Share
5,637 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 132
clock Created with Sketch.
28/06/24
15:44
Share
Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag
↑
the argument used back in 2010 was that it would threaten the lives of many who work for US security services, particularly in Afghanistan.
I believed that to be a real concern.
this is, imo, why its become such a fraught and divided discussion. much less about those locals who worked in the countries and more about the American security services. I don't understand the full implications. I'm not invested in the security industries. but sure, it was a reasonable concern.
as it is, as reported, none of US security people have been threatened. whereas Afghans who worked for the US were routed out and killed by Taliban. probably much the same result in Iraq.
theres often a double standard when it comes to security.
Expand
My understanding was that Assange had the vast trove of documents, most of which he could not responsibly redact within a timeframe fitting his agenda.
So he made the decision to release the remaining documents unredacted. So, at the time no one knew, even Assange, what was being released.
Dangerously irresponsible.
Anyway, what's done is done.