4 ms·
> He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been relea
by AllegedAlec 7y ago
> He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been released, my argument is not in defence of the original actions.
According to him and his lawyers he did not. The arguments for this are expanded on in the linked article.
- bilekas 7y agoWell according to the other side, people died because of the releases. Information was lost, sources fled. https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 So again, right or wrong depends on your opinion. Also again, I re-iterate and stress. I am not defending the bad actions of the US or anyone, I just don't believe that Assange is this 'holier than though' who needs to be coveted.
- henearkr 7y agoYou seem to imply that, because there were dramatic consequences from the release, then he was guilty from the release. Again, it seems that the problematic leak (uncensored names) comes from a 3rd party, so your implication is like a sophism.
- FireBeyond 7y agoApparently in your world one cannot be an accessory. If you arranged, assisted with and actively participated in the exfiltration of classified information, handed it on to someone else who agreed with you when you said "states can decrypt this; best just to publish now", apparently you get to say "woah, woah, woah, why are you angry at me, I had nothing to do with people getting hold of the information in these documents!". Who is being sophist now?
- henearkr 7y agoThe fact that an old web archive gave up the uncensored documents was clearly unintended... So, this shows that, though "being an accessory" is possible, this is not the case. "Possible => true" is another, erroneous, sophism.