Thats my point... you have a special brand of "free speech". That has caveats on the free part.
If you don't like the bradley manning example, then just move further up the chain to Wikileaks. The point is still valid.
It isn't Free Speech, is just 'mostly' free unless you impinge on a more powerful interest... oh wait, that isn't free.
If you don't like the bradley manning example, then just move further up the chain to Wikileaks. The point is still valid. It isn't Free Speech, is just 'mostly' free unless you impinge on a more powerful interest... oh wait, that isn't free.