Simon_Jester wrote:I have no right to punish someone for 'harming' me by releasing evidence that I've committed a crime. But what if, along with that evidence, they also release something like the personal identifying information of everyone who works for a the State Department?
Or what if they release documents on "this is how the FBI catches money launderers." Those might be classified at a low level just to make sure they aren't released to the general public and thus become common knowledge among money launderers. Suddenly, boom, common knowledge among money launderers. Oops.
Guess what, this is the risk you run with any whistleblower ever when your entire department is known for covering shady things up.
Also, I dare challenge any of you to show where state government diplomatic cables show private information of the state department guys. Somehow I doubt this is contained in any diplomatic cable.
While you're at it, you also might want to look at how Ellsberg was treated.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
They likely wouldn't unless they were strangely weird cables with specific purpose as that kind of information is sensitive but unclassified and as I understand the law wouldn't get someone charged under the Espionage Act like the cables would. However, if a cable like that were sent, and then leaked, the cable is still classified regardless.
