WikiLeaks/NYT/Guardian/Spiegel: The War Logs

[katoa]

In the other WikiLeaks thread someone asked me whether or not he government, or corporations should be able to have ANY secrets. I responded that they naturally have the right to try and secret info. I would add to that that I think that the government should be able to protect some kinds of information, specifically clandestine information that protects the lives of our soldiers, special forces and spies, with the full weight of the law. The great problem that I see with most of the info being reported by the NYT, is that it doesn't fit this category of information. Indeed much of it, like the use of small heat-guided missiles by the Taliban, was widely known by both our military AND the enemy. It appears that the goal of much of the 'classified' status here was not to keep info out of the hands of the enemy, but rather to keep it out of the hands of the American public. Rather than protecting the lives of our people these documents seem to protect the popularity/viability of the war itself. To me, this is absolutely antithetical to our democratic ideals. If the case for the war cannot be made without obscuring the truth, then we shouldn't be fighting it.

Amen, Bro.

This strikes me as rather naive. The leaks cast aspersions on the Pakistan intelligence service and make it likely that cooperation with that agency will decrease. Thus we will get less intelligence or we will have more of our intelligence leaked to the Taliban or both. Obviously it is true that everyone looking at Afghanistan doubts the independence and loyalty of the Pakistan intelligence service, but by airing official US military communiques taking this position the Pakistanis have almost no choice but to react negatively at both a policy level and at an individual level. It seems clear beyond cavil, in my mind, that this will result in an increase of threats to Americans in the field. Thus, the classification is justified.

BS. The Pakistani ISI has been known publicly for a long time to be in cahoot with the Taliban, even creating Al Queda. (with a large infusion of CIA cash and directives, as admitted by Robert Gates in his own memoir).

[creekster]

BS. The Pakistani ISI has been known publicly for a long time to be in cahoot with the Taliban, even creating Al Queda. (with a large infusion of CIA cash and directives, as admitted by Robert Gates in his own memoir).

I gather you missed the part where I said that it was the link itself that created a significant problem as a result of this disclosure? THat fact/premise doesnt undermine anything else I said. To the contrary, it is presumed in what I am saying.

Are you suggesting, btw, that Al Qaeda and the Taliban are the same or closely related entities?

[YOhio]

I would have a ton more respect for WikiLeaks if they were able to get hold of some of the really good classified material held by the government. Like the top-secret stuff about aliens, JFK, the moon landing and 9-11 that the feds are hiding from us. But instead we get some memos that speculate that some elements within the Pakistani intelligence community may be corrupt. Boooooring. C'mon blonde Australian guy. Step up ya game!

[katoa]

Interesting interview of Assange:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...708518,00.html

[RobinFinderson]

Interesting interview of Assange:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...708518,00.html

I liked this quote:

There is a legitimate role for secrecy, and there is a legitimate role for openness. Unfortunately, those who commit abuses against humanity or against the law find abusing legitimate secrecy to conceal their abuse all too easy. People of good conscience have always revealed abuses by ignoring abusive strictures. It is not WikiLeaks that decides to reveal something. It is a whistleblower or a dissident who decides to reveal it. Our job is to make sure that these individuals are protected, the public is informed and the historical record is not denied.

[katoa]

Great article:

Wikileaks, the World's First Stateless News Organization
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/we...ks_afghan.html

IMO, this was the most insightful:

“We tend to think: big revelations mean big reactions. But if the story is too big and crashes too many illusions, the exact opposite occurs.”

So we get worked up about some minor scandal here or there, but when serious cracks appear in the "we're free" story, such as testimony before congress about the CIA involved in drug trafficking, that is just too mind-blowing to consider (and thus major news organizations won't touch it with a 10 foot pole).

Explains why us serfs don't rise up in rebellion (and then attack those encouraging such rebellion)...

[creekster]

Explains why us serfs don't rise up in rebellion (and then attack those encouraging such rebellion)...

We are very fortunate to have you to help us move past our stupidity.

[creekster]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/07/29/wik...ex.html?hpt=T1

Looks like Assange could have done a little better job of expunging names, etc.

[myboynoah]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/07/29/wik...ex.html?hpt=T1

Looks like Assange could have done a little better job of expunging names, etc.

"I spent most of my life in the intelligence business, where the sacrosanct principle is protecting your sources. And that involves your sources trusting you to protect them and to protect their identities," Gates said. "That is one of the worst aspects of this, as far as I'm concerned. Will people trust us? Will people's whose lives are on the line trust us to keep their identities secret? Will other governments trust us to keep their documents and their intelligence secret?"

This, right here. This.

Of course, the USG should have done a much better job of protecting its classifed information. That the kid could mass download it onto a CD is scary. Some of that blood is on the hands of the USG as well.

[creekster]

This, right here. This.

Of course, the USG should have done a much better job of protecting its classified information. That the kid could mass download it onto a CD is scary. Some of that blood is on the hands of the USG as well.

You are correct. Plenty of blame to go around. But to be very honest Assange's sanctimonious screed trying to justify his efforts to get his name in the paper infuriate me. He could have handled this very, very differently, but he chose not to do so; he chose to go for the big splash and now people will die both in the short term and likely in the long term as a consequence of the lack of trust.

I have also read elsewhere that ironically this leak will lead to a much less accurate historical record because troops in the field are now going to be less likely to provide all details (such as names of informants or details of operations) for fear they will be leaked. Thus, policy makers seeking to appraise performance in the war will be less able to do so.

Furthermore, this could also lead to less exchange of information between intelligence agencies. I suppose that doesn't bother Assange or his ilk, but it makes me less than happy.

Yes, thanks wikileaks. Sure glad you acted for the higher good here.

[myboynoah]

You are correct. Plenty of blame to go around. But to be very honest Assange's sanctimonious screed trying to justify his efforts to get his name in the paper infuriate me. He could have handled this very, very differently, but he chose not to do so; he chose to go for the big splash and now people will die both in the short term and likely in the long term as a consequence of the lack of trust.

I have also read elsewhere that ironically this leak will lead to a much less accurate historical record because troops in the field are now going to be less likely to provide all details (such as names of informants or details of operations) for fear they will be leaked. Thus, policy makers seeking to appraise performance in the war will be less able to do so.

Furthermore, this could also lead to less exchange of information between intelligence agencies. I suppose that doesn't bother Assange or his ilk, but it makes me less than happy.

Yes, thanks wikileaks. Sure glad you acted for the higher good here.

I haven't been following this all that closely, but in the interviews I have seen, Mr. Assange comes off as way in over his head. I don't sense he at all grasps the gravity of the situation. He comes off as totally lacking in any understanding of what is going on, uninterested, and even a bit mousy. He's giving whistleblowers a bad name.

[YOhio]

I haven't been following this all that closely, but in the interviews I have seen, Mr. Assange comes off as way in over his head. I don't sense he at all grasps the gravity of the situation. He comes off as totally lacking in any understanding of what is going on, uninterested, and even a bit mousy. He's giving whistleblowers a bad name.

This guy isn't a fan.

If Hollywood were ever to make a film about a nihilistic leaker-hacker dude, a rootless subverter of international public order, they couldn’t do better than to cast Julian Assange as himself.

With his bloodless, sallow face, his lank hair drained of all color, his languorous, very un-Australian limbs, and his aura of blinding pallor that appears to admit no nuance, Assange looks every inch the amoral, uber-nerd villain, icily detached from the real world of moral choices in which the rest of us saps live. Call him the Unaleaker, with apologies to the victims of Ted Kaczynski.

[frank ryan]

This guy isn't a fan.

I don't think John Young, founder of Cryptome, another whistle blower website is too fond of him either. Young is disturbed by Assange's constant fundraising

[katoa]

But to be very honest Assange's sanctimonious screed trying to justify his efforts to get his name in the paper infuriate me. He could have handled this very, very differently, but he chose not to do so; he chose to go for the big splash and now people will die both in the short term and likely in the long term as a consequence of the lack of trust.

BS - Assange is going to risk getting getting extradited or worse, all to get his name in the paper?

If we really cared about the brave soldiers put at risk, we'd face up to the fact that we are only making the situation worse in Afghanistan and bring our soldiers home. Andrew J. Bacevich, professor of history and international relations at Boston University, summarizes it pretty well:

"What exactly is the point of the Afghanistan war? The point cannot be to 'prevent another 9/11,' since violent anti-Western jihadists are by no means confined to or even concentrated in Afghanistan. Even if we were to “win” in Afghanistan tomorrow, the jihadist threat would persist. If anything, staying in Afghanistan probably exacerbates that threat. So tell me again: why exactly are we there?"

The war machine is trying desperately to make the news story about the leak, to distract from the disaster the leak is exposing. For instance, why no mainstream news coverage of this?:

Toxic legacy of US assault on Fallujah 'worse than Hiroshima'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...a-2034065.html

Afghanistan is supposedly the graveyard of empires. If true, then ours is currently digging its own.

[The_Tick]

BS - Aggange is going to risk getting getting extradited or worse, all to get his name in the paper.

If we really cared about the brave soldiers put at risk, we'd face up to the fact that we are only making the situation worse in Afghanistan and bring our soldiers home. Andrew J. Bacevich, professor of history and international relations at Boston University, summarizes it pretty well:

"What exactly is the point of the Afghanistan war? The point cannot be to 'prevent another 9/11,' since violent anti-Western jihadists are by no means confined to or even concentrated in Afghanistan. Even if we were to “win” in Afghanistan tomorrow, the jihadist threat would persist. If anything, staying in Afghanistan probably exacerbates that threat. So tell me again: why exactly are we there?"

The war machine is trying desperately to make the news story about the leak, to distract from the disaster the leak is exposing. For instance, why no mainstream news coverage of this?:

Toxic legacy of US assault on Fallujah 'worse than Hiroshima'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...a-2034065.html

Afghanistan is supposedly the graveyard of empires. If true, then ours is currently digging its own.

I wouldn't want to be in the same foxhole as you.