"The Horror over WikiLeaks" Richard Armstrong

"The horror over WikiLeaks, which is being expressed mostly by inept diplomats, is disingenuous in the extreme. The consistent claims that lives are being endangered by the information borders on the hilarious. How many lives have been lost to erroneous, yet secret information that led to our invasion of Iraq? If WikiLeaks had been around in 2003 the public might have been well armed with information to create political resistance to W's folly in the ancient deserts. It is, of course, of equal absurdity to suggest there is no need for clandestine operations. But taxpayers and voters tend to acquire their information after the consequences of secret government endeavors, and, obviously, that is a bit late to be of preventive value." 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/wikileaks-and-the-myth-of_b_791740.html 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

The chattering classes are all up in arms about WikiLeaks as is our government.  It makes sense that the government should be upset and I would be dismayed if it wasn't protective both proactively and retroactively.  What I cannot understand is how the chattering classes, especially those of the conservative bent do not see the hypocrisy of damning WikiLeaks while with full throats they overwhelmingly supported this country foolishly choosing to start two completely unnecessary wars of choice. 

WikiLeaks detractors claim Assange is "threatening national security", "putting lives at risk", "damaging international relations" and "breaking the law". 

Let's be honest about this.  Obviously going to war puts lives at risk especially those of the civilian population in disproportional numbers to military personnel.  Yet, the jingoists saw nothing wrong with war. 

Wasting personnel, weapons systems, materiel and national treasure on military follies can certainly be said to threaten national security.  Yet those on the right and the occasional leftist refuse to admit this. 

Our international relations with our allies have been damaged and we've done a fine job of alienating those that adhere to the largest faith in the world by our actions. 

The release of classified material is definitely illegal however few if any had any problem with pundits, members of the press and the Office of the Vice President outing a CIA agent with No Operational Cover. 

The selective morality of the right and the chattering classes is nothing if not hypocritical.

 

 

 

Comments

[Patrick Lang]

Beaver

Welcome to the real world. pl

[JohnH]

Hypocrisy indeed. Most every day you hear some self-righteous politician or talking head condemning China for its internet policies. Now Wikileaks reveals them for what they are--hollow suits eager to exploit whatever position sounds good and agitates the citizenry on the nightly propaganda shows.

[Fred]

Walrus,

This is step 2 or 3 in internet censorship.

[CWZ]

We get all wrapped around the axle about hypocrisy. What bothers me is stupidity. Making the right decisions is more important than wondering whether we're being hypocritical or not.

Just so happens, in much of these cases, dumb decisions and hypocrisy go hand in hand.

[walrus]

Mr. Giraldi:

"My problem is that the definition of classified is so elastic. When George Tenet set out to write his book he was given a secure room at SAIC and access to all his "papers" from his time as DCI. His book was a for profit venture and he freely used classified material. He made $4 million off the book. Juan Cole's point about Rosen and Weissman is also absolutely on target. If you use classified information to attack the ruling class you are in trouble. If you are part of the ruling class and use it for almost any purpose everything is all right. "

1. Regarding uses of classified information, I saw my first CIA document on the desk of a friend of mine who was working for The Ford Motor Company around 1976. It was a classified profile of an Indian gentleman who wanted to do business with Ford.

2. As for the elastic definition of what is "classified", what do you think we talk about in our city clubs and little get togethers?

[The beaver]

Oh Colonel, I know that (I have experienced it) but it is the hypocrisy that I can't digest sometimes. There is the US telling Canada that such and such Canadian citizens can't work on joint projects because those citizens are the "progenitures" of people from the dark side but, some US citizens /politicos can be loyal to Israel and still be privy to State secrets or the US diplomats are free to spy on a friendly country. I have had to curtail some of my job prospects (pick and choose for whom I work for) so that my husband 's sec clearance is not impacted. In one way, it is good that all these "double talks" are in the open.

[trstone]

My take on this outrage of wikileaks exposing US gov't cables is an effort to keep the next release from happening, you know, the one about the real leaders of this good ol' USA--the banks. How much of our money did they get and how did they get it!
It might name names.

[Highlander]

The release of classified material is definitely illegal however few if any had any problem with pundits, members of the press and the Office of the Vice President outing a CIA agent with No Operational Cover.

Richard Dear BOY!

While I agree with your central thesis regarding wikileaks.

Please don't insult all the NOC's who have served this nation and died for it.(Most didn't get their names engraved in a DC marble wall...bad for morale and all that.)

By insulting their memory by bring up the case of that Equal Opportunity Hire..Valerie Palme. She was a bleached blonde joke you jackass!

You disingenuously ignore the fact that at the end of the day it wasn't even the vice president's office that leaked her name, but in truth it was Richard Armitage( who is approved by the left wing elites, and therefore got a free pass) And poor old Skeeter got to go to jail for it. Damn unfair world...our Imperial Capital that all you "OH SO SPECIAL PEOPLE" poplulate.

[Anna-Marina]

On a beauty of our "special relationships:” http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/12/04/wikileaks-exposes-israeli-mafias-growing-influence/
The US Jewish organizations are still under the spell of tribalism, whereas their post-Soviet kin are busy making money on the blatant criminal activity - in the same US

[Patrick Lang]

highlander

Actually, the little p---k is called Scooter. Having had numerous encounters with him I know that well.

Plame's cover was quite real even if it did not require her to live in it, just to operate in it. I haven't seen the movie and will not. pl

[trstone]

I hate to repost, but James Walcotts blog gives a rational description of the mostly heat and little light on this topc.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott

[Roy G]

Highlander, Fred Hiatt is in total agreement with you:

Hollywood has a habit of making movies about historical events without regard for the truth; "Fair Game" is just one more example. But the film's reception illustrates a more troubling trend of political debates in Washington in which established facts are willfully ignored. Mr. Wilson claimed that he had proved that Mr. Bush deliberately twisted the truth about Iraq, and he was eagerly embraced by those who insist the former president lied the country into a war. Though it was long ago established that Mr. Wilson himself was not telling the truth - not about his mission to Niger and not about his wife - the myth endures. We'll join the former president in hoping that future historians get it right.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120306298.html

Funny how the wingnuts are all hell bent on the 'truth' of Plame and Wilson. Totally understandable, because it takes the heat off the Original Lie, one that the neocons and their fellow travelers can never erase: that CheneyBushCo lied us into war with the fabricated Niger uranium.

Perhaps we will find evidence of more such skullduggery in the Wikileaks, hence the alarm.

[CK]

There is an acclaimed Chinese dissident person who has been awarded the Nobel peace prize. He is in prison and it is just so evil that he is imprisoned for pointing our flaws in China. I know it is evil because the serious news media and entertainment folks aggree that it is evil. Exposing truth can lead to cognitive dissonance among the viewers.
However, there is a list of nations who will Not be attending the award. Interesting list of nations
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/12/07/nobel-peace-prize-boycott.html 58 national embassies in Oslo, 19 have refused to attend so far.

[Brent Wiggans]

Fred Hiatt has a rather interesting way of citing the Pincus/Lieby piece to discredit the film’s depiction of Plame’s role in an undercover operation and then ignores the article’s trashing of the Senate investigation report. He cites the Senate report as authoritative with regard to what Wilson’s report on Niger actually said. Pincus/Lieby wrote of the story of Iraq’s attempt to buy 500 tons of yellowcake from Niger that Wilson was sent to investigate, “Wilson debunked it.” Pincus/Lieby also confirmed the accuracy of the film’s depiction of Plame’s role in Wilson’s being recruited for the trip. Hiatt does not express any reservations about the Pincus/Lieby article; he just ignores the bits that contradict what he chooses to assert as truth in the rest of his editorial.

This is the cafeteria model of truth where you get to pick your favorite stuff from the steam tables and call it a balanced meal. It is a lot like what the Bush administration did with intelligence on Iraqi WMD's, no?

[b]

Assange has now been put into jail for very spurious and false rape charges from a CIA connected woman while the State department issues this: U.S. to Host World Press Freedom Day in 2011

Remember that Assange is out to make the public aware of the hypocrisy of the US (and other) governments. The US is doing its best to prove him right.

The United States is pleased to announce that it will host UNESCO’s World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from May 1 - May 3 in Washington, D.C. UNESCO is the only UN agency with the mandate to promote freedom of expression and its corollary, freedom of the press.

The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.

[Fred]

Meanwhile, Visa and Mastercard refuse to process donations to wikileaks:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2010/1207/WikiLeaks-ditched-by-MasterCard-Visa.-Who-s-next

I wonder if Visa and Mastercard process any cards in State Sponsors of Terrorism Cuba, Iran, Sudan or Syria?

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/c14151.htm

On a note showing we are in for deep trouble in the Mideast:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/12/07/1962377/us-drops-push-for-israeli-freeze.html

[Anna-Marina]

A score of journalists were murdered in Russia for their work to expose the government corruption. And now the US... Palin, Frum (Bush’s speech-writer), and other Yoos bloviate about Assange "treason," while being quiet on AIPAC's spies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120303267.html
“If Assange is ultimately charged with disclosing information that is potentially damaging to national security, Eric Holder now knows who Assange will call as his first witness: the secretary of defense.”
By Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor

[Fred]

No wonder there is horror over wiki-leaks. Mr. Assange has made some powerful enemies. Perhaps Saudi society is going to have some turmoil soon too?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/235420

[Rd.]

A little quiz. Who said this?

We stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the world’s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. Now, this challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic.

And who said this?

The more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves.

#1: Hillary Rodham Clinton
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/01/135519.htm

#2: the words of wisdom of Barack Obama . In 2009
http://republicofdream.blogspot.com/

b, guess I don't qualify for the cookies, but there is plenty of christmas cookies to go around!!

and well worth repeating this post as well.

I've just realised what this contest between the U.S. Government and Wikileaks is all about....

If the Government can make an example of Assange and Wikileaks right now, then they can censor any American or Foreign journalist, anywhere, anytime, without changing the law or raising First Amendment rights issues in a court.
Posted by: walrus

[Brent Wiggans]

"By insulting their memory by bring up the case of that Equal Opportunity Hire..Valerie Palme. She was a bleached blonde joke you jackass!"

So, Highlander, do you actually know something that entitles you to denigrate Plame and her service to the country or are you just that way?

[Mark Logan]

Came across an interview with John Young, one of the co-founders, and the guy that runs "cryptome" that seems to provide some insight on Assange and Wikileaks.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html

A money making operation, with a cult-like following?
Seems to fit. Flake, 3rd class.

But killing this guy? "Worse than a blunder, it is a crime!" IMO.

[Roy G]

SST's own Phil Giraldi has come out in favor of Wikileaks:

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/12/08/leaks-and-leakers/

Well said, Mr. Giraldi!

[b]

@Rd. a cookie to you

@Mark Logan

John Young has always run his own thing - he never published anything secret at Cryptome - he seems not to get that what wikileaks tries to do is in a different dimension than his site.

[walrus]

Col. Lang,

I have just heard that Geoffrey Robinson is going to defend Assange in Britain. This is not good news for the United States.

I'm not sure if you are aware that lawyers don't come with a higher public profile than Robinson. He has run, and won, some very high profile cases, including in the crime and human rights fields.

I wonder if anyone in Washington is aware that Robinson is quite capable of putting the British, Swedish and American Governments in the dock and on trial themselves over this matter with very little prospect of them winning in the court of public opinion, no matter what the outcome of the hearing is?

You might like to consider using your contacts to enquire if Washington is aware that Geoffrey Robinson QC. is capable of turning this into an even bigger can of worms than it is now? The hearing is going to be legal theatre of the highest quality and the press will report every word.

In my opinion, unless Washington reverses direction on this entire matter, drops the harassment of Assange and Wikileaks, America risks permanent diplomatic damage.

Everyone can understand that the leaks are a gaffe, that diplomacy involves certain games, that the 911 response made information sharing important, etc. and that can be forgiven. What will NOT be forgiven is the hypocritical, petty and spiteful response of America towards Wikileaks, and you can trust Geoffrey Robinson to maximise the pain.

Furthermore, the persecution of Wikileaks and Assange gives the green light to every other government to do the same thing to any news organisation they judge to be purveying inconvenient truths. Journalists around the world are waking up to this, and they are not impressed. Don't make a Martyr out of Assange, or else.

It should also not be lost on anyone that in Assanges Op-Ed published in the Murdoch owned "The Australian", he invoked the memory of Rupert Murdoch's father whose despatches "leaked" from Gallipoli provoked similar official ire. I'm not sure which side of the fence Rupert is going to be on in this matter.

[Mark Logan]

@b

I thought he was pretty clear detailing the differences between Wikileaks and his own methods myself.

Just to clarify: I do not agree with the people who think Assange is guilty of "treason" or should be assassinated. Not one bit. Looking at what he has produced so far, the helicopter video was grossly miss-labeled. IMO, the field report release was irresponsible. The State Department cables are in the same catagory. Yet, I give him credit for running the information through generally responsible journalists where he did so.

I merely suspect the man is naive, vain, ideologically driven, and self serving. His site claims total anonymity, which is huckster-ish, because he can not make the promise, as Brad Manning will attest.

In short, I feel he is an incompetent flake. One who has a short future of usefulness in revealing the workings of government. He is revealing things that are not making war less likely, or anything of great use. Nothing to justify the price Manning will pay, the poor stupid kid should have been talked out of it.