Wikileaks

Yes, but plastering the army equipment database is poor judgement and character.

 

I am going to have to vote bad. If you are publicizing intricate details of army equipment, you are possibly endangering soldiers lives. That being said, I don't have a problem with them publicizing misconduct or war crimes.

 

Nothing hurts this country more than a cover-up. Not even terrorism.

 

Because our "tax dollars" are wasted more if terrorists know which place to focus in order to cripple our operations.

Equipment info for Afghanistan and Iraq isn't the same as line by line accounting for all military purchases.

 

What makes you so sure that over 10% of it is true?

 

Wikileaks is a gem.

 

we have the NYTimes, so wikileaks is redundant.

 

Here's another similar site that has been around for a while.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/

While I am a proponent of free speech and government openness, I do acknowledge and accept the need for some levels of secrecy.

There is a fair balance between our right-to-know and things that legitimately need classification as secret.

Unfortunately, the Cheney administration made a mockery of the process by classifying everything as secret.

 

I think in spirit it's a good thing, but I also think it (or sources like it) will be (are frequently/inevitably) abused for other agendas, rather than merely based in exposing the truth, as well as knowing no bounds in regards to the consequences of their actions. This makes it as dangerous as it is helpful, imo.

 

Where's the option for Great?

 

Judith Miller quit a while ago.

 

It must really suck for you to live here.