Wikileaks diplomatic cables

[NeuroTypical]

Any fans out there of geopolitics? Anyone wish they could spend less time reading between the lines of news media spin and press releases, because they've got access to something a little less filtered and doctored?

The latest wikileaks 'cablegate' posting is like a feast for lovers of unspun truth. Diplomatic cables between USG and embassies. I'm enjoying reading the 'Scenesetters' - such an insight into what our govt's priorities and thoughts actually are!

I'm edified to see various opinion-givers like Stratfor and WSJ so close to what is actually being talked and thought about. Makes me glad I read them. It's with mixed emotions that I guess the USG will probably react strongly enough to make the next potential leaker think twice.

LM

[GeneC]

Lieberman: Shut Down WikiLeaks

Monday, 29 Nov 2010 11:47 AM

Sen. Joe Lieberman is calling on the United States and other governments to shut down Wikileaks by "all legal means" after the website's latest dump of classified U.S. documents, the New York Times reports.

Lieberman, WikiLeaks, terrorist, shut downWikileaks' release of more than 250,000 diplomatic cables is "nothing less than an attack on the national security of the United States, as well as that of dozens of other countries," Lieberman, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in a statement on Sunday.

Pressure to curb the site and its operators is growing in Congress. Rep. Peter King, incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, wants the U.S. to formally declare Wikileaks a terrorist organization.

[HoosierGuy]

I like TPM's John Marshall's opinion on this. Here is part of it:

Secrecy? | Talking Points Memo

This is sort of a side note on the larger Wikileaks question. But in reading various commentary on the Cables story I see again and again references to government secrecy, over classification and so on. But very few of the documents seem to have been highly classified or even very far up to secrecy totem pole.

[HoosierGuy]

So this guy is going to release some things on the big banks. I hope he does. If he does, he will be my new hero! I would not be surprised to see the big banks and corporations try to do him harm (take out) this guy.

Edited December 1, 2010 by HoosierGuy
spelling

[captmoroniRM]

I'm honestly hoping wikileaks gets shut down. Documents like these are marked Secret/NoForn/Classified for reason. Especially ones marked Noforn, which is means it is not to be seen by other foreign nations. They pose a threat to our national security. They can stir our country's adversaries to anger against us. They can put our military in serious danger in the wrong hands. The fact that these leaks are coming from people in uniform is saddening in itself.

[FunkyTown]

I'm honestly hoping wikileaks gets shut down. Documents like these are marked Secret/NoForn/Classified for reason. Especially ones marked Noforn, which is means it is not to be seen by other foreign nations. They pose a threat to our national security. They can stir our country's adversaries to anger against us. They can put our military in serious danger in the wrong hands. The fact that these leaks are coming from people in uniform is saddening in itself.

I agree with you. As long as Wikileaks is providing detailed reports of troop type, numbers and location, they're a danger.

Of course, that's not really what they're doing. They're reporting on what various countries are doing that is controversial. We can not live in blissful ignorance of what is happening. If we are doing things so morally repugnant that it draws international ire, then that should be made public, as should every other country's sins out there.

I applaud Wikileak.

[NeuroTypical]

They can stir our country's adversaries to anger against us. They can put our military in serious danger in the wrong hands.

Meh. None of the things I've read have done any of that. It basically embarasses us and makes diplomacy a little harder for a little while. Iran already knows what Arabs think about them. Prince William already knows what we think about him, and what we think the business leaders in Kyrgizstan think about him. Nobody cares what the oil minister in Whatevereistan says or thinks or does. It's just now that they can wave our own words in our faces, and embarass us into maybe making some concessions we wouldn't have otherwise made. It's a minor play in a very long game.

Mind you, I'm not against finding this soldier and executing him for treason. These leaks do make it harder for the US to do our thing on the world stage, and I wouldn't be surprised to see us punish this guy sufficiently to dissuade the next young dumb kid from wanting to do the same thing.

LM

[Just_A_Guy]

The text of an interesting email from Secretary Gates to Michael Yon is here.

Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.

[DigitalShadow]

Meh. None of the things I've read have done any of that. It basically embarasses us and makes diplomacy a little harder for a little while. Iran already knows what Arabs think about them. Prince William already knows what we think about him, and what we think the business leaders in Kyrgizstan think about him. Nobody cares what the oil minister in Whatevereistan says or thinks or does. It's just now that they can wave our own words in our faces, and embarass us into maybe making some concessions we wouldn't have otherwise made. It's a minor play in a very long game.

Then what is the point of this leak? Simply to embarrass the US and our diplomats? I'm all for WikiLeaks making secret wrongdoings available for all to see, but I'm rather torn on this particular leak. It seems this is more like the equivalent of stirring up drama by telling a friend what someone else said about them behind their back.

[NeuroTypical]

Yeah, Sec. Gates' office called me last week to see what I thought about it. Good to see they went with my take on things.

LM

(lying through my teeth)

[Mahone]

I'm honestly hoping wikileaks gets shut down. Documents like these are marked Secret/NoForn/Classified for reason. Especially ones marked Noforn, which is means it is not to be seen by other foreign nations. They pose a threat to our national security. They can stir our country's adversaries to anger against us. They can put our military in serious danger in the wrong hands. The fact that these leaks are coming from people in uniform is saddening in itself.

Only to have wikileaks v2 take its place? I said in another thread about wikileaks that they are not the problem. Julian Assange is not the problem, even though a prominent Canadian figurehead has called for his assassination. The problem is within the American government, the fact that these things are being leaked in the first place. From the American governments perspective, this should be treated as a weed. You don't cut off the top of it so you can't see it, then forget about it - it will simply grow back again. It needs to be dealt with at the root, which is themselves - forget about wikileaks.

I don't disagree with wikileaks, I actually agree with a number of their aims. There are some things that should be kept secret for the sake of security, and there are some things which are being kept secret under the guise of national security, when all the government are trying to protect are their own jobs by covering up mistakes that they have made, or bad decisions, or things which they know that could cause a public outcry.

[Just_A_Guy]

That's one of the things Secy Gates points out in his email, Mahone--the US Govt leaks "like a sieve", and always has.

[Guest Kamperfoelie]

From wiki...pedia

" "Consent of the governed" is a phrase synonymous with a political theory wherein a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people or society over which that power is exercised."

How do the governed consent to what they dont know? Troop movements... okay, names of secret agents etc... okay. Aside from that, I dont see how any government has a right to hide its true face from its own people.

Im sincerely surprised to find such casual acceptance of government insincerity / dishonesty on an LDS forum. If anywhere id expect people to stand up for truth justice and doing things the right way...

[Just_A_Guy]

You mean, the US should publicize the fact that five other Arab nations want us to go to war with Iran?

Foreign relations often require keeping your cards close to your chest--that's just the nature of the beast.

[Guest Kamperfoelie]

Ultimately, you should be able to look everyone in the eye.

I realise that in this world, this could be complicated. On the other hand, five arab nations want what?! Personally, i think a very loud and public "nu-uh gurlfriend!" would have been in order, leaving the five red-faced, and facing the curious stare of ahmedinesomething. Let them sort it out amongst themselves.

[NeuroTypical]

geopolitics rule #1 - don't let people with nukes and oil sort anything out amongst themselves.

[FunkyTown]

geopolitics rule #1 - don't let people with nukes and oil sort anything out amongst themselves.

Well, I don't think it matters one way or the other. Nobody is especially surprised by any of these allegations.

Really, I don't think any big player on the world stage is too concerned about what was leaked for a few reasons:

1) Countries in the middle east pushing for the US to go to war with Iran could be doing so to hurt Iran, to hurt the US, to gather a piece of the wealth that is Iran, religious reasons or all four of those reasons combined.

2) One or two people in the US government making embarassing remarks is not the 'US'.

Instead, there are a few things that really do bother me about the leaked documents:

The first is the allegation that the US used banned weapons in bombing runs. This suggests either the US has rogue elements within its military that it can't control(Which it would never admit to as that would be horribly frightening) or that the US ignores international bans on weapons that cause long term suffering. Neither of those are palatable, but I think I would prefer the second to the first. By a long shot. I can tut and shake my fist and push for sanctions on the second. The first means that the most powerful military in the world can't control its weapons.

The second thing about the leaks that has bothered me is the reaction to them. I am horribly embarassed to say that a high level Canadian government aide pushed for the assassination of the Wikileaks founder.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, that the US did in those thousands of leaks is worse than knowing that the highest levels of the Canadian government are being advised by maniacs who think that wetworks and assassinations are the proper response to someone telling an embarassing truth about another country. These are not military secrets. These are embarassing details that will only cause hatred in people who already hate the US. Everyone else recognizes these with a shake of their head. I am actually extremely upset and determined to vote out Harper in the next election simply because of this if he doesn't immediately fire his advisor who made the comment.

[Argentina84]

The moment I read the news I thought of the following scriptures:

St Matthew 23:28

2 Nephi 27:27

Ether 8:22-23

And that scripture that talks about the last days in which people´s secrets would be revealed from the house roofs. (Sorry I cannot find it- I'll keep trying)

I don't think that stealing documents is correct, but at the same time I do not think that hiding the truth and being hypocrites helps the world be a better place.

Argentins84

[Argentina84]

Got it! D&C 1:3 =)

[Just_A_Guy]

The first is the allegation that the US used banned weapons in bombing runs.

Haven't seen anything on this. Link?

The second thing about the leaks that has bothered me is the reaction to them. I am horribly embarassed to say that a high level Canadian government aide pushed for the assassination of the Wikileaks founder.

One aspect I think is depressing, is that these really aren't causing nearly as much harm to the US as the spliced-and-diced "Collateral Murder" video that came out a while back. But that video--and most of the other Iraq/Afghanistan docs previously released--reflected poorly on the Bush Administration, so the condemnation of Assange came primarily from the Right. Now that Assange has turned loose information that makes the Obama administration's state department look foolish, it appears that the mainstream American public--and even many on the left--are finally ready to take some sort of action against Assange.

IMHO, Assange is as valid a military target as any enemy agent. But let us have no illusions: whatever action Uncle Sam takes against him will be for his crimes against our president, not for his crimes against our nation.

By the way: Assange is now threatening to release the unredacted documents if any government takes action against him or his website. In other words: shut me down, and I will release information that I know darned well will get your people killed.

Edited December 5, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Mahone]

By the way: Assange is now threatening to release the unredacted documents if any government takes action against him or his website. In other words: shut me down, and I will release information that I know darned well will get your people killed.

I believe this was the "insurance" file released on the wikileaks website back in may. I still have a copy of it somewhere on my laptop hard drive. It's a heavily encrypted file, that hundreds of thousands of people have downloaded since it was released in may, only no-one has been able to open it yet due to the encryption. It seems that wikileaks will release the key to decode the file if anything should happen. To be honest, if the US government really did want to take him out discreetly, this is one of the only things I can see stopping them - there is nothing they can do to get around it.

FoxNews.com - WikiLeaks Ready to Release Giant 'Insurance' File if Shut Down

Nigel Smart, professor of cryptology at the U.K.'s Bristol University, said even powerful military computers would be unable to crack the encryption. He said: “This isn’t something that can be broken with a modern computer. You need the key to open it.”

The file is 1.4 gigabytes in size, which would be big enough for a compressed version of all the files released this year and additional data.

This scenario just sounds more and more like Dan Browns digital fortress novel.

Edited December 5, 2010 by Mahone

[FunkyTown]

Haven't seen anything on this. Link?

Cluster bombs.

BBC News - Wikileaks: UK allowed US to use cluster bomb 'loophole'

[Guest Kamperfoelie]

Never posted a link here before, here goes:

Journalism

[Just_A_Guy]

Cluster bombs.

BBC News - Wikileaks: UK allowed US to use cluster bomb 'loophole'

Thanks, Funky.

We already had info that the US was using the bombs--the revelation here is basically that the UK allowed us to store those bombs on its soil, yes?

[GeneC]

-- WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in London, CNN confirms.