There are more problems with how this was allegedly handled by Manning. Several of the Wikileaks, particularly some of the ones regarding China point very clearly to the fact that the US or various other countries have a mole in organizations like the Chinese politburo. One such example is the fact that a member of the politburo apparently ordered the hacking attacks on Google in the last twelve to eighteen months. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0ZcyM-A610 . Now that the Chinese know that someone in the politburo or in the confidence of a member of the politburo is passing secrets to the United States or another country allied with the US, it is a simple matter to initiate counter-intelligence operations to identify that person and their contacts. When that happens, and it WILL happen, those people will likely be apprehended and executed. *
There are several wikileaks materials that point to various intelligence agencies around the world penetrating the governments of other countries. The result of most of those wikileaks will likely be the death of the moles and agents involved. Some of those moles were themselves providing information to other governments because they had crises of conscience with their own governments. It is an odd irony, Manning and Assange have likely caused the death of some people who in their own way were blowing the whistle on their governments. *
So we have classified documents that were released that have nothing to do with whistleblowing and then we have a few documents and materials that were whistleblowing in nature but could and should have been released to the Inspector Generals or other appropriate agency that would have handled the issue, investigated and prosecuted those who engaged in wrongdoing and prevented the unauthorized release of classified information. Then we have the Wikileaks that have likely resulted or likely will result in the deaths of dozens of people involved in intelligence around the world for various countries. *
Finally, we have the argument in some circles that anything that sheds "sunlight" or makes the activities of governments more open is good, no matter how it is done. The problem with that line of thinking is that there are few organizations that operate effectively without some measure of confidentiality in some of their operations. One of those organizations or institutions is definitely the institution of diplomacy which sadly is the target of most of the 250,000+ worth of materials recently exposed by Wikileaks. The very people whom the world depends on to preserve peace and good relations between countries was the main object of what can only be described as an attack.
Wars have been started because of diplomatic miscommunication. Although there are some who disagree, it is the opinion of many that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki directly proceeded from a misunderstanding of the Japanese response to the Potsdam declaration, i.e. "We "mokusatsu' it." What was in fact a subtle request for another offer (a way for the Japanese to surrender honorably) was interpreted as killing by silent contempt, the allied demand for unconditional surrender.
The issue of the Iraqi government interaction with the American ambassador to Iraq prior to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait is another horrific example. The Iraqi's communicated (vaguely) to the US Ambassador April Glaspie of some action to be taken with regard to Kuwait, we now know they meant war/invasion, and our ambassador responded that "We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts." Three US wars directly resulted from that diplomatic miscommunication, both Iraq wars and the war in Afghanistan. We know that the troops we deployed in Saudi Arabia for the first Iraq war was one of two main complaints that Osama bin Laden had with the US that lead to Al Qaeda's attacks on US embassies, ships and ultimately, 911. History is replete with such catastrophes. Now, we have wikileaks and from it may issue an age where diplomats communicate less and when they do, they may communicate more vaguely. I'm sorry my progressive friends, if you understand history, that is not a good thing.
If it is proven that he is the source of the 250,000+ wikileaks documents, Bradley Manning is going to be convicted and I believe he will receive the maximum sentence of 52 years in jail. I believe it will be a sentence that he deserves and I think that Wikileaks did itself and the world a disservice by this latest release of documents.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
2
