-This could change any minute I guess, but if this Yahoo blogger's list of top ten revelations turns out to be true then you can list me among the thoroughly unimpressed. I suspect we'll see more than what we have so far.
-This is not the first group of leaked US government info that Wikileaks has released. Previously they have released a batch related to Afghanistan, one batch on Iraq, and a video from Iraq that purported to show US helicopter pilots murdering reporters. The short video that was highlighted was a transparently stupid hatchet job that edited out key context from a longer video. The furor died quickly once that context was explained. The other releases died down more quickly than I expected.
-I think the issue with the Afghanistan info was it consisted of mostly military after action reports and though it was riddled with data of local significance, for the average person it was just boring. I think the Iraq info died down because too much of it contradicted established narrative. It wasn't the Americans committing atrocities against Iraqis, it was the Iraqis doing it to each other. It put American abuse at Abu Ghraib back in 2004 into perspective compared to the horrific torture and killings by Iraqis themselves. The data also mocked body counts of 600,000 to 1,000,000 and clearly established the terrible damage that IEDs did to Iraq. Far more damage than what the Americans did.
-Given those previous revelations, it's a good thing that OMB is today cracking the whip on federal agencies about security. That only took about seven months...why, the speed is blinding! Not to mention how comforting this is about keeping our medical records, or financial records, or even network security records all safe and secure.
-Related to the above(via Mr. B.), if it is true that as many as 3 million people had clearance and access to this data then how can anyone be astonished that it leaked? The most astonishing thing is that degree of access, not the leaks themselves.
I had a secret clearance when I was in the service, though I can only think of a couple of times I actually needed it and even then it seemed pretty silly to me. That was pre-Internet days, but even without "need to know" stamped on it I wasn't allowed to read just anything marked "secret." Had I walked into HQ and asked to peruse the "secret" files for the heck of it I would have had my ass handed back to me in pieces. I would think that with electronic documents and networks there would be even more attention paid to "need to know", and not less.
I was under the impression that the soldier suspected of leaking this had access because he was in an intelligence unit. If it's true that access was(is?) much broader than that then I'm utterly astonished.
-I have looked through some of the cables and here's an interesting one regarding Iranian influence in Iraq from about a year ago. The cable recounts a meeting with influential Shiites in Najaf, the center of Shiite clerical power in Iraq. I've harped on this in the past, but it doesn't hurt to show another example of how simplistically wrong it is to equate the toppling of Saddam with Iranian victory. Iraq is not Iran's pawn and if someone tries to tell you so then you can be absolutely certain that you are talking to a fool. Yes, Iran has influence in Iraq because it is next door, relatively powerful, and ruthless. There is also the Shia connection, of course. But there are also ethnic and nationalist loyalties that counter that connection and even strains between Iraqi and Iranian Shiites as that cable notes.
-I read a story over the weekend that claimed that Turkey was allowing arms to get to al Qaeda in Iraq and that the US was arming anti-Turkish PKK terrorists operating out of Iraq. Either of those stories would seem to be explosive. I searched for the cables that make those assertions and couldn't find them.
What I did find though, seemed to show the US and Turkey cooperating to a degree that surprised me. Here's one cable in advance of Secretary Gates arriving in Turkey for a visit earlier this year. I wonder now if what is damaging here is not that the US and Turkey are helping each others enemies, but the revelation that the two nations are cooperating far more than the Turkish public realizes.
-We'll see what else pops up.
One more thing: Nancy Youssef from McClatchy makes the case that the claim that Wikileaks will get somebody injured or killed are overblown because there has been no evidence presented to show that previous revelations have resulted in that.
Well, maybe, but how much looking has Nancy Youssef done? My guess is none. If some farmer in the village of Stone Age, Afghanistan, revealed as an informant a few months ago, was whacked by the local Taliban last week would we know? I doubt it, because it's funny how passive a reporter can get when facts contrary to a narrative would be a bit inconvenient. And make no mistake, Nancy Youssef does not work to inform you of the news regardless of how the chips may fall, she's there to serve you the narrative that she and her editors want you to see. Even if she did find out that my hypothetical farmer had been murdered I suspect that she would scrupulously report any detail, however small, that would point to anything other than Wikileaks. Perhaps that opinion is not fair to Ms. Youssef, but I spent years watching her and other so-called reporters filtering out positive news from Iraq. They have no credibility in my book. None.
Recent Comments