Other than embarrassing the U.S., what are you anticipating from the Wikileaks release?

[ProSense]

Factbox: Some facts about WikiLeaks

(Reuters) - The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks was preparing to release a cache of 250,000 classified U.S. State Department documents as early as Sunday.

The State Department told website founder Julian Assange in a letter on Saturday the release would endanger countless lives, jeopardize American military operations and hurt international cooperation on global security issues.

U.S. ambassadors anticipate embarrassing revelations affecting Washington's relations with its allies and other nations.

Here are some facts about WikiLeaks:

* WikiLeaks says it is a non-profit organization funded by human rights campaigners, journalists and the general public. Launched in 2006, it promotes the leaking of information to fight government and corporate corruption.

<...>

What are you anticipating: nothing or something of minor, major or catastrophic consequences?

[rucky]

1. a general attitude that we think everyone else is inferior.

[HipChick]

12. That's not a secret

[ShamelessHussy]

2. more insight into how the grand game is being played

history, is what i am expecting

[ProSense]

15. Not sure that will happen

It will be history unfolding, but not necessarily insight into the game, especially if the information is one-sided and lacks context. An isolated statement or series of statements is not really insight. It would be one thing if the information focused on a specific incident, then context can be added. How selective is the information being released? Information targeted to a specific incident would be one thing, something that can be isolated and given context, but no one seems to know the target, the purpose, the context or anything. The only word being thrown around is "embarrassing."

[jpgray]

20. Example: Germany opposed the Iraq War strongly and consistently, but was rebuffed

Not a big deal to you? Not historical? Out of context? Explain how and why, for all three. The current account of many events referred to in these cables is already a web of spin and deceit--how does having official documents leave us -worse- off in regards to the problems you cite?

[ProSense]

23. That's not new information, and

a lot of Americans opposed the Iraq war.

[jpgray]

26. You knew that high level meetings were taking place weeks before the war?

And that Germany was still arguing against the war in these meetings? Provide your sources, if you would.

[ProSense]

30. Yes

Did you think no meetings took place? One can draw a conclusion that if they objected to the war in the early stages, it didn't suddenly happen once it was officially reported.

[jpgray]

35. Supposition that an event happened is not the same as proof it happened

"Everyone knew," yet much has been written about Germany hedging or betraying the US on war with Iraq. The claim has just recently been published in Bush's memoirs. Why go the doublespeak route? Why not just admit the released documents amount to important evidence on the actions of world governments? Proof is better than "drawing a conclusion," right?

[ProSense]

42. Yeah

but supposition that high-level meetings took place and actual information that they took place only confirms the supposition, but is of little value beyond confirmation. This is not the same as assuming a person was at the place of a crime and finding evidence to support that.

[jpgray]

46. In that case, there was no need to publish Abu Ghraib photos, or publicly document the abuses at all

The only value there was confirmation? Do you agree with that?

[ProSense]

49. No, that is not the same thing.

The Abu Ghraib photos are akin to placing someone at the scene of a crime.

[jpgray]

50. And information the US is spying on the UN, or under pressure to bomb Iran from Arab leaders

No big deal? Suppositions unaided by confirmation? On Abu Ghraib, why not just release an official report rather than publish the photos?

[ProSense]

54. Again, not the same thing

Your supposition about the meeting is not the same as linking the U.S. or persons in the government to an atrocity.

[northernlights]

75. and I expect Wikileaks to expose crimes, and place people at the scenes of those crimes

If they happen to be crimes committed by representatives of the American government, then so be it.

[Ghost in the Machine]

57. France and Germany unite against Iraq war

France and Germany unite against Iraq war
Staff and agencies guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 22 January 2003 17.45 GMT


The German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, had last night made it clear his country would use its position on the UN security council to oppose a resolution backing force against the Iraqi regime.

"Don't expect Germany to approve a resolution legitimising war," Mr Schröder told a rally of his Social Democratic party.

In an article in the German daily Berliner Zeitung, he wrote: "In the crises involving terrorism, Iraq and North Korea, our peoples can count on the governments of Germany and France to join forces to preserve peace, avoid war and ensure people's security."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jan/22/germany.france


Germany, France against war with Iraq
Last Updated: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 | 10:48 PM ET
CBC News
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said Wednesday Germany would not support any UN resolution authorizing an attack on Iraq.

He added that Germany, which will chair the UN Security Council starting in February, and France will co-ordinate their efforts to prevent a war in the region.

Schroeder's anti-war statement is the clearest indication yet of how Germany would vote if a resolution on military action in Iraq were put to the Security Council.

The remarks come as U.S. President George W. Bush warned that options other than war in Iraq are "just about exhausted."

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2003/01/22/german_no030122.html

[ShamelessHussy]

58. public remarks vs private remarks are 2 different things

and since the former POTOUS has come out recently saying something else was said in private, these docs help to disprove that.

all, very useful information to historians and weTHEpeople looking to know what is really going on in the grand game.

[sendero]

77. Do you work for..

.. the US government?

[ShamelessHussy]

21. it could pull back the curtain on how the United States practices international diplomacy

more...
http://www.thenation.com/blog/156684/official-washington-worries-wikileak-will-reveal-inconsistent-approach-terror

the more info the better... hopefully, it will shed new light on every major event in the past decade.

[ProSense]

33. Frankly,

if this information is released and is a hodgepodge of messages without context that just becomes embarrassing, this will be a huge waste of time. If, on the other hand, it can serve as the basis to indict government officials on war crimes, that would be a different story.

The reason it's likely to be the latter also needs to be discovered.

[ShamelessHussy]

37. one mans hodgepodge, is another mans wealth of information

The variation in the background shifts sharply within the rings


Cosmos may show echoes of events before Big Bang

Evidence of events that happened before the Big Bang can be seen in the glow of microwave radiation that fills the Universe, scientists have asserted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11837869

[BeFree]

25. The best thing to do when...

...you are caught in a lie and deceit.... is to fess up.

Our government should release these files yesterday. It sure woulda made me proud.
As it is, utter embarrassment. Is this any way to run our government? Nope.

[ProSense]

36. I don't think that's the way the government operates.

I don't buy that there is never a need for confidentiality. The release of classified information was what led to Scooter Libby's indictment, albeit on perjury charges. The release of that information was called treasonous.

[yurbud]

62. maybe some of the real geopolitics of the war instead of the childish embarrassing lies

about chasing a handful of terrorists who were mostly funded by one of our allies (Saudi) and protected and funded by another (Pakistan).

What are we expecting to get by controlling the heart of the Middle East and the secondary oil producing region in the Caspian Basin?

Is it just for the benefit of the oil companies or is there some political advantage we hope to get from it?

Colin Powell's former chief of staff did a good job of laying out the geopolitics in a speech, but official docs don't back up that account yet.

I don't know if there's a transcript of this anywhere, but I've got the video links here and it's worth watching:

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2009/10/video-oil-foreign-policy-democracy.html

[ShamelessHussy]

63. excellent videos

thanks for the links :toast:

[yurbud]

64. I emailed him once and he replied.

[jpgray]

3. Information on how our government actually operates and thinks

Which is in short supply these days.

[yurbud]

60. like they say about all the invasions of our privacy the last decade: if you haven't done anything

wrong, you should have nothing to worry about.

[Pirate Smile]

4. People were all for improving diplomatic relationships with our allies and the world in the 2008

election and now many seem thrilled at the prospect of getting information out there to damage our relationships with allies. Yeah!

[jpgray]

13. By this logic, Abu Ghraib should have been covered up, since we want the US's image to improve

Propping up a pleasing facade of improvement is not the same as demanding actual improvement.

[jaxx]

14. It seems like putting down the USA is the prime objective.

It's an eye opening lesson to watch the joyful noise of the anti's.

[Hissyspit]

44. No, it's not.

And if attention was actually paid to what Assange has been saying for years, that would be more widely understood, whether one agrees with it or not.

[polly7]

22. Don't you think those allies have the right to know what's being

used to get us to sacrifice our children, and who knows what else, by the U.S. gov't and our own gov'ts alike? Each and every horror done in our names? I do. We elect these people based on what we know. All this secrecy does nothing but ensure we're kept ignorant enough to keep voting in those whose corruption may be exposed. Release it all ....... every bit of it.

[EFerrari]

32. Maybe when people realized that US Foreign policy was not going to change

they started looking at alternatives. Would Wikileaks would be releasing this information if there was any sign the American government was going to clean house?

[Catherina]

5. Struck at our Achilles heel while already vulnerable.

The world has been tired of our arrogance for a long time. Showing us in our true light is a hard blow since we're still not forgiven for misleading the world into an escalating world war. This is another blow down the superpower ladder.

To quote RaleighNCDUer:

"The US is fucking begging for money to feed its starving wife and kids, then blowing it on whores and cocaine - why would our allies ever trust us again?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9642622&mesg_id=9643213

[ProSense]

19. Maybe

"The world has been tired of our arrogance for a long time. Showing us in our true light is a hard blow since we're still not forgiven for misleading the world into an escalating world war."

But that's assuming that other Governments aren't arrogant. Britain cooperated with the US on the illegal invasion of Iraq. How many people will cheer the possible incapacitation of the U.S. Government?

[Catherina]

29. Britain is arrogant but they're our good partner in crime

The other countries haven't appreciated being pushed around by the US and the UK.

Given a spot on the very top, Germany, France, any of them would be just as arrogant but with a little more finesse about it. Our lack of finesse is unforgivable to the Europeans.

How many will cheer? I don't know. I doubt anyone will cheer at our misery but I know many will cheer that we've been exposed and their governments won't cooperate, against the people's will, as willingly anymore.

[ProSense]

51. Actually,

"I doubt anyone will cheer at our misery but I know many will cheer that we've been exposed and their governments won't cooperate, against the people's will, as willingly anymore."

Other than the governments that already distrust the U.S., I don't see that happening. In fact, this is likely going to be exploited by those governments.

[leftstreet]

6. As if US imperialism, resource theft, and military occupation hasn't embarrassed us enough

Yes, our reputation was so sterling

[kgnu_fan]

7. To wake up world citizens and make us all understand that we do have rational capacity and

Democracy is possible when we have correct information

[still_one]

8. I don't know what to expect, but what I do know is we invaded a country based on a lie. A lie that

the MSM propagated, and even today tries to ignore its ramifications

This is not just about embarrassing the United States, this is about a premeditated conspiracy against international law

[Parker CA]

9. Based on the Gawker piece, lots of gossip. nt

[HipChick]

17. Doesn't look like anything earth shattering

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. some major, mostly minor.

I suspect that Israel will come out looking bad. (worse?) I think Germany and France will look better, given their strong private warnings about invading Iraq.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Remember back when NBC "officially" declared Iraq in a state of civil war?

That was our government covering up for the death squads we had running all over that country at the time. The ones using electric drills. Remember them?

I think NBC was collaborating with the Bush administration on that one.

Just a guess though.

Don

[soleft]

16. All of these leaks and nothing re 9/11

I find this interesting. I was a big LIHOP back in the day. Does the fact there is nothing coming out of Weaki re: 9/11 mean there's nothing there so Bill Maher is right?

[kgnu_fan]

18. I think 911 thing may become clearer when we find out more about Turkish situation...

[NNN0LHI]

24. Condoleezza Rice has already admitted that she was expecting a "traditional" hijacking on live TV

Just didn't turn out the way she had expected.

Kind of like earlier this year when a "trusted", CIA asset pushed the button on his suicide vest killing a bunch of CIA agents in Afghanistan. That didn't go as expected either.

Don

[Autumn]

27. Nothing major, just some

transparency. If it embarrasses our government, that's their problem, not mine. From your little box:
"Launched in 2006, it promotes the leaking of information to fight government and corporate corruption."

Sounds good to me. I'm sick of government and corporate corruption, I don't care which administration it hits.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Considering the amount of pre-emptive CYA the politicians are doing..

It's gotta be pretty big or very embarrassing what's going to come out.

[EFerrari]

34. I wonder if it's the release of content they are protesting or simply,

the violation of their entitlement.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. Exactly. They have power and it's being threatened.

God forbid that the common herd be aware of what's being done to them or in their name by the bosses.

As I said in another thread on the topic, I don't subscribe to the "Daddy knows best" theory of governance.

BTW I love your sig line. That bit always makes me burst into laughter when we watch that movie again. :hi:

[EFerrari]

68. In an interview with Brian Lamb, Chalmers Johnson remarked

that the Presidential Daily Briefing is usually the most banal document you've ever seen. He used to help prepare them. :)

[ProSense]

43. Interesting

"pretty big or very embarrassing"


Very embarrassing is still embarrassing. What do you mean by "pretty big"?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. I can well imagine some of the folks sending those cables fearing prosecution.

Or, at least, early retirement.

[ldf]

31. if we are embarrassed

then maybe we shouldn't have done it to start with, you think?

i believe in total transparency. other than military action plans, which COULD endanger lives, NOTHING should be kept from the american people.

if it is being done in our name, we damn well have a right to know about it.

the average american citizen needs to own what we do as a nation. we shouldn't willingly wallow in ignorance.

[ProSense]

47. "Other than military action plans, which COULD endanger lives, NOTHING should be kept from

...american people."

We don't know what's being released. And I don't believe it's simply "military action plans" that should be considered confidential. The release of classified information was what led to Scooter Libby's indictment, albeit on perjury charges. The release of that information was called treasonous.

[Hissyspit]

38. I anticipate more Push Polls on Internet discussion boards.

:)

[hedgehog]

39. I am curious if any of the cables will show US policy designed to further the

interests of corporations. IIRC, we overthrew a government for the United Fruit Company. The fact that I can't name the country off hand is an example of how critical this issue was to an average American.

[leftstreet]

48. Guatemala

That's what interests me, too!

[hedgehog]

61. I know I couldn't point to Guatemala on a map - I think I know where

it is, but I know for sure I couldn't locate the capital! Yet this country was sooooo vital to US interests we overthrew the government.

[HopeHoops]

40. Osama bin Laden was really the shrub's personal bartender.

[Lucian]

45. The truth.

[MineralMan]

52. From the earliest details of these releases, I expect there to

be very severe repercussions from a number of nations. It's not going to be pretty at all, and the US is going to suffer badly from this. Diplomatic communications are seldom without some content that would be at least embarrassing if made public. It's all part of how diplomacy works. Dirt will be exposed that will harm our relationships with both allies and non-allies.

This could be a disaster that lasts for years.

Many will celebrate. That's my prediction. Many of those will be right here on DU. That celebration will soon end, though.

[TheKentuckian]

55. Maybe that will learn us to keep our nose clean

[MineralMan]

66. You have no idea what's involved. It doesn't really have to do with

keeping anyone's nose clean. It has to do with how international diplomacy works. If these revelations go as I suspect they will, we will have a very hard time doing diplomacy for a long time, and it may ruin our relationships with several countries. It's not that everyone doesn't do this confidential dealing behind the scenes. Everyone does it. But, having it revealed embarrasses more than just us, as you will see. Embarrassed people are potentially dangerous people. This will have bad effects you cannot even imagine, and some of them you will never know about. On the surface, you'll just see a bunch of people losing their positions all over the world. Beyond the surface, this will take years to overcome, and all international diplomacy will suffer as a result.

[TheKentuckian]

74. Maybe...and maybe we the people need to know what shenanigans and shady deals our government is up

to.

The truth is you know as much as I do and could be wrong in your suspicions or you may be right but the effects will be quite different than you'd guess based on the reactions of the citizens of nations around the world.

If we shut down some bogus trade and whatnot, that will be to our benefit.

Odds are if folks are embarrassed, they should be.

The global system needs chaos, I have no desire to preserve it and so am a cheerleader for gremlins in the global-corporate power structure.

[jpgray]

56. Yeah, I remember everyone high-fiving each other after Abu Ghraib

There comes a level of dirt when maintaining a facade of respectability is less important than exposing bad and embarrassing behavior. That you see the fault only in those who reveal such things, and not at all in those who engage in them, is telling.

[MineralMan]

67. You know, I'm not finding fault at all. I'm just saying what will happen

because of this. You're reading more into my posts than is there. Potentially, this may be the diplomatic disaster of this and last century. Remember that I said that, if you would. Judgment? I'm not judging anyone. If I had the information, I'd probably publish it, too. I'm just saying what I think will result from its publication. Just watch.

[Strelnikov_]

59. The Reich propaganda office picking and choosing what to 'report'

in order to build the case for Obama, Biden's and Clinton's impeachment and subsequent trial in the Senate,

all timed for effect relative to the next election cycle.

[arcane1]

65. I'm curious about the document from 1966

but haven't found anything about it yet.

[moondust]

69. Completely unpredictable.

There are wackos in the world who may feel threatened by something and decide to start a war. Or maybe it will all blow over in a couple days and be forgotten. :shrug:

[Chan790]

70. I'm expecting that the people have been suckered again.

Someone argued elsewhere on DU that they suspect Assange's source was/is a disgruntled RWer in a back office of power.

This is exactly the sort of thing Republican operatives do; the person I was reading was thinking lone-wolf, I'm thinking planned and intentional enemy action...the leaks will destroy this president and his presidency while protecting the powers that be. It will cripple our ability to undertake diplomacy because the PTB don't value diplomacy, diplomacy means weakness to people who support unilateralist hegemony and militarism. They'll profit by letting Wikileaks burn our diplomatic bridges.

Oh, there will be a Libby or 4, people that the PTB view as expendable or risky to their future endeavors. They're good at playing pawn-sacrifice chess. They'll even throw a big fish into the kettle to sweeten the deal if it gets them what they want...I mean maybe they'll throw us a Cheney, the man's got less than a year to live; he's no longer ever going to do anything valuable. The same's true of Rumsfeld...he's not dying but his career in politics is likely over. But something that harms the Military-Industrial Complex or its' surrogates? Something that brings USA aggression in the ME to an end? No. Idiot Bush? No. Poppy Bush? No. The GOP? Nope. Nor AIPAC or PNAC,

I fully expect that the contents of the leaks will upset the kettle in some way to give "them" what they want. This has GOP/MiC/PtB fingerprints all over it. We've been had. Assange's their gunslinger or as easily manipulated as the rest of the pacifists who think truth and idealism-pie will end wars and militarism.

[LAGC]

71. Ridiculous.

There are simply some people who think government secrecy is a good thing.

If it really was a RW-er in the State Department who provided these latest leaks, he did a service to all. Wikileaks uses whatever sources it can to further its agenda, they are no ones patsy. I only wish Wikileaks was up and running in full after 9-11-01 when all the saber-rattling for war was just beginning, let alone the Iraq War. They may have actually been able to prevent it, if the world could have seen what shaky evidence there was for Saddam's WMDs.

Point is, it doesn't matter what the political affiliation is of whoever leaked these documents. I'm sure there will be many disgruntled liberals in future Republican Administrations who will also leak documents, in which case it will be more than a mere "embarassment" to Republican Administrations as well.

Long live Wikileaks!

[Chan790]

72. Think?

Know.

I know that I don't want to know the nature of the sausage making of diplomacy and international relations. I already know more than I want to know about it. Do I think we do bad things? I'm fairly certain we do. Some good bit of it being stuff I would prefer that we/they not do.

Where you and I differ is that I am completely and utter sold on the complete and utter f*cking uselessness of the topical truth. It doesn't matter. It doesn't dissuade the powers-that-be from doing whatever the hell they want. You mention Saddam's WMDs. Who the hell didn't know that Saddam had jack and shit; didn't even have enough jack and shit to rub together to make jackshit? It was as clear as day and rainwater. A Wikileaks would have done nothing to change that, it was decided that we were going. Facts had zero to do with that decision. The only thing Wikileaks is good for is humiliating America and setting back our interests by being naive and idealistic about global-unity and pacifism. It's a war against entrenched evil, not a hand-holding "We Are The World" Kumbaya campfire-sing-along. The naivety is astounding. Nothing they reveal will change anything...because the truth means fuck-all. Decisions are made by fiat now.

Welcome to the "benevolent" dictatorship. Some things are beyond the will of the people and just need to accepted: we will always be at war if the war pigs say so.

If Wikileaks wants to make a difference, they'd take on corporate corruption. They can't change the wars but they can destroy the corporate oligarchy if they choose to. They can destroy the mouthpieces by revealing that corruption, they can make it clear how the corporations run the world. Destroy the oligarchy and you destroy the underpinnings of the war-pigs. Julian Assange would achieve more of his goals if he took on the domestic MIL and the USCoC and told the next 50 people who sent him data on Iraq and Afghanistan or US international relations that he just didn't give a fuck, it wasn't the fight he needed to fight.

But he'd have to stop being Don Quixote first.

[flvegan]

73. Whatever comes of it will somehow be blamed on Obama.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

76. i dont remember du'ers being this concerned about news embarrassing america

when bush was in power.

i personally think you dont want this particular government embarrassed..which is different from not wanting the US embarrassed.

[Forkboy]

78. It's all about protecting the brand name.

What I've learned about DU since Obama took office is that we have many posers here who were clearly only pretending to care about certain things when Bush was in office. It was never the issue they cared about, but how it could further damage the other brand name. Politcs as sport.

[Catherina]

80. +1 n/t

[TexasObserver]

79. Ridiculous threads such as this one, trying to impugn the leaks.