Not to mention the evidence of the US government lying about the numbers of civilian casualties (read: murders), or the many examples of money laundering, and tit-for-tat deals. The idea that nothing was gained from the Afghan/Iraqi war logs alone is beyond ridiculous. Let alone the mountains of other leaks they published before and since.
ryanmercer 7y ago
You can release that information and still redact the names of private individuals that are informants/spies so that you aren't signing their gruesome death sentence at the hands of the 'enemy'...
foldr 7y ago
No, the comment refers to Wikileaks releasing the names of American informants in Iraq, potentially endangering their lives.
- cyphar 7y ago
  Future WikiLeak publications took more care redacting documents (even asking the US State Department for advice). So I disagree with what WikiLeaks did in that instance, and it's clear they adjusted their ways. But it should also be made very clear that there is zero evidence that anyone was harmed as a result of the leak. Yes, this may have been luck or lots of effort by the US State Department, but it still something to consider.
  - foldr 7y ago
    That's an extraordinarily mild way to respond to a massive and thoughtless leak of extremely sensitive information. I wonder if you are so charitable towards the US government! They no doubt would also have claim to have mended their ways since the release of the "collateral murder" video. >even asking the US State Department for advice A disingenuous request. >and it's clear they adjusted their ways. This is actually far from clear.
    - pluma 7y ago
      I'm not sure if that's your point but the US clearly have not mended their ways and continually violate international human rights by killing, torturing and illegally detaining people.
    - cyphar 7y ago
      > That's an extraordinarily mild way to respond to a massive and thoughtless leak of extremely sensitive information. I said that I disagree with what that aspect of what they did, and had I been in that situation I would've redacted many more things. But I agree with their publishing of the documents. I'm not sure what response you'd like me to have -- call for him to be in prison for the rest of his life? > I wonder if you are so charitable towards the US government! They are the most powerful government in the world, and are blatantly violating the Nuremberg convention and their own constitution. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are not. > They no doubt would also have claim to have mended their ways since the release of the "collateral murder" video. They haven't claimed that (Obama claimed that they "tortured folks" and have stopped, but Guantanamo Bay is still "open for business"). But even if they did claim it, we have plenty of evidence they haven't. But we do have evidence that WikiLeaks did start redacting more documents -- because many of their subsequent leaks had more heavily redacted documents. > A disingenuous request. So what would've made you happy? That they don't publish anything? Newspapers ask the government to help redact leaked documents all the time (the Guardian even did line-by-line redactions of the Snowden documents with GCHQ). I really don't understand what your bar for "responsible journalism" is, if doing what other journalists do is not enough.
      - 7y ago

cyphar 7y ago

Not to mention the evidence of the US government lying about the numbers of civilian casualties (read: murders), or the many examples of money laundering, and tit-for-tat deals. The idea that nothing was gained from the Afghan/Iraqi war logs alone is beyond ridiculous. Let alone the mountains of other leaks they published before and since.

ryanmercer 7y ago

You can release that information and still redact the names of private individuals that are informants/spies so that you aren't signing their gruesome death sentence at the hands of the 'enemy'...

foldr 7y ago

No, the comment refers to Wikileaks releasing the names of American informants in Iraq, potentially endangering their lives.

cyphar 7y ago
Future WikiLeak publications took more care redacting documents (even asking the US State Department for advice). So I disagree with what WikiLeaks did in that instance, and it's clear they adjusted their ways. But it should also be made very clear that there is zero evidence that anyone was harmed as a result of the leak. Yes, this may have been luck or lots of effort by the US State Department, but it still something to consider.
- foldr 7y ago
  That's an extraordinarily mild way to respond to a massive and thoughtless leak of extremely sensitive information. I wonder if you are so charitable towards the US government! They no doubt would also have claim to have mended their ways since the release of the "collateral murder" video. >even asking the US State Department for advice A disingenuous request. >and it's clear they adjusted their ways. This is actually far from clear.
  - pluma 7y ago
    I'm not sure if that's your point but the US clearly have not mended their ways and continually violate international human rights by killing, torturing and illegally detaining people.
  - cyphar 7y ago
    > That's an extraordinarily mild way to respond to a massive and thoughtless leak of extremely sensitive information. I said that I disagree with what that aspect of what they did, and had I been in that situation I would've redacted many more things. But I agree with their publishing of the documents. I'm not sure what response you'd like me to have -- call for him to be in prison for the rest of his life? > I wonder if you are so charitable towards the US government! They are the most powerful government in the world, and are blatantly violating the Nuremberg convention and their own constitution. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are not. > They no doubt would also have claim to have mended their ways since the release of the "collateral murder" video. They haven't claimed that (Obama claimed that they "tortured folks" and have stopped, but Guantanamo Bay is still "open for business"). But even if they did claim it, we have plenty of evidence they haven't. But we do have evidence that WikiLeaks did start redacting more documents -- because many of their subsequent leaks had more heavily redacted documents. > A disingenuous request. So what would've made you happy? That they don't publish anything? Newspapers ask the government to help redact leaked documents all the time (the Guardian even did line-by-line redactions of the Snowden documents with GCHQ). I really don't understand what your bar for "responsible journalism" is, if doing what other journalists do is not enough.
    - 7y ago