On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Robert Munn <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> What do you see as the primary difference between the Wikileaks case >> and the Pentagon Papers? >> >> > In the case of the Pentagon Papers, the government was lying to the American > people about the Vietnam War, and Ellsberg's documents proved it. In that > circumstance, the public's right to know the lies outweighed the need for > secrecy. In the Wikileaks case, there seems to be no bombshell, no dark > secret to reveal. It's just routine diplomatic communication that provides a > very open view of our dealings around the world. What public good is served > by this disclosure?
That's a fair distinction, I'd say. But then if there is no bombshell, if they are just routine and not really secret, why is it so bad to put them out for everyone to see? What is inherently bad about that level of transparency? Shouldn't transparency be the default and secrecy be reserved for the extraordinary cases? Juda ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:332680 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
