Kate Adie Quotes

The people have a right to know—no, a duty to know—what the army is doing in our name.

As leakers take great risks in releasing information, assuring them that they are not sacrificing themselves in vain and that their leaks would have public consequences would most likely encourage more people to leak.

Some in my party threaten to send a message that they don't know a just war when they see it, and more broadly that they're not prepared to use our military strength to protect our security and the cause of freedom.

There is no country on earth with a stronger tradition of protecting the public's right to know.

The American people have been denied important information for their own protection.

It is not to benefit CBS, not to benefit its reporters. On this one, the entire basis of it is this is a way to get more information, more important information to the public. And that's why so many states recognize this.

What is the 'noble cause' for which you sent our country to war?

When the Vice President of the United States shoots somebody, the public has the right to know.

We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know, and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows

I believe that the American People have a right to know what was done in their name..

The utterly fallacious idea at the heart of the pro-war argument is that it is the duty of the anti-war argument to provide an alternative to war. The onus is on them to explain just cause.

It's my father's legacy. My father's view was that the public is the employer of these government employees and has the right to know what they're up to.

There are many people, including me, who admire the original mission of WikiLeaks.

The U.K. government has a responsibility to keep secrets in some circumstances. It also has a responsibility not to abuse that power for other purposes.

The major wars that the U.S. became involved in are all ethically defensible.

What I've learned, and will try to remember from now on, is that defending your country's credibility is never sufficient reason to fight a war.

The Second World War is and was constantly being drudged up by Blair and Bush to rationalize the invasion of Iraq.

I'm a freedom of information campaigner, so obviously I support the cause of Wikileaks.

The fact is that when it comes to judgment as to what should be secret and what should not be secret, Julian Assange's judgment has been pretty good so far.

Openness, transparency - these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect itself from the powerful and the corrupt... and that is the best thing that WikiLeaks has done.

I think the good old British democracy should keep scrutinising and pressing to get the truth out.

Can a democratic nation fight a War on Terror and at the same time bend over backward so as not to offend a few visitors' rights?

The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.

Are there really good wars and bad wars? We thought so during World War II, and in retrospect, we were right. But in Vietnam, and Iraq we were wrong.

The People have a right to the Truth as they have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.