Reply With Quote
I think they are about equally contemptible. Glenn Greenwald's false dilemma crumbles under momentary scrutiny.
Can do ents available to 600,000 people actually be considered 'secret'?
From blood-thirsty pols to the M4M shill journalists, the strident reactions to the whistle-blower site reveal a lot,,,,
TUESDAY, NOV 30, 2010 06:31 ET
GLENN GREENWALD
WikiLeaks reveals more than just government secrets
BY GLENN GREENWALD
salonThe WikiLeaks disclosure has revealed not only numerous government secrets, but also the driving mentality of major factions in our political and media class. Simply put, there are few countries in the world with citizenries and especially media outlets more devoted to serving, protecting and venerating government authorities than the U.S. Indeed, I don't quite recall any en y producing as much bipartisan contempt across the American political spectrum as WikiLeaks has: as usual, for authoritarian minds, those who expose secrets are far more hated than those in power who commit heinous acts using secrecy as their principal weapon.
First we have the group demanding that Julian Assange be murdered without any charges, trial or due process. There was Sarah Palin on on Twitter illiterately accusing WikiLeaks -- a stateless group run by an Australian citizen -- of "treason"; she thereafter took to her Facebook page to object that Julian Assange was "not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders" (she also lied by stating that he has "blood on his hands": a claim which even the Pentagon admits is untrue). Townhall's John Hawkins has a column this morning en led "5 Reasons The CIA Should Have Already Killed Julian Assange." That Assange should be treated as a "traitor" and murdered with no due process has been strongly suggested if not outright urged by the likes of Marc Theissen, Seth Lipsky (with Jeffrey Goldberg posting Lipsky's column and also illiterately accusing Assange of "treason"), Jonah Goldberg, Rep. Pete King, and, today, The Wall Street Journal.
...
Then we have the Good Citizens who are furious that WikiLeaks has shown them what their Government is doing and, conversely, prevented the Government from keeping things from them. Joshua Foust -- who says "he’s spent the vast majority of his adult life doing defense and intelligence consulting for the U.S. government" -- has a private Twitter feed for various intelligence officials and reporters, behind which he's been bravely railing against WikiLeaks defenders (including me) and hysterically blaming WikiLeaks disclosures for everything from Chinese cyber warfare to the next terrorist attack. Plenty of other people are reciting anti-WikiLeaks condemnations from the same script.
....
Nonetheless, our government and political culture is so far toward the extreme pole of excessive, improper secrecy that that is clearly the far more significant threat. And few organizations besides WikiLeaks are doing anything to subvert that regime of secrecy, and none is close to its efficacy. It's staggering to watch anyone walk around acting as though the real threat is from excessive disclosures when the impenetrable, always-growing Wall of Secrecy is what has enabled virtually every abuse and transgression of the U.S. government over the last two decades at least.
- snip -
The central goal of WikiLeaks is to prevent the world's most powerful factions -- including the sprawling, imperial U.S. Government -- from continuing to operate in the dark and without restraints. Most of the ins utions which are supposed to perform that function -- beginning with the U.S. Congress and the American media -- not only fail to do so, but are active participants in maintaining the veil of secrecy. WikiLeaks, for whatever its flaws, is one of the very few en ies shining a vitally needed light on all of this. It's hardly surprising, then, that those factions -- and their hordes of spokespeople, followers and enablers -- see WikiLeaks as a force for evil. That's evidence of how much good they are doing.
The leaks themselves aren't that world shattering for those of us who know history, but the reaction is telling.
We ARE a caste society and this is a direct attack on that social order....
I think they are about equally contemptible. Glenn Greenwald's false dilemma crumbles under momentary scrutiny.
He excludes the middle to make a broad ideological point.
The 600,000 number is unrealistically high. Maybe as a total of people who had legal access to one or more of the several thousand do ents. Lots of overlap there.
How would you happen to know anything about that, WC? Just curious.
I have dealt with classified military material for just over a decade. The story simply portrays the wrong idea. If we consider FOUO, then nearly all military personnel have access to that, but a 3,000,000+ number wasn't stated, so we can safely assume it meant actual secret or top secret categories. Top secret information is compartmentalized, and all classified information is need to know. Just ask LnGrrrR. For 600,000 people to have the same classified material, means 600,000 had a need to know. Just because someone has the clearance level for something, does not grant them access to anything of that level.
Need to know.
Are you claiming that is possible? What would that be by chance? And if there is a single incident or so by chance, it most certainly isn't the norm.
WC is right about this. Just because I have a certain level of clearance doesn't mean I can read everything at that level. Think of your clearance as a mandatory qualification. If you're approved at that level, then you can be granted need to know.
And I'm not sure if all TS is compartmentalized; I thought that was just TS/SCI info.
I meant to say most. Lost that in an edit I guess. Thanks for the correction.
No prob.
The middle doesn't move people to force the government to tell the truth and neither does the M$M, in fact, one could say that if anything apathy breeds complicity...
Do ents Show NYT and Washington Post Shilling for US Government on Iran Missile "Threat"
Wikileaks Exposes Complicity of the Press
By GARETH PORTER
CounterPunch
December 1, 2010
Counter PunchA diplomatic cable from last February released by Wikileaks provides a detailed account of how Russian specialists on the Iranian ballistic missile program refuted the U.S. suggestion that Iran has missiles that could target European capitals or intends to develop such a capability.
In fact, the Russians challenged the very existence of the mystery missile the U.S. claims Iran acquired from North Korea.
But readers of the two leading U.S. newspapers never learned those key facts about the do ent.
The New York Times and Washington Post reported only that the United States believed Iran had acquired such missiles - supposedly called the BM-25 - from North Korea. Neither newspaper reported the detailed Russian refutation of the U.S. view on the issue or the lack of hard evidence for the BM-25 from the U.S. side.
The Times, which had obtained the diplomatic cables not from Wikileaks but from The Guardian, according to a Washington Post story Monday, did not publish the text of the cable.
Just as the M$M was complicit in getting into Iraq on false pretense
WP and NYT were great enablers and cheerleaders for the Repug Iraq war-for-oil lies.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
