| HappySqurriel said:
There has been suggestion that many recently released classified documents were leaked by the administration to benefit the president's election chances. In the past leaked information has also been targeted towards politically hurting other politicians. Wikileaks is just an organization to make this information public, the people who are leaking the information are doing it for their own reasons; and rarely are these reasons to be an honorable person. If you want a transparent government demand a transparent government, don't let people spoon feed you shit and call it a leak and think you're getting legitimate unbiased information. |
You realise that your argument is digging you in an even deeper hole, right?
So can you explain Manning's motive on this? You have some kind of proof that he's running for office and looking to dig up dirt on Obama? If I want a transparent government, I'd want as much info out of it as possible, biased or not (of course, the government is going to release only info that will show them in a good light. Its the job of the press to report on the other side). Oh, and if Manning did it for some kind of personal gain, it didn't help, did it?
How about this: If you saw the government doing something that you would consider immoral, would you let others know about it? Or would you let the government continue on it's merry way, in fear that what you release will just be bias material? Sometimes whistleblowers are motivated on a moral basis. Why do you think Syrian/Libyan officers were defecting from their respective reigimes? Just for their own personal gain? Some people are deeply ashaed at some of their government's actions...
Oh, and originally you claimed that you're 100% against Wikileaks, but now you're claiming that they're "just an organisation" and that the people leaking it are to blame. Which part do you have a problem with, exactly?
