Lettre à Wikileaks.

705 Avenue de Valescure

Les Tulipes - bâtiment  A

83700 Saint-Raphaël

To: Wikileaks 

BOX 4080

University of Melbourne

Victoria 3052

Australia  

15th October 2016

Dear Sir,

I would like to comment regarding Tuesday’s publication of a series of e-mails pirated from the account of John Podesta, the campaign manager of Hillary Clinton, with regards the reaction of the Democratic team after Barack Obama had declared to have had knowledge of the existence of this private mail server.

You’re justification for these exposes is hidden behind your self-righteous claim to defend “human rights” and “freedom of speech”, but at the same time you seem to ignore the issue of “invasion of privacy” by releasing personal confidential data.

Yes, in certain cases your publications are meant with the best intentions and championing a good cause, but when you invade personal privacy and data there can be far reaching consequences such as influencing the outcome of an election to endangering a countries national and domestic security.

In a few weeks time presidential election will be held, and it is evident by the timing of your publication’s release regarding the pirated
e-mails that your intentions are not ethical or in the general public interest. Presidential elections are meant to be transparent and genuinely democratic. In my opinion, Wikileaks appears to have an agenda regarding Democratic Party and especially with Hilary Clinton.

Can you please explain, from your point of view, what is the objective, purpose and mission statement of Wikileaks.

Perhaps you are ‘big business’ funded and, as per some of the television networks in the USA, exist purely to keep the citizens living in fear and influence decisions. This way, issues that affect the ’small people’ are undermined by sensational releases that have no bearing or benefit to the general population.

I do not subscribe into the reasoning that you are here as the self-proclaimed guardian watchdog to inform the public with sensitive information. It appears that you have positioned yourselves above the law and are selective in your ‘right’ to infringe on personal and government data regardless of how this information is obtained, the case of Edward Snowden is a prime example.

Where would Wikileaks place its ethical boundary when releasing information that could infringe on an individual’s personal privacy.

 I am certain that your personnel and staff would object to their private
e-mails and other sensitive personal information being published.

I would hope that a company the size of Wikileaks provides an employee confidentiality and privacy agreement. If so, should not the same ethic and respect be extended to the general public with no exceptions.

Yours faithfully

...