I take it that you have no evidence of malicious intent, since if you did, you would have linked it. Seriously, why is it so hard to believe that Julian just p

I take it that you have no evidence of malicious intent, since if you did, you would have linked it. Seriously, why is it so hard to believe that Julian just punked them? It's easy enough to pull off, and honestly more believable from someone who otherwise has impeccable opsec. Just look at the order of events: 1. Julian gives an encrypted file and its key to The Guardian. 2. In February 2011, the key gets published in a book by The Guardian's journalist. 3. In September 2011, it's discovered that the encrypted file is available via BitTorrent, with the key already public in said book. 4. WikiLeaks "helpfully" publishes all the unredacted information later that month, to "ensure" that no "malicious" actors would "selectively" publish it. I have a very hard time believing that security professionals like those who run WikiLeaks would let this happen by accident. Step 4 was probably their end-game all along.