WikiLeaks

[tw]

From the NY Times of 4 Dec 2010:

From WikiLemons, Clinton Tries to Make Lemonade
Whatever damage the leaks may do, and nobody doubts it could be substantial, they have showcased the many roles of the Foreign Service officer in the field: part intelligence analyst, part schmoozer, part spy - and to judge by these often artful cables, part foreign correspondent.

[Shawnee123]

[Lamplighter]

The soldier who copied and distributed the documents will certainly face a military court.
But once those documents were distributed, there seems to be a consensus developing that
Wikileaks and the news media acted responsibly in the publication of only selected documents,
and little actual damage was done... so far only (justifiable ?) embarrassment.

So, the question may become one of over-reaction.

Good Gossip, and No Harm Done to U.S.
By ALBERT R. HUNT | BLOOMBERG NEWS
Published: December 5, 2010

WikiLeaks is one of those stories where the passions of the moment blind us
to what may eventually be seen as the more important lessons.

To be sure, there are embarrassing revelations in the thousands of cables, often raw files.
Arab governments are urging the United States to strike Iran;
the United States and South Korea are gaming China’s reaction to a collapse of North Korea;
the portraits of heads of state aren’t flattering.

This no doubt will complicate some relations as well as American diplomacy for a while.
Despots probably will go out of their way to distance themselves publicly.
Still, rather than exposing ineptitude, a reading of a fair portion of the documents suggests
that they actually reflect well on U.S. policy and diplomacy.<snip>

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who suggested that while the cables were “awkward” and “embarrassing,”
the consequences for U.S. foreign policy are “fairly modest.”

It is worth considering this when measuring the cries to lynch Mr. Assange.
Mike Huckabee, a Republican presidential hopeful, wants him executed;
others want to lock him up at Guantánamo Bay.
His actions may be offensive;
it’s not clear they’re prosecutable under the almost century-old Espionage Act.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

But once those documents were distributed, there seems to be a consensus developing that
Wikileaks and the news media acted responsibly in the publication of only selected documents,
and little actual damage was done... so far only (justifiable ?) embarrassment.

I would have to say that is pretty much BS. We know for a fact that he put lives of individuals in harms way with the first release. Just because the news organizations have vetted them and done a better job than he has does not make him less culpable.

[Lamplighter]

@ Merc

We know for a fact that he put lives of individuals in harms way with the first release.

I've not been into reading any of the publically released documents.
Maybe I should, but I've not yet heard such a specific report.
Right now I'm still going on what I've seen on a TV interview with Assange,
and the (Google News) media reports.

During the TV interview, Assange said Wikipedia staff reviewed the documents and
Wikipedia did not distribute any that were above the "Secret" level of security.
Then there is this from the link I gave above:

John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org, a public policy organization focused on national security, says,
“If you can get a credit card, you can get a ‘secret’ clearance.”

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

@ Merc

During the TV interview, Assange said Wikipedia staff reviewed the documents and
Wikipedia did not distribute any that were above the "Secret" level of security.

I really find that very difficult to believe. Cables from overseas would require special access, not just a Secret clearance.

“If you can get a credit card, you can get a ‘secret’ clearance.”

Well the point is made but it is definitely an overstatement. Not just "anyone" can get one, but if you have a clear past and an explainable but documented record you should be able to get one with minimal problem. You would be surprised at what you need to go above that. For my TS/SCI Compartmentalized my investigation was nearly 18months long before they finished it. Not for any other reason but that is about how long it takes. It is pretty detailed and for a limited time period before you have a recheck.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

We know for a fact that he put lives of individuals in harms way with the first release.

But outing a covert CIA agent to promote the massacre of 4500 American soldiers in Iraq is acceptable? It is rather amazing the double standard.

First these same people outted Valerie Plame. Then they so subvert security that any kid with only a high school education has access to all "secrets". Then they accuse Assange of treason when Assange is neither an American nor did he do anything to compromise American security. When do we discuss they who most subverted American security and innovation instead attack Assange.

Ironic. Same people who intentionally lied to blame Saddam for 11 September, had White House lawyers rewriting science papers, subvert the American space program, created a near destruction of the American economy (including welfare to the rich), did all but protect bin Laden, tried to get America into a hot war with China over a silly spy plane, all but surrendered in Afghanistan, undermined the Oslo Accords, and kidnapped people into secret prisons all over the world. But somehow Assange is as evil as Saddam for simply redacting and reporting what was made into public information.

Amazing the hate of Assange. And so little anger at the Army Private or the people who all but enable that Private to breach security.

Worst harm is that we and everyone else in the world now have to deal with so many people so scummy as to be 'insulted'. Who could not accept honest assessments. A little blunt honesty demonstrates to the world that Americans have been dealing with them honestly. Once we eliminate (or forget) the emotional tirade, eventually a new world order will either accept that honesty or entrench those who fear honesty.

Most of this is only hyped because it embarrasses the liars. And embarrasses the honest people for being honest. Embarrassment is another example of silly emotions - adults acting as children. Meanwhile, the most important fact is this. In the last decade, the Chinese have probably stolen all plans for America's nuclear arsenal because those who even had lawyers rewriting science also subverted American security.

Where security should have existed, why are we not calling for their public execution? Because that is too logical - not based in hate and hype promoted by those most responsible for this breach. And who are now attack Assange so that we will not blame the real anti-Americans.

Those same people may also be the reason why the Chinese have plans for all of our nuclear weapons. And so they use Limbaugh and Joseph McCarthy logic. Attack and accuse others. We have major security problems because those whose purpose is only a political agenda have so screwed so many American institutions and systems - including national security.

[TheMercenary]

Here you go.... Now what would be the purpose of such a release?

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...r-targets.html

[Bullitt]

I was just about to post that Merc. People can claim 1st Amendment, freedom of information, transparency, etc. all they want about Wikileaks, but this newest release shows their true colors. What is the purpose of releasing this list? What evil action by the government does this expose? What justice is being done here? Nothing. There is no use for this list other than by those who wish the US and its allies (since this list includes places overseas such as GB) harm.

[Lamplighter]

Again, from Merc's link above:

The list was compiled as part of what is described by the cable as the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) created by the US Department of Homeland Security to manage the protection of critical infrastructure under one US body.

Importantly, none of the targets gathered by the the State Department were under the control or management of any US agency and the cable explicitly ordered personnel not to seek host countries' assistance in identifying critical infrastructure targets.

According to the leaked cable, under the NIPP, targets from 18 different sectors were ordered to be located, namely in the areas of agriculture and food; defense industrial base; energy; healthcare and public health; national monuments and icons; banking and finance; drinking water and water treatment systems; chemical; commercial facilities; dams; emergency services; commercial nuclear reactors, materials, and waste; information technology; communications; postal and shipping; transportation and systems; government facilities; and critical manufacturing.

Among the sites listed in the cable are the Straits of Hormuz, which bridge the Persian Gulf and was the site of Iraq and Iran's Tanker War in the 1980s that triggered a spike in the price of oil, and a Haifa weapons development facility belonging to Israeli company Rafael. Outside the Middle East, the diverse list of targets covers everything from mines in Africa to vaccine facilities in France and undersea communication cables in Australia and China.

I suppose it's how you view such things,
but to me this looks just like what governments and businesses routinely do...
make catalog listings of things.

For example, just using Google I could have made a list that included
the Straits of Hormuz, , mines in Africa,
vaccine facilities in France, and undersea cables .

Here is something about a weapons factory in Haifa (via Google);
however, I don't know if this link is part of the Wikileaks or if it has been up for a while.
I think the latter because at the bottom it reads:

Site maintained by: John Pike - Page last modified: 28-04-2005 12:53:39 Zulu

[TheMercenary]

I think he is digging his own grave, figurative speaking. He is pushing the envelope and the closer he gets to the edge the more evidence they will have to declare him and his organization a quasi-terrorist organization where more extreme measures can be used against him. He is aiding and abetting at the least.

And now there is this:

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06...ion=cnn_latest

[skysidhe]

makes for good reading, guys

[piercehawkeye45]

Wikileaks has to take responsibility for everything they post but how can someone tell the difference between a document with the sole purpose as a national security threat to the US and one that may have slipped through the cracks of a filter, if they even have one? There are 1.2 million documents on wikileaks.

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

I suppose it's how you view such things,
but to me this looks just like what governments and businesses routinely do...
make catalog listings of things.

For example, just using Google I could have made a list that included
the Straits of Hormuz, , mines in Africa,
vaccine facilities in France, and undersea cables .

Here is something about a weapons factory in Haifa (via Google);
however, I don't know if this link is part of the Wikileaks or if it has been up for a while.
I think the latter because at the bottom it reads

That's true but it is still something you don't make public. For example, with the same amount of planning, maybe even less, Al-Qaeda could have drastically affected every American and killed tens of thousands if not millions. It's a bold claim but it's amazing how low security was for many high level targets before 9/11.

[Sundae]

British police are looking for Mr Assange in relation to the allegations of rape in Sweden. Which means his arrival in the USA is imminent. We'll give him to Sweden immediately and although I agreed that Sweden is a European country mostly unaffected by America, extradition treaties are pretty damned powerful.

You got Gary McKinnon off us at any rate.

[Shawnee123]

He has turned himself in to London police for the Swedish arrest warrant for the sex crime allegation:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe...ex.html?hpt=T1