3 ms·

This classy response by Gates is but a brief glimpse of honesty from an otherwise hysterical, paranoid, and secretive government. A statement like this would n

This classy response by Gates is but a brief glimpse of honesty from an otherwise hysterical, paranoid, and secretive government. A statement like this would never have occurred if Assange had not released these documents. The standard rhetoric from Washington is that it's important to keep secrets, and that's why so much is classified, and why it needs to remain classified. Assange AND Gates have demonstrated that this is not true, that release of these cables and the earlier military leak (which DoD found did NOT reveal any sensitive intelligence sources or methods) do not seriously threaten our safety. Contrast that with statements from Sarah Palin, Congressperson Peter King, and others, who are basically calling for Wikileaks to be classified as a terrorist organization. King in particular noted that the requirement seems to be met -- that Wikileaks represents a "clear and present danger" -- which seems to be contradicted by Gates' statement. Also, in academic political science, terrorism is generally defined as -violence- against a non-military target to achieve a political end, so there's no terrorism involved here from an academic perspective. If King is correct and that's the requirement, it is too broad. Cablegate has thus been valuable in demonstrating hypocrisy among politicians and political hacks. If there's a story here, it's that politicians are trying to whip Americans into a frenzy over some embarrassing but not critical leakage.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Helianthus16 16y ago
>This classy response by Gates is but a brief glimpse of honesty from an otherwise hysterical, paranoid, and secretive government. I think you're making a really careless characterization here, and it's taking me some time to put a finger on why. Maybe it's that the government has _not_ acted hysterical, paranoid, or secretive in any way throughout this hubbub. It was pretty much like "Yeah, we know what's coming, we're bracing ourselves," with an additional stated position of "It is wrong to release state secrets." I think you're conflating the media coverage, which _is_ hysterical and paranoid, with the actual government's reaction. I think in addition, you're conflating what the loudmouths of the political process call for action with the actual government's reaction. The loudmouths are there for us to consider extreme courses of action. The reason this took me long to force out was that this brief glimpse of honesty really is in contrast with the reactions of the irked and probably very harassed officials who have been quoted, so I didn't disagree with some part of the statement. However, I expect this is because the government is realizing how it came off pretty well--I would not be surprised to find US policy advanced in some ways, especially Iran. The US was a victim in public world opinion. So maybe now the government is able to communicate with the media its composure.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

Helianthus16 16y ago

>This classy response by Gates is but a brief glimpse of honesty from an otherwise hysterical, paranoid, and secretive government. I think you're making a really careless characterization here, and it's taking me some time to put a finger on why. Maybe it's that the government has _not_ acted hysterical, paranoid, or secretive in any way throughout this hubbub. It was pretty much like "Yeah, we know what's coming, we're bracing ourselves," with an additional stated position of "It is wrong to release state secrets." I think you're conflating the media coverage, which _is_ hysterical and paranoid, with the actual government's reaction. I think in addition, you're conflating what the loudmouths of the political process call for action with the actual government's reaction. The loudmouths are there for us to consider extreme courses of action. The reason this took me long to force out was that this brief glimpse of honesty really is in contrast with the reactions of the irked and probably very harassed officials who have been quoted, so I didn't disagree with some part of the statement. However, I expect this is because the government is realizing how it came off pretty well--I would not be surprised to find US policy advanced in some ways, especially Iran. The US was a victim in public world opinion. So maybe now the government is able to communicate with the media its composure.