WikiLeaks, an organization determined to end illegitimate governance by creating a free exchange of government information, recently released many documents directly related to the United States and the U.S.’s defense strategies. While the leak of cables and documents relating to U.S. foreign policy does keep the public more informed of the inner workings of the government and creates a more democratic feel to the relationship between the government and the governed, the documents contained sensitive material that does not only give away United States military secrets, but also endangers the lives of specific U.S. citizens. WikiLeaks has gone too far.

            Many assert that the free spread of documents directly relating to government secrets contributes to the “transparency” that “is supposed to be the characteristic of democracies.”  This statement would be perfectly admissible as a reason to keep organizations like WikiLeaks running, if the United States was a democracy. The United States is a democratic republic in which the people have some, but not complete, control of the government and its actions. This means that the government has freedom to act independently of the people’s wishes on some issues, especially in cases revolving around the safety of America’s home soil or the troops fighting in exotic lands. The United States is not a democracy, and therefore is not subject to criticism that would have people believe that our nation is out to completely serve the people, which the government is setting out to protect.

            Others assert that WikiLeaks is a positive source of information. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange even goes so far as to say that WikiLeaks is an outlet for “whistle-blowers and journalists who have been censored to get material out to the public.” If the site was limited purely to whistle-blowers and journalists, then the debacle involving the United States may have never happened. It is the loose definition of whistle-blowers that allows government workers who must obtain their information illegally to post sensitive and classified information for the entire electronic world to see. A whistle-blower should not include one who must break the law in order to get his or her information to a leak site that could potentially damage the United States as well as specific United States citizens. WikiLeaks is using illegal information, and that should not be under the category of the free exchange of information, but rather the unwarranted exchange of illegal documents.

            Many officials within the United States believe it is too secretive with its information, and that the public should know more of the institution it is blindly following. One such believer is Democratic Representative Holt of New Jersey. Holt, who consistently believes more information on the government’s doings should be released to the public, gave a statement admitting that after reading the cables posted by WikiLeaks, he “concluded that their release could indeed cause real harm to real people.”  This information proves that the WikiLeaks release of U.S. government documents is not only sticking it to the Man, as most would claim, but is compromising the safety of United States citizens who hold secretive positions or are in situations that should not be known of.

            WikiLeaks is a website and news source dedicated to the release of sensitive government documents that are intended to inform the public of the behind-the-scenes workings of a national government. This information leaked to the entire universe does not only harm the integrity of international superpowers, it targets and endangers specific members of specific communities. This is not a benevolent news source dedicated to the free exchange of information; it is a pirate organization with the sole intention of bringing down organized government as we humans know it today.