This article is about government harassment of a cyber systems analyst who dared to "express support for Wikileaks" and attended a pro-Wikileaks demonstration. What is wrong with that?
Pretending people are upset about the existence of classification system is silly. The question is why an organization devoted to promoting government transparency and engaged in supposedly-protected free speech is getting officially classified using language which is used to justify (illegal and criminal) warrantless detention, torture and extra-judicial assassination.
It is entirely possible that the US military could restrict service members from subscribing to the New York Times or the Washington Post, but I don't see Bob Woodward or Tom Friedman getting described as an enemy of the American Republic.
There is nothing wrong with attending pro-Wikileaks demonstrations as far as I can tell, and to the extent that the Air Force is trying to criminalize advocacy on behalf of Wikileaks, I strongly agree that they're irredeemably in the wrong.
Pretending people are upset about the existence of classification system is silly. The question is why an organization devoted to promoting government transparency and engaged in supposedly-protected free speech is getting officially classified using language which is used to justify (illegal and criminal) warrantless detention, torture and extra-judicial assassination.
It is entirely possible that the US military could restrict service members from subscribing to the New York Times or the Washington Post, but I don't see Bob Woodward or Tom Friedman getting described as an enemy of the American Republic.