Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness
now assume that the Doctor/lawyer is the US.
and the patient/client is a foreign diplomat.
because thats what many of these diplomatic cables discuss.
what the patient told the doctor under the protection of doctor patient confidentiality.
|
The US was still the one who was damaged more. As I said, confidential information between a patient and a doctor or a client and a lawyer is meant to protect the client's/patient's interest more. The confidential information that was leaked was concerning the US more than anyone, not the foreign diplomat, for the diplomat would then question whether to trust speaking to the US out loud. Sure, their interests were compromised to an extent but it was information that compromised the US more than anyone.
That being said, however, I do see what you're trying to get at because the documents reveal information about other countries and their activities which they preferred to keep in the dark but this information, which was kept by the US like medical records are kept by a doctor, and it compromised them. However, I still believe these are of a different nature as it hurt the reputation of the US more than it did the foreign diplomats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noctis Lucis
The more I think about this, the more I think that the latest diplomatic cables belong on The Sun, The New York POST (not the Times), and other tabloids, given that they're mere mudslinging. Very little important issues emerge, that of North Korea and Iran (again, looks more like a Murdoch thing than anything else.)
Could this really be Fox feeding info to Assange?  |
Truth be told, part of me does think Assange is in fact a tool of higher figures working in the shadows (ohh, conspiracies
) and is being paid to feed the gullible false info or unimportant info but in such a way to make it look like it's important. It's the free Masons all over again in a way.