The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
I think there is now a general consensus that the embarrassing revelations about Arab attitudes to Iran, or the Chinese to the Korea problem, or American diplomats' views of everyone from the Russians to the Royal Family are pretty predictable. Some even praise our off the record cables for not being too much at odds with official policy. But that said, we also accept that the leaks will have an insidious effect: fewer players will wish to speak to our team; Americans will fight a reputation of being untrustworthy in keeping confidence; and we will thus miss out on some vital information that could have life and death consequences—in addition to these revelations hurting those we have enlisted to our cause.
More importantly, the relative ease with which Bradley Manning stole the files, and the open contempt and disdain that Mr. Assange seems to have for the United States, likewise cement an image of American impotence. Clearly, neither Americans nor foreigners fear disclosing national secret cables. They possess an almost "OK, what exactly are you going to do about it?" attitude, especially in the case of Assange who is not subject to military justice.
The only upside? Because this happened on the watch of a liberal president, and because liberal diplomats like Hillary Clinton were caught doing embarrassing things like overseeing some spying on UN diplomats, we are seeing the media either go after Assange, claim that the damage is not all that great, or praise the transcripts for their wit and candor—all mechanisms for lessening the damage. Of course, had this happened under Bush we would see calls to fire the Secretary of State, perhaps give Assange a Pulitzer Prize, and bash Bush for cheap things like offering photo-ops in exchange for dumping Guantanamo detainees.
- Comment (9)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
Pulitzer? Please. They are already polishing up a Nobel Peace Prize I am sure.
For Assange, the real nightmare begins Inauguration Day, 2013.
705 days until the election.
Jun '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
My healthcare company has several hundred thousand patient records in our systems. Just looking at a patient record for which you have no need-to-know is a first offense termination and the system tracks who, what, when and why. Disclosure of those records is subject to federal criminal and civil penalties that could bankrupt the company and ruin the corporate officers. It would be the DOJ that appropriately brought the hammer down in a most public manner. Serious indeed, but not national security. Are we to believe that the same government that would publicly destroy my company is going to quietly put the whole rap on some idiot PFC?
Edited on Dec 2, 2010 at 5:41pmAug '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
So how are we to react when the obvious links between Soros and Assange become apparent ? Will this surpass earlier hypocrisies as Soros sups with Mr Clinton as Mrs Clinton is hauled over the hot emails and they are all Obami apologists, sponsors or employees ? Threatening to prosecute yourself is a new acrobatic challenge to the " most transparent Govt ever "! And they send the AG to the FIFA convention ? way too stinky
May '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
I think Dalrymple's take is dead on target:
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon1202td.html
"The dissolution of the distinction between the private and public spheres was one of the great aims of totalitarianism. Opening and reading other people’s e-mails is not different in principle from opening and reading other people’s letters. In effect, WikiLeaks has assumed the role of censor to the world, a role that requires an astonishing moral grandiosity and arrogance to have assumed. Even if some evils are exposed by it, or some necessary truths aired, the end does not justify the means."
May '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
I have a terrible memory, but I seem to recall someone being caught selling our nuclear secrets during Clinton's administration and the culprit was either pardoned or slapped with a minor sentence. Perhaps it shouldn't surprise anyone that a government that will not guard its borders also does not consider treason a serious offense.
As I said before, leaks of state information are hardly new. The New York Times has collaborated with politicians and government employees for decades to release privileged information for mutual benefit (money and prestige for the reporters, leverage for the politicians and administrators). WikiLeaks is a continuation of larger problems with security and corruption.
Oct '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
"Americans will fight a reputation of being untrustworthy in keeping confidence; and we will thus miss out on some vital information that could have life and death consequences"
The New York Times drove a stake through the heart of confidentiality some time ago. The countervailing upside here is that it may be a lot harder for our international "partners" to speak out of both sides of their mouths.
May '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
The lack of serious action by the administration at the outset of this crisis is simply mind blowing - as is the lack of overwhelming public outcry. We will be paying for these leaks for many years to come.
That the leaks put our service people, diplomats and allies at risk in a time of war, and our response is weak and ineffective, is a national disgrace.
Jun '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
A applaud wikileaks for their work, I reckon it's as close as we get to a free press anymore. After all, the things the government seems most concerned about leaking is their own ineptitude and dishonesty. Assauge should be untouchable. After all, leaking classified and confidential documents are a time honored government tradition. Ask any veteran who's had his medical records lost on some laptop...over and over again.
Bradley Manning, on the other hand, should get nailed. What he did was treason.
America IS untrustworthy. As any Native American how well we keep our treaties, our promises. As Vietnam, Cuba, Laos, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Taiwan, or many other countries how well we keep our promises. Regardless of how we feel about our country, the international community has no illusions about our trustworthiness.
Jul '10
Re: The Aftermath of WikiLeaks
I'm confused.
The Smartest Man in the World, employing the Smartest Woman in the World as Secretary of State have just blundered on the world stage and it proves what?
Well, it proves that Bush was a Cowboy and couldn't be trusted in charge of the Most Powerful Nation in the world because he garnered cooperation from other nations in matters of life and death, unlike the current occupant who wasn't responsible for what went wrong because he cannot get cooperation from the world on things like The Olympics and FIFA.
I think I'll have a salad.