Do you think publishing the names, locations and relatives names of informants does not cause problems? Or do you think it's ok until someone gets dead?Right, thats why i asked gunnut to mention which leaks. Your article is from June and refers to the afghan war logs and not the embassy cables.
They say they found names but did that cause problems ?
Legally speaking, it doesn't matter whether someone ultimately gets killed or not. The legal question here is did Assange intend to do harm by leaking the docs, or have knowledge that they would do harm if released?
Well according to the quote you pulled the answer is "yes". If you don't think there's any harm then there's no point in having a harm-minimisation policy is there?
And I think this money quote...
...is going to come back to kick him in the ass."We have read more leaked documents than any other organisation that's not a spy agency. If someone can apply this policy, surely we can do it."
So how did that policy work out there Assange?
Arrogant ass. Nice going.In just two hours of searching the WikiLeaks archive, The Times found the names of dozens of Afghans credited with handing intelligence to US forces. Their villages are given for identification and, in many cases, their fathers' names.