I'm going to ruffle more than a few feathers with this post, but there are two words that come to mind when I read over the information Wikileaks is releasing.
Valerie Plame.
This smells like a rather large rat-fucking operation with information on so many fronts being made public all at once. What I see is fairly conventional politics of states, but it is sure to enrage the purists on the left and the nationalists on the right in about equal measure. The first group will wring their ineffectual hands over the evil of the government while the latter will rage at their screens over the release of state secrets.
Who is benefiting from this, really? This is designed to embarrass and compromise people, force resignations, undermine conduct of policy.
This much information being released does not happen without some serious coordination and power. This wasn't done by a few outraged whistle-blowers.
Anglachel
Update - To save pointless speculation, no, I don't think this is the White House trying to make HRC look bad. They have their hands full making themselves look like dolts, after all. My guess is the remnants of Cheney's operation at State and in the military (potentially with help from the CIA and key news reporters) providing carefully selected stuff to an operation all too happy to tell the "truth", no matter how distorted, misleading, or lacking in context that alleged "truth" is.
No, I don't have much respect for Wikileaks. It's all too eager to play messenger for unknown interests. If you think this latest round of releases is good for anyone except the hard right, you need to get out more.
PS - Thanks, Falstaff! Good catch.
7 comments:
"This is designed to embarrass and compromise people, force resignations, undermine conduct of policy."
The White House requested the NYT redact some information from Wikileaks. They redacted some but not all requests. It’s interesting they didn’t redact the news that Hillary ordered the US State Department to spy on diplomats from other countries.
I suspect the White House, the guys with the most skin in the game to let Hillary take a fall, intentionally neglected to request that particular redaction. I doubt the NYT made a decision to ignore a White House request to redact the story and since it’s likely no such request existed, they were happy to run with it.
If there’s any opportunity to embarrass Hillary or diminish her, you can count on the White House to throw her under the bus rather than protect her. I've seen this pattern too many times to believe the faux outrage over Wikileaks hasn't been orchestrated to take her down.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731587,00.html
It still is potentially an operation by a few unrelated individuals. It may be an evolution of the "regular" leaks to the media. This one with a larger volume and impact and a hint of a new form of disobedience.
Are you denying that Hillary ordered US diplomats to collect the credit card numbers of key UN officials?
And if not, how do you justify it?
I'm with you re whose ox gets gored and whose interests are served by this leak. It's possible, I suppose, that Iran might be able to prompt outrage on the Arab "street" against leaders in the region who are seen to be conspiring with America... and so maybe this could wind up helping Ahmadinejad. But probably not.
As a side note, as if it were needed... if anybody did think this would create a problem for Hillary specifically, all one needs do is see the characteristically confident, smart way she is dealing with it to know how quixotic any such attempt would be. This is, indeed, what a leader (and a grown-up) looks like: http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1857622883?bctid=691992352001
My resistance to the higher ups involved may be against other commenters.
A smart hacker is another possibility especially when a bank is the next target.
All the systems involved, as many others, are susceptible to smart hackers that can easily spoofed and extract data without the safeguards being triggered.
I had to go check out the "characteristically confident, smart way she is dealing with it". Hillary attacked people leaking classified information, expressing her concern for the dangers of impeding open discussion, blah, blah, blah. But those documents detail her approval of efforts to steal credit card numbers of UN diplomats. She is a class act
Philip - Actually, yes. A class act: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/world/05diplo.html?hp. While everybody else in the administration (Obama and Gates most notably) goes AWOL, Hillary steps up to the plate, acts like a grown up and does the hard, smart work to protect America's interests.
Re her authorization of ambassadorial spying: I'm sorry, but I can't summon much outrage. I think it's unfortunate that it's become public knowledge, because maybe it'll do some modest damage to some relationships - but maybe not much. My guess is that this is BAU -- and has been, as long as there have been nation states. And I find the idea that she should resign over this "scandal" risible.
Post a Comment