Balloon guy, on Sunday, November 28th, 2010, 10:33 AM, said:
I am fully supporting the government not being required to get a warrant to tape a phone call in progress with a known terrorist in another country. That is hardly a carte blanche support of anyone, anytime, any reason.
If they are known terrorists, then by definition, we already have evidence on them. If they are still trying to collect evidence, then they are not known terrorists. But I'm glad you trust the government to never abuse their power. I don't think it's ever happened before, has it?
Yea, I am generally okay with them leaking things that have no consequences also.I am not willing though to let some jackwad at Wikileaks with a blind devotion to the 'public's right to know' being the decider if the 4 terabytes of info has been properly screened to insure that no damage will be done.But hey, the freedom of the press is a wonderful warm blanket to wrap yourself around as people pay with their lives for your effort to increase hit counts on your website.If on the other hand the only info released embarrass state department people with their petty self serving willingness to let soldiers in the field pay for their failures of diplomacy, then sure release them with pictures and graphs.I am a pessimist when it comes to the motives of people releasing secret documents, that's all.
These are fair points. I think Wikileak's position should be "We've got this stuff, and it's ours to release. Now, you've got three months to tell us which parts of this are dangerous to release, and justify it to us." If they can't do it, then release it.Like you, I'm a little nervous about their motives. I'd be much happier if Wikileaks had some ex-military types working with them to explain to them what's at stake. Getting famous and creating controversy is not enough of a reason. But I do tend to err on the side of freedom of information, whereas the government tends to err on the side of covering up everything.