Former US Amb. Kristie Kenney called P-Noy "diffident, unassertive".
US backs MILF.
So says the non-profit media organization-cum-"whistleblower protection intermediary" ---a.k.a. Wikileaks.
In its 5 years of controversial existence, the organization has gathered awards, praises, criticisms, rebukes and everything else in between. For the information freedom fighters, Wikileaks is a crucial journalistic tool that provides a “universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices.” The naysayers (e.g. US) on the other hand, challenges the liberty that Wikileaks “abuses” as a threat that harms national security and compromises international diplomacy.
As any journalistic tool, Wikileaks can build and destroy with the same blow. To remain effective, true to its mission, and to survive the criticisms, it has to operate within the framework of international law and principles. For one, it must consider a certain level of censoring without sacrificing the truth and completeness of the “reports”. For example, names of civilians working with international forces must be adequately redacted prior to release of sensitive documents. More importantly, Wikileaks should address the perceived lack of editorial discretion when it releases thousands of documents in bulk, without sufficient analysis. Wikileaks, in short, should not only be able to feed the public with information, it should help them digest them. Otherwise, the document they feed will stand for nothing but another piece of (sometimes unintelligible) paper.
-Cris Bernardino, post#12