Claire Wolf linked to a Rasmussen survey on reactions to the most recent set of docs yanked into the light of day by Wikileaks, in which we find this interesting example of contrast:
"While 55% of Mainstream voters agree that leaking the documents is treasonous, a plurality (45%) of those in the Political Class disagrees."
Why, yes, I can see how terribly different the two groups are: 55% of the Political Class would also be either thinking the leaks were treason or haven't made up their minds. Gosh, those two groups are sooooo different on this issue!
If you ask me, they're both wrong, too, and kinda right as well. While the earlier military leaks bothered me 'cos it could get working soldiers killed, this batch is, aw, c'mon. Diplomats are supposed to know better; if you wouldn't say it directly to the Ambassador from Armpitistan, don't effing write it down, either. What is this, Junior High School? That kind of stuff is like mold or cockroaches and a nice dose of sunlight might help limit the infestation. On the other hand, if the leaker is still the same soldier boy (as seems to be the case), his actions probably are treason per the letter of the law and he will be paying the price.
As for WikiLeak's principal, he strikes me as a right snot and not at all noble. He's after attention and he's getting it, too, which is a pity. If he's so all-fired selfless, why didn't he just lay low? Especially since he is supposedly living on the run. A cad, a bounder, seems likely. A traitor, he's not: he's not a U. S. citizen.
But encouraging diplomats to act like grown-ups, to mean what they say and say what they mean? Call me simple but it sounds like a good idea that's never been tried. It won't be this time, either -- they'll try to scrape it under like a cat on a tile floor and pretend it goes away.
CHICAGO RAILROAD FAIR, 1948
2 hours ago