US diplomatic cables to be dropped by wikileaks; US doing pre-emptive damage control

[Cantih]

You're welcome.

Also, inc. Kuya Uruguay/Meat jokes

[archibaldcrane]

Here's a twitter feed breaking down the cables into digestible information nuggets.

http://twitter.com/#!/blakehounshell

[Mistress Stowastiq]

Here comes my naivety again, I don't understand the chat log/forum kind of gossipy personal comments on people that are in these cables. It seems to me that if you are in an embassy and things are documented, you don't write down that the Chancellor is a big poo poo head who picks his nose and he has a bad attitude. I just don't understand the lack of common sense that some appear to have while being employed in a place like that. Is there no protocol for that there?

Perhaps they are supposed to be informal terms kind of personal but it seems like an error in judgment to write things up like that when they hold onto that stuff forever.

Oh and lol No-Dong.

[aurik]

State department insists on the illegality of wikileaks releases, refuses to cooperate with redaction efforts.

I like how they keep repeating 'illegal' as if the US State department has any jurisdiction on wikileaks.

Also, "releasing unredacted memos will put our troops / informants at risk!" "would you like to help us redact it then?" "no!" Glad to see the US gov't has their priorities in order: PR is more important than lives.

[archibaldcrane]

I was honestly hoping for a somewhat more...disciplined release of info. The fact that it seems like -everyone- is being catty bitches (I don't like him, country X is a liar, we're not as worried about this as we said, etc. etc.) seems to make the whole thing a bit of white noise.

It just seems like while you could read 10 of these and be shocked, after thousands the only major conclusion it seems to be drawn is "fuckin diplomacy, how does it work?" Or, if not that, then "awww, see guys? We think we're so different, but in the end, we're all the same! Look at our cables!"

[Kuya]

I've read on El Pais, as i think i alluded to before, that it was official government policy that its diplomats should spy at the UN, which, according to the news source, is illegal. Anyone else hear about this?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

I like how they keep repeating 'illegal' as if the US State department has any jurisdiction on wikileaks.

Also, "releasing unredacted memos will put our troops / informants at risk!" "would you like to help us redact it then?" "no!" Glad to see the US gov't has their priorities in order: PR is more important than lives.

Palin was on twitter calling Wikileaks a treasonous organization lol

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/a...Picture1-7.png

[Shuvo]

Maybe I'm reading it all differently, but none of the cables I've seen make the US look bad. I mean it sucks for them cause now other foreign leaders know what how they are truely thought of , but nothing that specifically makes the US look bad. E.g. It's nice to know they are trying hard to close G.Bay but can't due to the political shitstorm in trying to find somewhere to put the detainees, or how they have plans to (relatively) peacefully reunite Korea, etc. The UN spying thing is done by every country, I'm sure, so that doesn't bother me too much.

Of course, this is only 0.1% of the total leaks!

[Edelweiss]

The real story here is that WikiLeaks will be dropping docs on a major US bank soon!

This is sorta TMZ-ish (though still interesting). The above (Gitmo, reunification of Korea in a "benign alliance" with the US) are probably the only noteworthy releases thus far, albeit it's such a small percentage as Shuvo mentioned. There's afew things that pretty much reinforce already known facts/realities (Afghanistan's government corruption) or sentiments by national leaders towards other persons. US-friendly Middle Eastern leaders championing an attack on Iran is rather contrary to what most uninformed persons might find most surprising (and could probably be spinned to the building of support for it, I don't have alot of faith in the American people..ugh).

Also, i'd be surprised if there WASN'T atleast some espionage occuring at the UN, fucking ever, in the entirety of the UN's existence. That the US got documented attempting to do it? lol

I really am glad WikiLeaks exists, they're a necessity for atleast keeping people.. accountable, if not honest.

[Mistress Stowastiq]

Don't know if it is already posted but Monday 11/29 Amy interviewed Daniel Ellsberg in a big roundtable discussion and it is naturally informative, just watched it. Here is preview of the caption for the vid and link. It is more or less focused on facts and not so much shock and awe like the majority of the news on this issue.

Daniel explains the security level of the cables, some of the acronyms and puts them in context per his own past experience with such data, laying out their value in an easy to grasp scenario. Prompted by Amy's question, he also cynically rips on Sen John Kerry pretty hard regarding his statement about the cable leak and subsequently dismantles his entire premise.


Also -Last Word- Lawrence O'Donnell interviewed Jimmy Carter last night on the subject, it was pretty cool too.

http://www.democracynow.org/ Interview starts at about 12:00 in the vid timeline of the broadcast coverage.

U.S. Facing Global Diplomatic Crisis Following Massive WikiLeaks Release of Secret Diplomatic Cables

The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks has begun releasing a giant trove of confidential U.S. diplomatic cables that is sending shockwaves through the global diplomatic establishment.

Among the findings: Arab leaders are urging the United States to attack Iran; Washington and Yemen agreed to cover up the use of U.S. warplanes to bomb Yemen; the United States is using its embassies around the world as part of a global spy network and asking diplomats to gather intelligence; and much more.

We host a roundtable discussion with Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg; Greg Mitchell, who writes the Media Fix blog at The Nation; Carne Ross, a British diplomat for 15 years who resigned before the Iraq war; and As’ad AbuKhalil, a professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus.

[Shuvo]

Some random thoughts on US security:

Disregarding the morality of it all (It's not what I would condone personally) but I think the US has a really good opportunity now to destroy wikileaks. The entire reason whistleblowers go to wikileaks is the presumption of anonymity and security, so all the US has to do is push for execution on Sgt. Bradley Mannings, and the trust people have in Wikileaks would be destroyed, forever. The trick would be getting it done in a short period of time while it's still fresh in the public's mind (people on death row typically survive for decades).

As far as their communications security goes, if they want to maintain electronic records (going back to paper would be the securest thing to do I think, with information coming through on a need to know basis through the chain of command), each document will need some kind extremely subtle marker on it unique to each person who views it (say some random pixels, rearranging sentence structure). This way, if someone leaks it again it could be traced fairly easily back to whoever it originated from. Random rewording would be best, as wikileaks was hesitant to simply redact names from the massive volume of documents they have, I think it would be extremely unlikely they'd go through and reword entire documents.

[BerenTebogo]

Sure is a whole lot of stupid above me.

[Shuvo]

Your face is stupid

[Mistress Stowastiq]

The seed has already been planted and in the hypothetical obliteration of one Leak organization, another can and will bloom [example: encrypted 'insurance' files in numerous torrent sites]. Not all whistleblowers leak their information with the hope of remaining in secret.

A long process where potential self sacrifice is measured against the cost of keeping secret what a soul cannot live with having witnessed and the decision is made.

In short, I doubt the public will be frightened by possible retaliation into staying silent when they have information to share.

[Dantrag]

I'm not sure if it's been said, but how the heck does wikileaks keep getting this kind of information in this quantity?

[Khajit]

Us security is VERY bad.
I remember watching tv and one guy who stole info was talking about how he went into a computer with classified information and burned it onto CD and bypassed security checks simply by labeling the CD "Lady Gaga" with a marker He even burned all the documents right in front of everyone with said blank CD.


Also the person who made the cable about Middle eastern governments wanting the US to invade Iran was bloomberg aka the guy who first claimed Iraq was tied to al Quada and a former IDF soldier. Just about anything he says cant be trusted to be impartial when Israel has any interest in the topic.

The Amir advised the U.S. to continue trying to open a dialogue with the Iranian leadership. He also told Senator Kerry the U.S. needs to tell the Israelis they are causing the U.S. to lose the hearts and minds of Muslims. There was a time, such as during the Suez Canal crisis, when the Arabs loved the Americans and disliked the British and French, he said.

39. (C) Senator Kerry asked the Amir how the U.S. goes about changing its reputation. The Amir said first and foremost the U.S. must do everything in its power to find a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the best way to begin is by moving first on the Syrian track.

40. (C) The Chairman of the SFRC [Senate Foreign Relations Committee] said he expects a genuine effort by the President this year on an agreement and expressed his hope that Iranian issues would not complicate matters.
Here are some cables that conveniently got skimmed over concerning the Middle East.

http://mondoweiss.net/2010/11/if-you...tml#more-30273

[Cantih]

The entire reason whistleblowers go to wikileaks is the presumption of anonymity and security, so all the US has to do is push for execution on Sgt. Bradley Mannings, and the trust people have in Wikileaks would be destroyed, forever.

Erm, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but isn't the fact anyone knows about Mannings, is because he himself talked about what he did to Adrian Lamo, and Lamo turned him in.
Wikileaks has never admitted as to who gave them the leaks, as per their policy.

So executing the guy won't make people think Wikileaks is unsecured, but rather that letting Lamo look at your shit will get you killed.

[Fodder]

The whole examining the laws looking for ways to prosecute thing is funny. Julian Assange is not a US citizen and not subject to any law of the US, and he presumably didn't publish the docs in the US.

The thing that does surprise me is that the Fed has yet to have named him a terrorist, stuffed him into a gunny sack, and carted him off to Guantanamo Bay. That or laid him to rest next to Jimmy Hoffa. Isn't that how the Fed usually deals with those they don't have jurisdiction over?

Edit: Private Manning is all over fucked.

[tyven]

Assange will be dead before the year is out. COUNT ON IT

[Shiroikage]

So executing the guy won't make people think Wikileaks is unsecured, but rather that letting Lamo look at your shit will get you killed.

There's a big difference between what something means and what people will think it means.