Naughty Naughty Americans

[JimC]

There is a massive disconnect between the huge level of embarrassment such revelations cause, and the almost ludicrous lack of security involved in these soon-to-be-leaked communiques...

Couldn't someone in the State Department understand, just a little about calculations of potential risk?

[Gawd]

There is a massive disconnect between the huge level of embarrassment such revelations cause, and the almost ludicrous lack of security involved in these soon-to-be-leaked communiques...

Couldn't someone in the State Department understand, just a little about calculations of potential risk?

Why hide it? What do you have to hide that people can't know?

[Rum]

There was only one item in the leaks (that I have read in the Guardian website) which wasn't at some level general knowledge (the story about Prince William, which is an irrelevance anyway to most people) There is more detail about those issues in the leaks, but not a great deal of revelation. Perhaps it is the fact that the system is so leaky which is getting people into such a lather.

[JimC]

There is a massive disconnect between the huge level of embarrassment such revelations cause, and the almost ludicrous lack of security involved in these soon-to-be-leaked communiques...

Couldn't someone in the State Department understand, just a little about calculations of potential risk?

Why hide it? What do you have to hide that people can't know?

Well, you might like at times to speak frankly amongst your fellow diplomats about some shortcomings you perceive in your allies, without wanting the criticism to be out in the open, where your enemies can laugh at your lack of unity...

Perfectly understandable hominid trait, tribal gossip and in-fighting writ large...

[Gawd]

There is a massive disconnect between the huge level of embarrassment such revelations cause, and the almost ludicrous lack of security involved in these soon-to-be-leaked communiques...

Couldn't someone in the State Department understand, just a little about calculations of potential risk?

Why hide it? What do you have to hide that people can't know?

Well, you might like at times to speak frankly amongst your fellow diplomats about some shortcomings you perceive in your allies, without wanting the criticism to be out in the open, where your enemies can laugh at your lack of unity...

Perfectly understandable hominid trait, tribal gossip and in-fighting writ large...

If there is someone in the US government that's not controlled by AIPAC, you damn well know that I would want them to criticize Israel instead of shutting up and keeping it behind closed doors like AIPAC wants you to. Note that Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden are both members of AIPAC.

[Trolldor]

America has criticised Israel quite publically a number of times. Especially recently while under the Obama Administration.

[Gawd]

America has criticised Israel quite publically a number of times. Especially recently while under the Obama Administration.

That "criticism" is quite half assed and dishonest, IMHO. Look at what Obama and Hilary did after Israel started stealing West Bank land and homes once more: They gave Israel warplanes. That is hardly genuine criticism and more like playing the public for fools. It puts the whole perspective of the American intentions in a clearer light and paints the previous "criticism" as just a charade.

[eXcommunicate]

A great quote from Assange's blog in 2007, before Wikileaks hit it huge.

"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love. In a modern economy it is impossible to seal oneself off from injustice.

If we have brains or courage, then we are blessed and called on not to frit these qualities away, standing agape at the ideas of others, winning pissing contests, improving the efficiencies of the neocorporate state, or immersing ourselves in obscuranta, but rather to prove the vigor of our talents against the strongest opponents of love we can find.

If we can only live once, then let it be a daring adventure that draws on all our powers. Let it be with similar types whos hearts and heads we may be proud of. Let our grandchildren delight to find the start of our stories in their ears but the endings all around in their wandering eyes.

The whole universe or the structure that perceives it is a worthy opponent, but try as I may I can not escape the sound of suffering. Perhaps as an old man I will take great comfort in pottering around in a lab and gently talking to students in the summer evening and will accept suffering with insouciance. But not now; men in their prime, if they have convictions are tasked to act on them."

-- Julian Assange, 03 Jan 2007

[Lozzer]

A great quote from Assange's blog in 2007, before Wikileaks hit it huge.

"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love. In a modern economy it is impossible to seal oneself off from injustice.

If we have brains or courage, then we are blessed and called on not to frit these qualities away, standing agape at the ideas of others, winning pissing contests, improving the efficiencies of the neocorporate state, or immersing ourselves in obscuranta, but rather to prove the vigor of our talents against the strongest opponents of love we can find.

If we can only live once, then let it be a daring adventure that draws on all our powers. Let it be with similar types whos hearts and heads we may be proud of. Let our grandchildren delight to find the start of our stories in their ears but the endings all around in their wandering eyes.

The whole universe or the structure that perceives it is a worthy opponent, but try as I may I can not escape the sound of suffering. Perhaps as an old man I will take great comfort in pottering around in a lab and gently talking to students in the summer evening and will accept suffering with insouciance. But not now; men in their prime, if they have convictions are tasked to act on them."

-- Julian Assange, 03 Jan 2007

Same year he raped two women in Sweden, no?

[Feck]

That case looks a bit strange Lozzer ,They dropped the case .....they re-opened it....... they didn't want him detained ...

[Lozzer]

That case looks a bit strange Lozzer ,They dropped the case .....they re-opened it....... they didn't want him detained ...

That's what I initially thought, but then again, it's too credible that it should be a slur campaign and too good of an excuse for Assanage.

[Feck]

That case looks a bit strange Lozzer ,They dropped the case .....they re-opened it....... they didn't want him detained ...

That's what I initially thought, but then again, it's too credible that it should be a slur campaign and too good of an excuse for Assanage.

there must be a lot of pressure to get him .... it's not like they can arrange for an accident is it ... I don't know ,but If he is charged and found guilty I would be surprised .

[Lozzer]

That case looks a bit strange Lozzer ,They dropped the case .....they re-opened it....... they didn't want him detained ...

That's what I initially thought, but then again, it's too credible that it should be a slur campaign and too good of an excuse for Assanage.

there must be a lot of pressure to get him .... it's not like they can arrange for an accident is it ... I don't know ,but If he is charged and found guilty I would be surprised .

Well a US politician wants Wikileaks labelled a terrorist organisation and Assanage arrested under America law, so.

[GreyICE]

If I were Assange, then I would not arrange any visits to the US. He would be in a jail cell in hours.

[Ian]

A few thoughts, if anyone cares to read…

Information that can be classified as secret does not necessarily make it relevant, not in and of itself. That does not mean that it should be immediately disclosed to the public. Take the reports about Qaddafi. The fact that he’s now always accompanied by a voluptuous blonde Ukrainian nurse probably has little relevance by itself. Everybody already knows that he’s a weird guy and that he’s getting old. But good intelligence is fused from other sources. Let’s say another report two months earlier from an informant in Tripoli (who’s desperate to keep his identity secret, by the way!) had mentioned that an unnamed senior Libyan official had just been diagnosed with terminal cancer and is expected to die within six months, and had brought in an eastern European nurse who specializes in oncology to care for him. Suddenly, what might have merely been a State Department water-cooler joke about Qaddafi enjoying some eye candy becomes extremely important for the future of international relations across North Africa and within the Arab world. At that point, this information gets shared among any number of foreign ministries around the world. Qaddafi might have wanted to keep his health a secret, but why shouldn’t others get a heads up that Libya is about to undergo political upheaval?

The crap Wikileaks said about American diplomats being used for intelligence gathering might have to be the dumbest notion I’ve ever heard! Earth to Julian Assange… diplomats have always been used to gather information! Always have, and always will. Any time there’s a meeting between foreign officials, even if it is off the books, the details are recorded by both of them after the fact. If the American Ambassador in Moscow meets with Medvedev and later notes in his report that the Russian President appeared to have a very tense relationship with his staff, then that, believe it or not, is intelligence gathering. And I don’t see why such details need to be published in the New York Times. Nor is such reporting remotely illegal. And Julian Assange makes a statement about being shocked by the scale of American intelligence gathering by our diplomats?? What a jackass! He’s just trying to create publicity and controversy for his website. I suppose he would also be shocked to learn that sports teams watch videos of their opponents before having a match with them.

And the above examples aren’t just semantic imaginings. One of the reports published today described Angela Merkel as being uncreative and risk-averse, one likened Medvedev as playing Robin to Putin’s Batman, one discussed Berlusconi as being the mouthpiece of Putin in Europe and exchanging lavish gifts with him, etc. All of these things are embarrassing… and not so much to the US. So far this morning I’ve read about Chinese intelligence hacking into American computer servers, Saudi Arabia asking the US for airstrikes against Iran, Syrian arms smuggling to Hezbollah despite Assad’s rhetoric, Qaddafi bitching about his reception at the UN, possible Eritrean support to Islamic militants in Somalia, Pakistan refusing to accept US offers to help in securing its enriched uranium, etc. And I’ve also read some interesting-if-confusing stuff about Yemen. Sure, all of this is a bit embarrassing to the US, but that may actually be the least of the damage. So America gets its diary stolen and then posted for all its neighbors to read, big deal. As annoyed as the US is with this, all of reports I mentioned here are even more embarrassing (and potentially damaging) to Russia, Germany, China, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Eritrea, Pakistan and Yemen. And who knows which country’s foreign ministry will have an employee that leaks a bunch of sensitive documents to Wikileaks next? The existence of a website like Wikileaks might be a generally good thing, but this move cannot possibly do more good than harm for the world, not by a mile. But I’m comforted by the fact that Wikileaks made an awful lot of new enemies with this deluge of notes.