Some 250,000 classified cables and embassy dispatches from the State Department are being released today via WikiLeaks latest, and reportedly largest, document dump ever. Within the last hour, news reports based on those documents have begun to be published by various world media outlets that are said to have been given advanced access.
Among the very first revelations to emerge, as quickly highlighted on Twitter via search hashtags #WikiLeaks and #CableGate this morning, are details on the U.S. having pleaded with Germany in 2007 to not prosecute CIA operatives who kidnapped and tortured a terror suspect, Yemeni officials covering up U.S. drone strikes in their country, Saudi officials encouraging U.S. to take attack Iran, the U.S. spying on UN diplomats, as well as various, potentially embarrassing State Department assessments of allied world leaders. There will be much more to come.
You can review more of the coverage yourself at the UK Guardian, the New York Times, German’s Der Spiegel, and Israel’s Haaretz among many others to emerge over the next several hours and, indeed, days. The Nation’s Greg Mitchell is live blogging the release, and rounding up many of the key links.
As this information becomes public, and as the U.S. Government continues to scramble to mitigate what the White House is calling today a “reckless and dangerous” leak, condemning it “in the strongest terms” as an alleged threat to national security, it’s worth keeping in mind, for valuable perspective, what the 1970s legendary “Pentagon Papers” whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg wrote in an op/ed for The BRAD BLOG in early 2008…
As well, John F. Kennedy’s April 1961 speech on what he described as this nation’s abhorrence of secrecy, and the necessity of a free press — as delivered to the American Newspaper Publishers Association at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York a year or so before his death — is rather astonishing, and more than a bit ironic, in light of today’s leaks and, as directly, the actions of the Executive Branch and its enablers in this country — in Congress, in the mainstream media and in the public — over the past dark decade. JFK’s remarks include these thoughts among others that must be heard or read…
…
And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.
…
And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
…
No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary.
Here is a five minute or so excerpt from that speech (the full 19-minute version, and complete text transcript are both posted here)…
Please read on for both a transcript of the above video excerpt, and one or two more quick, but noteworthy, thoughts on it thereafter…
…
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. [Ed Note: See comment below for the now-rather ironic sentence that JFK noted here, but which was edited out of the video excerpt above by the person who compiled it and posted it to YouTube.]
…
No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support an Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.
I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers–I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: “An error doesn’t become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.” We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.
Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed–and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment — the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution — not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply “give the public what it wants” — but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news — for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security…
…
And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news — that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
As noted, JFK’s entire speech and transcript is available here. And, to be fair, among the passages removed from the above excerpt (not by us, but by the person who created the above video), includes a plea to the newspaper publishers for self-restraint when dealing with issues that could endanger national security. For example:
One last note on the edited version of the speech above. Unfortunately, it leaves out one rather ironic remark following the comments in which JFK describes the U.S. being “opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence” as a “system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.” He says the “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy[‘s] … preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed,” before concluding his description of what could as well be the U.S. from 2001 through the present day, by noting, ironically enough, “It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.”
It would seem this “democracy,” at least, has, in fact, “matched” exactly that conspiracy described as abhorrent by JFK. And we have all, collectively, allowed it to happen — whether we had ever hoped or wished to.
Like so many of his kind Kennedy could hum the tune — but he could never conduct the orchestra.
I think this leak is a very bad thing. I would point in particular to the leaks regarding possible responses to a collapse of North Korea. This leaked info could lead to war in that situation. Some diplomatic discussions need to take place in secrecy.
Quoting JFK, Brad states:
I’m glad that Brad included quotes around the word “democracy” for the question as to whether the the US in the 21st Century is a “democracy” as opposed to a plutocratic, authoritarian corporate security state is an appropriate subject for serious scholarly debate.
I would respectfully disagree with Randy D @2.
It is the ability of the government to operate under a veil of secrecy; to openly lie to the people, which facilitates a government’s decision to take us to war—case in point, the great lengths the Bush/Cheney cabal went to in order to whip up fear that Iraq, a nation which had been crippled by 13 years of devastating sanctions, somehow posed such a grave threat to the U.S. that the only logical recourse was a preemptive military strike.
I would submit that a truly informed public serves as an impediment to war.
It is our own government’s concealment/disinformation and not WikiLeaks’ revelations which poses the true threat to peace. And, in the case of Iraq, it was a war made possible by a pliant corporate media which served as a megaphone for the Bush/Cheney cabal’s lies, e.g., Judith Miller’s infamous New York Times lead articles which simply parroted the disinformation provided by her “official sources.”
The true purpose of media as envisioned by the First Amendment is to expose the lies; to speak truth to power.
“Some 250,000 classified cables and embassy dispatches from the State Department are being released today vis a vis WikiLeaks latest, and reportedly largest, document dump ever.”
I don’t think “vis a vis” means what you think it means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vis-a-vis
Why is there never anything about Israel or 911 in any of the wikileaks documents?
This is really not a good thing. There’s “secrets” and then there’s what this is. As much as I like Wikileaks, and support them in general, here they’ve gone to the extent of posting opinions and commentary, damaging our relationships around the world. It’ll be a long time repairing them. There’s transparency, and then there’s this. The next time we want cooperation or diplomacy to defuse a situation? It’s going to be that much harder.
So do you think, Norbrook, that having U.S., Saudi & Israeli leaders meeting in secret to plot an attack on Iran while, publicly, they leave us to believe they are merely seeking sanctions is a good thing?
For a broader discussion, there is Democracy Now:
U.S. Facing Global Diplomatic Crisis Following Massive WikiLeaks Release of Secret Diplomatic Cables
after extensive study it seems clear to me that Wleaks is a Mossad/CIA creation.
Check out Gordon Duff’s work on the subject.
GORDON DUFF: WIKILEAKS, A TOUCH OF ASSANGE AND THE STENCH OF AIPAC
or
GORDON DUFF: “WIKI-MURDERS†IN IRAN, SIGNAL “FALSE FLAG†TERROR
Well, folks, it all begins to fall into place, if what Gordon Duff says is even remotely the case. Now we know why Obama has been behaving like an overcooked noodle. Here’s the deal-false flags only work if people don’t KNOW they are false flags. At this point, 77% of the American citizenry suspect the b.s. they’ve been offered. We are weakened but as long as we have phones and fax machines, and email lists, it is possible to wake these folks up to put an end to this endgame shenanigans. I think the best tactic is to call our bought-and-paid for ‘representatives’ and demand that they leave Iran alone. If enough noise is made about the real possibility of WWIII, the Congress may be too afraid to go through this monstrous act. Please pick up the phone and demand appropriate behavior from these nervous nellies.
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
… David Ehrenstein said on 11/28/2010 @ 8:29 pm PT…
Like so many of his kind Kennedy could hum the tune — but he could never conduct the orchestra.
And exactly what was “his kind” Mr. Ehrenstein? Murdered by those opposed to him?
Like those willing to betray their own country to arm a foreign country with nuclear weapon technology and material, then when caught, have that foreign country, supposedly our “ally” erect a statue to him?
Is that what you mean by “his kind”, those of us that think traitors shouldn’t breath after conviction? And “allies” shouldn’t be erecting statues to those Americans betraying us, or they get placed back on the UN Terrorist list George Herbert Walker Bush pushed to have them removed from??
Odd how that works out, ain’t it Mr. Ehrenstein? I mean, Bush being the CIA supervisory for the Bay of Pigs fiasco JFK wouldn’t sanction or back, then stated he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces and cast it to the wind? I mean, with Nixon being his daddy’s political protege…and the Library of Congress having a letter from Cong. Nixon’s office to the House Unamerican committee, asking they excuse “one Jack Rubenstein” from testifying before them because he was *working undercover* for Nixon.
Dated 1946. Library of Congress. Jack Ruby and Richard Milhouse Nixon.
And Poppy Bush photographed leaning on the TSBD right before the Hit.
So, what was “his kind” again, Mr. Ehrenstein?
“One of the signs that you’re a successful payments company is that hackers start to target you, this case isn’t anything different”
-It’s not that PayPal is successful, it is because VP of Platform Osama Bedier doesn’t understand that PayPal choose to shut down a client because of a note from the government without any effort to look over the situation to confirm illegal activities. A small note is sent to PayPal and the instructions are exercised without thought and thus PayPal is not reliable for “the people’s” business.
As a result of the move taken by PayPal, a majority of those who are boycotting and watching the activity are mostly the younger generation which will and are the future thus losing potential clients. I will not forget, as a college student I as with many choose not to blindly follow and will take stronger efforts to prevent further restrictions on freedom on the people and the internet.
History is now, written by us, are you going to join or watch?