You should get out of your industry/market moreâ¦.

Not really pointless at all -- think about when you're selected for jury duty.

It's not quite that simple -- boiled down it has to do with security clearance and your ability to get it. The government has told it's employees, and it's contractors and their employees, if they're not specifically authorized to view the classified material then their security clearance can/will be revoked--along with their jobs. It also coul have a bearing on your ability to gain clearance, or higher clearance, in the future. If you knowingly/willingly view classified material you were not expressly authorized to view, what's to keep you from doing it again in the future?

I am actually curious about something, so please go easy on the flames if this has been spelled out or is obvious. While Assange didn't take the material itself, isn't it against US law to be in possession of classified/Secret material if you're not authorized to do so? If so, could this been seen similar to receiving stolen goods? Like if I were to steal a TV and give it to you, you're just as liable as I am if you knew the TV was stolen when I gave it to you? I realize there have been arguments made about ethical/moral "obligation" and what not, but that's a personal choice -- just wondering about the possession piece...