Yeah, this will help

30 years of peace


Israel National News:

Documents revealed by Wikileaks show that Egypt continues to see Israel as its primary military threat despite a decades-old peace treaty. Egypt and Israel fought against each other in four wars before signing the treaty in 1979.

United States diplomats have been frustrated as Egyptian leaders focus on being prepared for war with Israel while ignoring threats such as terrorism and weapons smuggling.

“The United States has sought to interest the Egyptian military into expanding their mission in ways that reflect new regional and transnational security threats, such as piracy, border security, and counterterrorism,” said one leaked file.

“But the aging leadership, however, has resisted our efforts and remained satisfied with continuing to do what they have done for years: train for force-on-force warfare with a premium on grounds forces and armor.”

A leaked memo addressed to U.S. General David Petraeus ahead of a 2008 visit to Egypt warns that Egyptian Defense Minister Mohammed Hussein Tantawi in particular is the “chief impediment” to U.S. efforts to involve the Egyptian military in fighting modern threats. “During his tenure, the tactical and operational readiness of the Egyptian Armed forces has decayed,” the memo stated.

This is why I am skeptical of WikiLeaks. I cannot see how publishing this information can possibly contribute to lasting peace in the Middle East.

What do we gain by having this knowledge made public? How has WikiLeaks made Hillary Clinton’s job easier?

Now some fans of WikiLeaks have been defending the secretive organization by pointing out they have only leaked a small portion of the State Department cables. But that begs the question – what do they still have and why haven’t they released it yet?

Someone once said that the best way to lie is to use the truth selectively.


About these ads

90 Responses

  1. What I want to know is if WikiLeaks leakers (whom ever they are) knows where the missing 2.3 Trillion Dollars from the Pentagon went? Oh, and Jesse Ventura is wondering where the 2.3 Trillion went too.

    Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory: 911 Pentagon Coverup-(Full Length Episode)

  2. Oh, CHIT…look @ this:

    Jan. 1, 2011
    Julian Assange Given Press Freedom Award

    (AP) BUCHAREST – A Romanian online publication known for its editorial independence is honoring Wikileaks founder Julian Assange for his service to press freedom, which it warns is under threat in Eastern Europe.

    Cotidianul.ro said Saturday Assange was given the “Free Dacia” award for exposing the “duplicitous behavior of some democratic countries.”

    OK, we now return you to ‘Tar and Feather Him Already’… ;-)

    • Julian Assange Given Press Freedom Award
      Romanian News Site Honors WikiLeaks Founder for Exposing Some Governments’ “Duplicitous Behavior”
      http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/01/world/main7203524.shtml

      Ooops forgot the link…

    • CNN Poll: WikiLeaks has few fans in U.S.

      A just-released CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll finds 77 percent of Americans disapprove of the online organization’s release of thousands of confidential U.S. government documents concerning U.S. diplomatic and military policies. Only 20 percent approved of the action.

      1 Romanian newspaper approves, 77% of Americans disapprove.

      Majority rules.

      • Then these two must be among the 20-23%. And if the pictures alone makes anyone feel nauseated, I wouldn’t recommend reading the accompanying texts. Just saying.

        “Freedom Fighter Sexiest Man Alive!”

        WikiLeaks is fighting for freedom. Julian Assange of WikiLeaks has my vote for the 2010 Sexiest Man Alive.
        Because he is a freedom fighter. It doesn’t get any sexier than freedom.

        “Honor”

        I like Julian Assange. It shows class that he doesn’t like to talk about his sex life in public […] Although obviously not the most pure and chaste person in the world, he is brave, intelligent, principled, and honorable…and not a rapist.

        [Via jounalism.org]

        • From the first link:

          Because he is a freedom fighter. It doesn’t get any sexier than freedom.

          Sounds like a groupie to me.

        • 2008: Yes, we can
          2010: Yes, we leak

          2011 hopefully:
          Yes, lets think for ourselves!

      • EL PAÍS editor, JAVIER MORENO, explains the decision to publish the State Department cables, which expose on an unprecedented scale the extent to which Western leaders lie to their electorates. MORENO provides some of the best analysis of Cablegate yet.

        From Why EL PAÍS chose to publish the leakshttp://wlcentral.org/node/790

        Cynics will argue that none of what we have learned from WikiLeaks differs from the usual way in which high-level international politics is conducted, and that without diplomatic secrets, the world would be even less manageable and more dangerous for everyone. Political classes on both sides of the Atlantic convey a simple message that is tailored to their advantage: trust us, don’t try to reveal our secrets; in exchange, we offer you security.

        But just how much security do they really offer in exchange for this moral blackmail? Little or none, since we face the sad paradox that this is the same political elite that was incapable of properly supervising the international financial system, whose implosion triggered the biggest crisis since 1929, ruining entire countries and condemning millions of workers to unemployment and poverty. These are the same people responsible for the deteriorating quality of life of their populations, the uncertain future of the euro, the lack of a viable European project and the global governance crisis that has gripped the world in recent years, and which elites in Washington and Brussels are not oblivious to. I doubt that keeping embassy secrets under wraps is any kind of guarantee of better diplomacy or that such an approach offers us better answers to the problems we face.

        I found the above most interesting and it causes one to do a ahemmmm. (((Gets the noggin thinking)))

  3. Miqu2xU,

    You can come out now, I am off to work…I will argue with you later…oops comment. ;-)

  4. Nice. So not only are some of these leaks pushing us all to war with Iran, but now possible war among Israel and some of its neighbors. At least that’s how things seem to be playing out by the methods and careful selection of what is leaked and when. Wonder who would like it if any or all of that happened?

    • Besides the neocons there is a certain group of religious zealots who would like to see Armageddon take place because that’s when Jeebus is supposed to come back.

  5. Jeebus there are some loony comments associated with that article. My favorite is the one about the US having bad weather because they have turned their back on them. OK then…

  6. Wow, TCU has a real team. When did that happen?

  7. Iran denies WikiLeaks report that Ahmadinejad was slapped

    Iran has denied a WikiLeaks report that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was slapped by the chief of the country’s Revolutionary Guards, the Tehran press reported Saturday.

    According to a leaked US diplomatic cable, General Mohammad-Ali Jafari slapped Ahmadinejad in early 2010, as Tehran was still dealing with the fallout from a disputed election.

    A Revolutionary Guards spokesman told Fars news agency that ‘those behind WikiLeaks have availed themselves of the fame they gained through their insider information and invent false stories’.

    Spokesman Ramezan Sharif said that some of the WikiLeaks disclosures about the US might have been true but there had also been several fabricated pieces of information.

    President Ahmadinejad last year dismissed the WikiLeaks documents as worthless. He said they followed certain political aims and had no impact on Iran’s relations with any other states.

    Iran was especially upset about the leaked documents saying that Saudi Arabia and Bahrain urged the US to halt Iran’s nuclear programme by any means, including a military attack.

    And the point of this leak is?

  8. Serious question-if Assange wasn’t accused of rape and McCain was President, would we be seeing the same posts against the leaks here? I’m not pretending to know the answer-but I think the answer does matter.

    • You would be seeing the same posts from me and maybe McCain would actually do something to better protect the so-called high level security of the USA.

    • I was skeptical of WikiLeaks before I formed any opinion on the rape charges. McCain being POTUS would not affect my opinion.

      • And same if Hillary were president. Look at the leaks, look at the most likely pressures and possible results. And look at the methods and how and when the leaks trickle out. Just those things alone should make anyone wonder why? Could be on the up and up, but something seems fishy.

        • the whole thing stinks of fish… and all the players seem to reek also.

          (except for Manning, who I suspect is an innocent dupe)

    • instead of pretending you are asking a question, why not be a grown up and state what you think?

    • Absolutely. Anarchists do nothing for me. Anarchists with big egos are no different from fundie evangelists. Cult leaders.

      • Well said, Three Wickets! I can’t think of anything positive anarchists have done. It is not a practical philosophy — rather narcissistic in nature.

        djmm

    • Serious answer: What I see isn’t “posts against the leaks”, as much as posts and discussions questioning the actual/factual importance of these much ballyhooed leaks.

      I see questions being asked. And if I didn’t see those questions being asked I would seriously wonder if nothing was learned from the lessons we were taught in 2008.

      And you do realize, don’t you, that the reason the media luuuves those leaks so much, is because that frees them from doing actual investigative work themselves.

  9. weeweeleaks is the classic fishing expedition—-release a bunch of docs and see what you can stir up. Very statesmanlike and filled with 13 dimensional strategic thinking about how to make the world safer for all of us.

  10. I do not see what has been released yet that is earth shattering or worth two toots. Egypt still has night sweats about Israel? Who would have thought? Akimadman got slapped? Or not? Really important stuff. Iran’s neighbors would like for us to kick Iran’s butt? Surprise, surprise.

    • Honk,
      Nothing I’ve heard about so far is earth shattering, either. In fact, we pretty much heard many of the rumors before.
      All those upper level aides who could not be quoted.

      Hell, Assange and WL seem to have no other agenda than to spill all the beans.

      The cables originally were known to only the individuals who wrote and who read them.
      But, there alone guarantees many hundreds of people know this stuff. It is being leaked all the time.
      Assange, is simply putting it all out there.
      I support full disclosure on all government secrets.

      Innocents be damned.
      Yes, I said it.
      There are always casualties in rev0lution.
      The world is in a downward spiral with climate change and over population , endless wars, human slavery increasing.
      Time to shake the snow globe.

      • I have not decided on full government disclosure—there are some things that might be important for some people not to know. But I do know that I do not want all my secrets splattered everywhere. I don’t like that people can look up my name and see where I live—somehow that does not make me feel safe.

        • … not to speak of medical records, or bank statements, or divorce papers, or …

          That’s what worries me too in all this: where do we (they!) draw the line? What secrets should stay secret? And who decides? The media…?

      • “Innocents be damned.”

        War crimes are okay? In theory, then, you should be just fine in principle with the attack on the WTC, since it met Al Qaida’s military objectives, and “there are always casualties in revolution.”

        You must have taken a wrong turn at the corner. This isn’t a GWBush fanblog.

      • so you think making peace negotiations more difficult is part of the revolution? You prefer war to peace?
        exactly what in the above leaked material is going to make the world a better place?
        Can’t you see that the material is damaging and makes nothing better? Being an anarchist just for the sake of anarchy is juvenile behavior. Not only is what this schmuck has done childish, but also lazy. He could have edited and NOT released documents that make world peace LESS likely.

      • Curious what your solution to over population would be…as you shake that snow globe.

    • Maybe they were all news to JA. Given that he is sooo into himself he had no time to follow what is going on in Egypt! Agree – mostly unsurprising stuff!

  11. This leak isn’t news in the Middle East. Arab media, never conveyed in the US media, shows high animosity of many Egptians against Israel; like the US, all people cannot live comfortably with an enemy, a potential war and such.

    Abbas, for instance, during the non-talks-peace talks with Israel has said in the Arab media that he will never make peace with Israel. Again, it’s common knowledge except Europe and the US.

    • I doubt if anybody who’s been paying attention was shocked by these revelations. But the question remains:

      What do we gain by having this knowledge made public?

      This leak doesn’t deal with government dishonesty or corruption. It’s just exposing secrets for the sake of exposing secrets.

      • And those adoring Swedish women.

      • I think the wikileaks show how the U.S. sees the world and the Middle East. Until the Carter peace accord, Egypt was at war, and I can understand why Egypt would be uneasy about the region. That the U.S. would like Egypt to feel safe, is a little naive, imo.

      • i agree exposing secrets. just for the
        sake of exposing secrets. theres something to be said for confidentiality.

  12. Exactly. Where are the secrets we really want to know? Like what was really being said in those wee hours when supposedly the whole world financial system was about ready to collapse? What was really going on at Goidman Sachs then and now? What about behind the scenes at Fannie Mae? The HCR bill? Health Insurance companies and politicians? All those meetings O has with big money? I could make a list.

    • Oh baby, if there’s a list… My number one request is give me the full damn conversations in which the
      RBC decided Obarf would be the dem candidate.

      • And an answer to why they had to hand over 4 of Hillary Clintons delegates to Obama.

        Why 4? Well, why any, but what were the, to my knowledge never revealed, numbers behind the 4?

  13. Myiq, I think you misread the information from wikileaks. When I read the information, it says to me that the U.S. is hell bent on forcing its views and does not recognize the realities of the region. That the U.S. sees stumbling blocks speaks more about the narrow views the U.S. takes about a region that was formed by war.

    • yeah yeah yeah, and that is why you should be secretary of state and Hillary Clinton should be commenting on a blog under and a fake name.
      I never used to understand why people on the right said those of us on the left were the “hate America first crowd”. I am starting to get it.

    • If I may add, there’s a nation in the Middle East that already has nukes and destabilizes the whole region. I can certainly understand why Egypt would not feel safe under such circumstances.

  14. >instead of pretending you are asking a question, why not be a grown up and state what you think?

    >Because if you take a stand you can’t accuse other people of having closed minds

    Well, first, you can both (fill in the censored suggestions of your choice) , because it was a serious question. I was hoping for some honest self-examination as to whether the generally negative reaction to these leaks on this site are being affected either by the rape charges or fear of hurting Hillary. But since I can’t read minds, I’ll have to accept No as an honest answer.

    As for “what I think,” I think 95+% of government secrets are designed to protect the people in government from their citizens, not the citizens from harm. There are exceptions (mostly military secrets in wartime) but not that many, and I’m not yet convinced that these leaks overall constitute one of those exceptions.

    • People have been questioning my motives since my first post on the topic. Speaking of self-examination, physician heal thyself.

      Doesn’t your use of the term “generally negative” to characterize my skeptical attitude demonstrate that you are biased in favor of WikiLeaks?

      Would you feel the same way about WikiLeaks if it was run by the Tea Party or some other far-right group?

    • statements disguised at questions are gutless. You have an opinion about the people on this site, state it.

  15. Creepy Assange:

    http://gawker.com/5714043/the-creepy-lovesick-emails-of-julian-assange

    of course as it is leaked from somewhere who knows it is true, but he does not sound like he takes no easily!

    • She 19, he 33. Even worse, the comments reacting to these obviously creepy messages. “Ardent and a bit poetic?” Yeah, they thought Bundy was charming, too.

      *****A

  16. Watchdog Blog

    Myra MacPherson: Of Assange, I.F. Stone, Secrecy and, Last, Sex

    Unless they are diehard supporters or detractors, the first thing some people say when they talk of Julian Assange—which seems curious to me—is that he is creepy or weird looking, and then there is a quiet murmur of dissent: “What if he releases something that could damage someone or get people killed?
    snip
    Assange himself says that his information shows how this war and government business is run rather than any revelatory smoking gun.

    But the value of WikiLeaks is that the data are now public and official, in black and white cables and memos, unlike media stories that can be denied and stonewalled. And Assange challenges any one to find a situation where his leaks have led to any death. Leading international news organizations collaborate with him because he is giving them more details of murky and often unsavory government operations than their own reporting has. Some critics utter that he has produced “No Gulf of Tonkin” style revelation, the fake incident that got this country mired in Vietnam for 10 years. Which brings me to a question people ask me: “what do you think I.F. Stone would say about WikiLeaks?” And I can only think; “If only enough journalists had taken Stone’s advice on the Gulf of Tonkin!”

    more at link

    I agree with MacPherson. The wikileaks show the bureaucrats’ thinking and approach to policy. It’s one sided because we never get to read, for example, why the Egyptian general is uneasy about the other Middle East nation.

    • Yeah interesting. Nieman at Harvard along with the digital journalism centers at Columbia, CUNY, NYU, Northwestern, USC, Berkeley…all funded and shilling for Google as far as I can tell. The political voice online of the creative class elite…indoctrinating the young minds of a generation. Whoo pee.

      • For Google, transparency means non-privacy means their 25 billion annual revenue engine…one of the biggest big business sellouts going these days, and the poor online journalists are following in single file like lemmings.

        • Oh, the irony of wannabe revolutionaries tied to the internet which is owned and controlled by government and big business.

          They’re like fleas bragging about how they control the dog.

    • I agree with MacPherson. And since when has it been the job of anyone exposing government secrets to make Hillary Clinton’s damned job easier? She’s a grown woman and can look after it herself. If officials don’t want to be embarassed by what they have done maybe it would be wise to stop doing those things in the first place.

      Ari Fleischer never made a more strident and ridiculous defense of government secrecy than what has been made here the past few weeks. Whoopee!

      • I’m with you Myiq. I take everything that comes from the government with a grain of salt, and I’m doing the same with wikileaks. To me, wikileak only pierces the veil of secrecy for a selected point of view. My take is that someone sifted the information and leaked only what served them, but it nevertheless shows how our government thinks. We need to keep that in mind. The leak has to be read in context of what we already know.

      • I don’t think the leak is about Hillary but about U.S. policy that doesn’t change much from president to president. Foreign policy, as we’ve seen with Obama is a continuation of G.W.B. Foreign policy is tweaked, but it’s stable for the most part.

      • If I saw anything in the leaks that cried out for disclosure, I might agree, Ralph. But with rare exceptions, I have seen nothing in the leaks that would have seriously displeased Mr. Cheney.

        That makes me wonder.

        djmm

    • I dont think you need Wikileaks to inform us on Egyptian generals. I think in this day and age with access to the internet it is fairly easy to be informed about a wide range of topics. Your time to research the subject and your foreign language abilities being the only constraints..

  17. Hi guys, I’m back. Just got back from a party in another state. I’m exhausted. Will have a post tomorrow.

  18. Do you ever get the impression that people you know are reading your stuff? I go to a party and I swear people have been reading what I write. But it’s not the reaction I expected at all. People “reveal” themselves to me in ways I didn’t expect. I’m really touched. I try, REALLY HARD, not to let my political views enter my interactions with people who I genuinely love and respect even though they are not my family and even though our political views are at polar opposites. But every now and again, they surprise me because it seems to me that no matter what your political affiliation, we are all struggling with our own backgrounds and resentments and prejudices and some of us are winning that battle. People who I once thought wer just young cocky assholes are learning to empathize. The evangelical dreamer has a down to earth revelation. The wealthy businessman sees the employment situation through the eyes of a relative. I have hope, conflucians. The world is hard but there is enlightenment where you least expect it sometimes.

    • That would be good news because I do get the feeling sometimes that everyone is on someone else’s payroll…except the posters and regulars on TC that is. :-)

    • That’s very nice to hear.

    • that is very similar to my experience that has been ongoing for about 10 years. The conservative republican members of my church come up to me when I write letters to the editor and tell me how they agree with something I said or that they voted for a democrat etc…I have also found that there is no difference between the conservative and liberal members when it comes to giving time and energy to doing things like feeding the poor etc…..
      Sometimes life yanks you out of your box and lets you see the wider world.

      • Agree. One-on-one, it’s encouraging. And yet with every election cycle, we have to deal with a world made worse by people who vote by team rather than by principle–both side of the aisle.

    • More unites us than we sometimes think.

      djmm

  19. >Would you feel the same way about WikiLeaks if it was run by the Tea Party or some other far-right group?

    Yes-since my feeling isn’t about Wikileaks itself, but about government secrets, both their tremendous overuse and their general intent (to protect them from us, not us from others). So in general, any info anyone can pry out of the government I’m in favor of coming to light.. There are, as I said, a small number of exceptions-I remain unconvinced they apply to anything here.

    >statements disguised at questions are gutless. You have an opinion about the people on this site, state it.

    Well I certainly have an opinion about you, but I’m betting you can already figure it out for yourself.

    • I think 95+% of government secrets are designed to protect the people in government from their citizens, not the citizens from harm.

      Is this a personal assessment?

  20. > To me, wikileak only pierces the veil of secrecy for a selected point of view.

    Of course.

  21. >I think 95+% of government secrets are designed to protect the people in government from their citizens, not the citizens from harm.

    >Is this a personal assessment?

    Hence the words, “I think.” But it is an assessment based on the reading of at least 3000 volumes of history and politics over the last 40 years, so it isn’t based on thin air either.

  22. >We ignorant savages bow to your superior intellect.

    >You must have trouble finding hats that fit.

    I’m sorry-I thought I was dealing with grownups. My mistake.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 433 other followers

%d bloggers like this: