Can someone tell me if there's actual malfeasance this time or just more edgy moaning about the spy agency doing its job?
I'm happy to call out the security apparatus when it actually oversteps its bounds (Eg the Snowden leaks). But so far as I can tell wikileaks vault 7/8 isn't a leak in the public interest. Its just anti-American wankery.
Why don't you read it and decide for yourself?
I honestly wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of these applications were used today with relatively little change.
Author:User#142 Date: Fri Oct 30 09:58:22 2015 EDT User's Guide date corrections.
But the point is moot anyway: either their tools are still relevant today, in that case it's good to see what they can use against the people, or they are not, in which case it won't hurt them if we see them and it's not "anti american".
So what, that’s been wikileaks MO since day one. Assange has been very transparent about his intentions.
Read his essay from 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125831/http://iq.org/con...
Assuming you weren't involved in any of this, ask yourself: did I authorize it? Did the legitimate authority of my civil peers (to which I am willing to cede) authorize it? Did my representatives authorize it? (Not everyone in congress is on these top-secret commitiees, it's entirely possible that some action could be taken that the voters of an entire state had essentially zero say in.)
Finally,
What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody? You know, like Snowden, except not conscience-driven to make sure we all heard about it. It's not like established systems have ever suppressed secrets that would make them look bad if widely known, right? Right?
CIA or Wikileaks? CIA absolutely not, Wikileaks probably yes.
>Without oversight, how could they possibly be kept on the good side?
CIA is the foreign intelligence agency of a particularly murderous country, they can’t possibly be kept on the good side.
Wikileaks seems to have oversight built in that they need to be trustworthy enough for people to leak to them.
>Having gone so long without oversight, how far have they strayed?
CIA has a long history of doing terrible things, I doubt they’ve strayed too far from that.
>What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody?
What would happen if the sun came up in the morning? Things would probably be the same they were yesterday.
I (or we?) stand in one of the many countries where this threat is developing, but one of the few countries where our predecessors have secured the liberties for us to do something about it. So in this sense, we are the custodians of ourselves: and any true American would tend to their government while discussing with their countrymen how they can do the same.
(Hopefully that addresses your point, now that I see what you're really saying.)
In most countries, sadly the answer is still no.
And no, if you're from a country that's openly hostile to free speech, you really can't speak freely online without fear of reprisal. In an abstract sense I can't speak with a complete lack of fear of reprisal either - but essentially what I'm trying to exhort people to realize is that taking on the personal risk of saying the "wrong thing" in public is a civil duty: the civil duty of maintaining our government.