Why did they publish his SF-86? This seems like a very irresponsible invasion of Brennan's personal privacy; nothing in there could possibly be of legitimate public interest.
Assange himself explained the "non-linear effects of leaks on unjust systems of governance[1]".
His rationale is that illegitimate power requires conspiracy and conspiracy requires secrecy.
Therefore, by leaking information Assange makes secrecy so difficult that it cripples the organization's ability to communicate with itself and operate the conspiracy.
The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks
induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie.
This must result in minimization of efficient internal communications
mechanisms (an increase in cognitive "secrecy tax") and consequent
system-wide cognitive decline resulting in decreased ability
to hold onto power as the environment demands adaption.
Hence in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust
systems are nonlinearly hit relative to open, just systems.
Since unjust systems by their nature induce opponents, and in
many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves
them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with
more open forms of governance.
Assange is an archetypical agent of 5th-generation warfare, and Wikileaks is a perfect example of a Robbian superempowered group: http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/02...
And he's winning. He might die, in horrible agony, in an Argentinian embassy, but he'll take the CIA down with him.
What a time to be alive indeed.
At least I imagined that Wikileaks would want to preserve their reputation as doing something for the public good but a childish move like this focused on a single individual (an enemy in their eyes) makes me question the organization's values going forward.
It seems like you're confusing them with some other organization that does responsible disclosure.
The Cablegate leaks were newsworthy and responsibly handled.
Syrian/Saudi diplomatic emails, Iraq/Afghanistan war documents, Trans-pacific Partnership reporting. These actions bring attention to large groups of people in power and hold governments accountable for their actions.
Publishing the emails from an AOL account of a CIA director doesn't quite fit that mould.
"He did nothing wrong, therefore he has nothing to hide".
Are you really questioning the fact that this was made public while NSA, CIA and other agencies have been wiping their asses with the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution and the Article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Running with the Chelsea Manning leak helped start a conversation about the ethics of drone warfare and the culpability of the US military in the deaths of civilians.
What kind of a wider conversation does leaking John Brennan's SF-86 create? Maybe there's some ancillary discussion about those in the security community not using secure channels but it mostly just feels like a cheap shot.
Does it necessarily have to create a conversation?
It, at the very least, destroys yet another time the "nothing to hide" argument and underlines both the fact that nobody is safe unless active measures are taken and that all this spying business is tainted with serious amateurism.
And if this is worthless to you, see it as a backlash. Our personal informations are intercepted on a daily basis and played with in a way that we have no control over. The average Joe, alone, can't fight back, Wikileaks is the collective answer.
It is in-line with Trevor Paglen's work [1] on demystifying spying activities: they're no super heroes, they're bound to physical, practical and logistical limitations (like we all are), we can fight them.
[1] (video) "Seeing The Secret State: Six Landscapes" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF4vQA7eWgE
Russia is anti Saudi because of oil
Pay attention.
They're being co-opted:
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-10-16/saudi-arabi...
Snowden too. Some of the stuff he leaked was not in the public interest
There could be. There is a reason the government asks there questions because they get relevant information. Hypothetically there could be newsworthy stuff in there.
But there isn't anything actually in there. So it's shitty to leak it.
* Theres a theory that WIKILEAKS has been a FSB front since 2010: *
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pobtq/is_russi...
They haven't posted a SINGLE ANTI-Russian document since they threatened to leak documents in 2010
This is ONLY about Embarrassing the West.
At first I was skeptical, now i'm fully convinced that Assange and crew are TOTAL useful idiots.
I live in the western world, so that's what I care about.
Any PR victory Moscow can prop against the US hegemony is a win to them.
This is straight out of the Cold War PR battle.
Your comments looks like straight out of the Cold War PR battle.
If I was going to be a whisteblower, or a leaker of state and corporate secrets I would do it for my own country and the countries it was allied with.
What is so difficult to understand about that?
...linking to a post on /r/conspiracy.
There are also a theories, in the very same sub, that drinking is own urine is better the chemotherapy [0], that China has floating cities in parallel universe [1] and that Ahmed Mohammed is a "clock bomb hoaxer" [2].
Please keep on improving our discussion with wonderful sources like /r/conspiracy.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pp1z3/woman_wi...
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3psibh/another_...
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3psun2/ahmed_th...