WIKILEAKS SERIES Information
Daniel Domscheit-Berg took the time to write a 208 page book. There are many possible reasons.
He could have spent all that time directly on OpenLinks' website development, the leaks system, contractual arrangements with publishers, etc. Publishing the book is timed for maximum publicity and to simultaneously answer some questions. Of course, then there's money from book sales. How will that be spent? Just how open does he want to be?
Meanwhile, who leaked the chat room conversation and why, all while Julian didn't have the ability to answer directly and immediately?
Daniel says he was upset by the lack of transparency, among other things. It's ironic in the eyes of many that WikiLeaks needs to keep secrets. I find those people to be dimwitted. Daniel will be keeping secrets too. I'm not suggesting that he is one claiming that WikiLeaks didn't require secrecy though. He draws the line at a different place than does or did Julian Assange.
Ultimately, as a Christian, I must say that there are no secrets and that, that doesn't bother me because I trust the one who ultimately knows all. I believe in the righteousness of my God. The reason for secrecy and privacy now is due to the wickedness of many. Evil ideas have been introduced into the minds of humanity. People, individually and collectively, have not worked hard enough to overcome those evil inroads. They are tempted, fall, harden, and take it out on others thereby leading others astray with them.
Even George W. Bush, the war criminal, need not have every last bit of privacy removed while people get at the truth of his war crimes and crimes against humanity and move to hold him to account since he was, along with many others, responsible for gigantic evil that is still on-going. It is truly a shame people don't have a better sense of what should be taken public versus what should remain confidential and why.
I am a firm believer in pastoral counseling for instance. Someone asking for help with a problem that is at that point still private and that should remain so to protect people, especially the innocent, and to give people a real opportunity to see the error of their ways and to stop, turn, repent, and atone is a good thing. Where to draw the line is not always clear-cut. The secular law has views about counseling pedophiles for one. It puts restraints upon the work of religious people and institutions because it, the secular, usually if not always, discounts conversions and transformations and then mercy and forgiveness, etc.
Then, of course, there's a large group within the false liberal crowd that thinks pedophilia is not an evil. It all makes for some difficult judgment calls. The terrible internal mishandling of the rampant pedophilia within the Roman Catholic Church surely muddied the waters a great deal and served to weaken the acceptance of the moral authority of various religious groups who have done a much better job.
Anyway, Daniel Domscheit-Berg waited way too long to allay the rumors about Julian Assange and the Mossad, etc. Perhaps that was due to his relative young age, but 32 isn't exactly a babe. How much has bitterness and vindictiveness had to do with it if any?
Who knows Daniel Domscheit-Berg's heart?