General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ---so what you are saying, is we would be BETTER OFF --- NOT KNOWING THESE THINGS?: [View all]TiberiusB
(490 posts)This is one of those little exaggerations that refuses to die and clearly only serves to try and make Manning look irresponsible and dangerous.
Manning released the cables to Wikileaks, not the entire world, and that was after going to the NYT and WaPo. Wikileaks then released selected information to certain media outlets a little at a time. It was only after the U.S. government started shutting down Wikileaks funding that anything approaching "indiscriminate" releases of information occurred. Assange feared he wouldn't be able to muster the resources to sort through the remaining documents or get them released. Unless I am mistaken, all of the cables were never released. Far from it, in fact, because, if you recall, Daniel Domscheit Berg bailed on Assange and trashed a ton of documents when he left.
Second, can anyone insisting that somehow Manning is bad, because, you know, reasons, point to any information released that has legitimately harmed U.S. interests? No?
So if we tally up the "good" leaks against the "bad" leaks, we get something like eighty bajillion to none.
And in some minds this means "none" wins.
*Sigh*