10-20-2016, 10:09 AM
(10-20-2016, 09:53 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: No, I think you might be misunderstanding my position. It isn't as much about what is disclosed. If there is a disclosure of illegal activity by our country, which is really what we are discussing, then it is a matter of to whom that information is given. A closer analogy would be: I was okay with the PI releasing the video of him beating his wife, mistress, and a prostitute to the police and the DA, but I was not okay with him releasing the videos to the families of the victims along with his personal information so that they could more easily take vengeance outside of the legal system and then the PI sought protection from those families.
Ah, good clarification. Thanks.
But, in this case the "man" in the videos beating 3 different women is the US government, right? So, not sure if expecting protection and fair treatment of the whistle blower from "the man" is realistic...
The only case I am aware of with similar dynamics is the (Pentagon Papers) Ellsberg case, and last I checked I think Ellsberg was advocating for both of these guys. That carries a lot of weight with me, but I fully admit both the Snowden and Assange cases are complex and I am nowhere near intimately familiar with all the ins and outs of either...
JOHN ROBERTS: From time to time in the years to come, I hope you will be treated unfairly so that you will come to know the value of justice... I wish you bad luck, again, from time to time so that you will be conscious of the role of chance in life and understand that your success is not completely deserved and that the failure of others is not completely deserved either.
