3 ms·
You 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 lea
by henearkr 7y ago
You 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.