[Karunamon]

Mmm, no. I think there is a real and legitimate purpose for a government to be able to tell its employees that certain information shouldn't be shared.

What most of us are bothered about is the way that the classification process is bandied about like a cheap rubber stamp with no justification or review, and worse how it's being used to cover up some pretty alarming (and probably illegal) things themselves.

Classification is a tool, you don't throw out the tool because it's misused sometimes (or even most of the time).

[youngerdryas]

Ellsberg was shielded because he was reporting illegal activity by a government official. If what you divulge is not illegal you have no protection.

[gruseom]

Ellsberg was shielded because he was reporting illegal activity by a government official.

What specific illegal conduct did Ellsberg report? My understanding is that he leaked classified documents about the Vietnam War because he felt the public was being misled and had a right to know. That doesn't seem so different from the justification Snowden has given (assuming he's telling the truth on that).

How was Ellsberg "shielded"? He was put on trial, and Nixon famously sent the plumbers to dig up dirt on him.

If what you divulge is not illegal you have no protection.

What law are you referring to here?