Since Rep. Ron Paul of Texas is that rarest of Republicans -- a war critic who's both rational and prescient describing our careening, imperial foreign policy, let us openly address his probing questions (italics) Friday on the House floor. In defending Wikileaks disclosures, Paul proclaims what should never be forgotten (but is, every day):
Just as with the Vietnam War, the Iraq War was based on lies. We were never threatened by weapons of mass destruction, nor al Qaeda in Iraq, though the attack on Iraq was based on this false information. Any information which challenges the official propaganda for the war in the Middle East is unwelcome by the administration and the supporters of these unnecessary wars.
Number 1: Do the America People deserve to know the truth regarding the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?
The phrase, "American People," is a figment of the imagination, manufactured on the spot to justify whatever one believes. Deserve ? Not by electing hacks. Truth, even after ten years? Forget it. What U.S. government since Lincoln has honored the public with transparency, let alone "truth" on wars (except FDR). Not Teddy Roosevelt (modern imperialism), Truman (Korea, line in the sand), JFK/LBJ/Nixon (Vietnam), through Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and outliers we've not yet heard about. It's way easier to argue downright LYING, rather than truth, drives presidents to sell invasions (including the Afghan surge against "terrorists").
So, Rep. Paul, how's your "truthiness" going -- posing the same blunt, unanswered questions without policy change for ten straight years?
Number 2: Could a larger question be how can an army private access so much secret information?
Actually, it's a smaller question. You can ask, but digital information is hard to protect, especially when not "top secret." The only way to protect all such information is to massively reduce government transparency, already abysmally low, thus making officials more paranoid about the gross distortions and half-truths they deign to afflict on the public. Great solution.
Number 3: Why is the hostility mostly directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our government's failure to protect classified information?