I think that Julian Assange has done good things but I think that the way he communicates basically gives advocates of censorship and surveillance free talking points.

Most atheists are able to express their disagreement, or even opposition, to religion without expressing hatred against religion. Unfortunately, Richard Dawkins is not that sort of atheist.

I'm thankful for what Edward Snowden did. Unfortunately, even if he didn't have much choice, by fleeing to Russia he made it much easier for people to dismiss criticisms of surveillance as anti-American propaganda.

From what I've heard, John Cleese's criticism of "cancel culture" has been nuanced and reasonable. Unfortunately, a lot of people just lump him in with out of touch comedians whining that they get criticized for telling bigoted jokes. My point being; although I don't think it's fair, his inclusion is unlikely to do the Westminster Declaration any favors in terms of changing people's minds.