Dingens said: If you can't shoot the message shoot the messenger am I right? Click to expand...

Eh, I see it more as there simply being no angels in this situation.The CIA is bad for getting into a bunch of shady shit that undermines US allies and destabilizes global diplomacy in ways that don't even advance American interests. Also it seems that the CIA is continuing their legacy of thumb-chewing incompetence since they "lost control" of this arsenal, apparently by passing around access to contractors without proper controls. The CIA have always been pioneers in finding novel ways to be global-scale fuck ups and it's nice to see that their particular brand of life-and-death slapstick comedy has successfully transitioned to the cyber-age. (Seriously guys: What The Fuck)That being said, Wikileaks has made it clear that their goals are to undermine American interests, not pursue perfect transparency. Therefor, any leaks they release are suspect. Are the archives complete and untampered with? Is the timing of the leak designed to undermine a specific policy or sway the course of a domestic issue? Are they being selective about what they release in order to paint certain parties as particularly bad while withholding incriminating information about other parties? Given their collusion with Russian intelligence, any Wikileaks activity should be viewed as poison fruit. That's not to say that no good can come from leaks, as increased transparency is a net gain, but we should be suspicious of their motives and the accuracy of their leaks should not be considered guaranteed.