The whole Wikileaks thing
Not that anybody asked my opinion, but hey, this is my blog and therefore you're going to get it:
Did Bradley Manning (assuming, as it certainly seems, that he was the source of the "Afghan Files") violate a number of laws? Almost certainly.
Does Manning deserve to be prosecuted? I think so.
Did Julian Assange and cohorts violate a number of laws? I think so.
Do they deserve to be prosecuted? I believe they do.
Should the government of the US take steps to have that information that has already been widely disseminated taken down from Wikileaks? Well, maybe, although that falls under "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted."
Should the government of the US take steps to prevent the wide dissemination of information that Wikileaks is currently in possession of but which they have not widely disseminated yet? I think so, though the practical details of doing so are problematic.
If the Wikileaks folks are indeed in receipt of substantial information that they have not widely disseminated (well, ok, it looks like they've disseminated it in encrypted form and are withholding the keys) in order to be able to use it as a "weapon" (effectively a form of blackmail) against the government, given their stated philosophy of (more-or-less) "we'll publish anything," does that make them hypocrites? Oh yeah, it sure does.
Do loose lips sink ships? Yes - or at least they can. This is every bit as true now as when that phrase first came into vogue.
Finally... I'd like to smack those of you who say that "information wants to be free." If _you_ want information to be free then say that, damn it, and say why. Saying "information wants to be free" is cowardly and trivially falsifiable, it's like saying that the sun wants to shine or water wants to get you wet.
Thank you for your consideration.
ETA: Holy crap, the Wikileaks/Manning booster club has a really active internet PR/spam arm.
Did Bradley Manning (assuming, as it certainly seems, that he was the source of the "Afghan Files") violate a number of laws? Almost certainly.
Does Manning deserve to be prosecuted? I think so.
Did Julian Assange and cohorts violate a number of laws? I think so.
Do they deserve to be prosecuted? I believe they do.
Should the government of the US take steps to have that information that has already been widely disseminated taken down from Wikileaks? Well, maybe, although that falls under "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted."
Should the government of the US take steps to prevent the wide dissemination of information that Wikileaks is currently in possession of but which they have not widely disseminated yet? I think so, though the practical details of doing so are problematic.
If the Wikileaks folks are indeed in receipt of substantial information that they have not widely disseminated (well, ok, it looks like they've disseminated it in encrypted form and are withholding the keys) in order to be able to use it as a "weapon" (effectively a form of blackmail) against the government, given their stated philosophy of (more-or-less) "we'll publish anything," does that make them hypocrites? Oh yeah, it sure does.
Do loose lips sink ships? Yes - or at least they can. This is every bit as true now as when that phrase first came into vogue.
Finally... I'd like to smack those of you who say that "information wants to be free." If _you_ want information to be free then say that, damn it, and say why. Saying "information wants to be free" is cowardly and trivially falsifiable, it's like saying that the sun wants to shine or water wants to get you wet.
Thank you for your consideration.
ETA: Holy crap, the Wikileaks/Manning booster club has a really active internet PR/spam arm.