Wikileaks: The man who went too far

Some libertarians disagree but most people think that speech leading directly to death or serious harm (e.g. shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater) should not be protected free speech

"Australian-born Julian Assange is peddling a range of excuses for having put Afghans in harm's way.

Assange has been savaged publicly for releasing information that could lead to the death of many people identified in US military logs that range from 2004 to 2009.

Two days after WikiLeaks posted 76,000 of the documents on the internet, a team of reporters from The Times of London pored over the raw material. In a matter of hours they discovered that the names, villages, relatives' names and even precise GPS locations of Afghans who had co-operated with US-led forces were easy to spot.

If any Afghan informant were killed, Assange retreats to the argument that the harm caused would be outweighed by the importance of publishing the information. So disclosure is justice, apparently, regardless of consequences.

In a chronicle of the WikiLeaks saga, The Columbia Journalism Review says reporters from The Guardian and Der Spiegel specifically encouraged Assange "to be careful about the lethal harm that could come to people identified in the logs if he released certain documents unredacted". He did not follow this advice.

Much more HERE

Ian Gilmour was a very notable and privileged Englishman. Most of the Royal family came to his wedding. He was also once Lord Privy Seal of England in Margaret Thatcher's government. He was not however of her faction in the Conservative party and there is much that he said that I disagree with.

He did however write a book Inside Right which presented extensive and persuasive arguments from history in favor of the view that Conservatives have always been "trimmers" -- people who try to find a middle way in difficult matters -- so it seems clear that Assange is not of a conservative persuasion