Hooray For WikiLeaks

[poliphilo]

1. I've returned to reading the papers online. That's mainly because I want to keep abreast of the WikiLeaks saga. Today we're hearing about Russia- and how the Government and the mafia are hand in hand. 

2. A little of nugget of British interest is this. Britain signed up to a treaty banning cluster bombs. The US didn't. The House of Commons was told that all supplies of the bloody things would be removed from US bases on British territory, only- behind the scenes- the Foreign Office cooked up a wangle which allowed things to carry on as normal. David Miliband is choosing not to comment.

Cluster bombs are foul. The bomb bursts and distributes lots of little bomblets which can hang around forever. People in Vietnam are still being killed by bomblets that were dropped over 30 years ago. 

3. The US government has pressurised Amazon into pulling the plug on WikiLeaks. The methods are different, but I don't see- morally- that this is so very different from what happens in China. Either you cherish freedom of speech- or you don't.  

4. Here's an article- from the L.A. Times in which two federal agents argue that WikiLeaks (if it had existed back then) might have stopped the 9/11 attacks. 

Comments

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

Why don't you give examples rather than fulminate?

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

I already did, actually. McMegan advanced "nation building" as one of our military's missions threatened by wikileaks. It was one of the first supposed negative consequences of the leaked cables she cited. Setting aside whether the claim is true -- it isn't -- either the woman believes in "nation building" or she mouths the words because others believe it. Ergo, she is either stupid or dishonest.

And having followed McMegan for some years, now, I am quite convinced that it is the former. The woman is a useful idiot and this article is painfully typical of her work. It might make sense to those unaccustomed to questioning the conventional wisdom of the hour, but unravels like a cheap sweater on examination.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

That doesn't match up. McArdle doesn't profess doesn't profess support or opposition to nation-building here. She's just citing it as one non-violent military activity which is potentially hampered by WikiLeaks in contrast to drone attacks, which probably aren't.

I think you're really overinterpreting here.