Skip to main content

View Diary: Should Leakers Be Prosecuted? The Deafening Silence From Whistleblowers (152 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Read her editorial again--leaking endangers (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrkvica, elwior, An Affirming Flame

    people and serves NO public interest; it's cowardly; whistle-blowing uncovers dangerous acts of the government against the people that it's meant to serve. Whether it's anonymous or not, there's a difference between the two, and imo, Drake's actions are the latter.

    Whistleblowing make public information of significant public importance, which reveals illegal, unconstitutional and dangerous conduct, often at the highest levels of government.  Leaking is cowardly, often vengefuly, and and of no public value.

    Are you really saying Drake should have kept quiet? Or are you just disagreeing with how he revealed the info? I think the latter, but all I care about as a citizen is that the information is made public.

    "[K]now that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy." -Barack Obama

    by Battle4Seattle on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 10:22:55 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The way he revealed it leaves open (0+ / 0-)

      the interpretation of his motives.

      Was it politically motivated?  Did he have a personal axe to grind with someone in government?

      Was the story complete, or did he pick and choose what data to leak?

      The other thing that strikes me about this case, is that it seems to me these leaks were done primarily to embarrass the NSA regarding mis-managed projects, rather than reveal NSA crimes against Americans or the Constitution.

      And then he lied about it when questioned.. you never lie.. If they cannot get you on substance, they will always get you for lying, which is what he is being changed with.

      Too many questions..

      "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - G. Marx

      by Skeptical Bastard on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 11:18:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not arguing there were no illegalities in the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        details. What I am saying is there's an intrinsic difference between leaking and whistleblowing. Does he deserve whistleblowing protections? That's a different question, but you continue to call him a leaker, and I disagree.

        His revelations WERE in the public interest (complete transparency in the revelations? Perhaps not--but nevertheless we needed to know), how he did it--well, there are the legal questions.

        "[K]now that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy." -Barack Obama

        by Battle4Seattle on Tue Apr 27, 2010 at 12:37:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site