"What a difference WikiLeaks makes"

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Transparency is oxygen to democracy!

What a difference WikiLeaks makes

December 18, 2010
The gap between what politicians say and what they really think has never been more evident.

WHISTLEBLOWERS and leaks are not new. They are what make media scrutiny of the secretive workings of governments and corporations possible. This is a fact of life even for governments, which sometimes discreetly release information they think will serve their agendas even though it may be contained in documents marked ''classified'', ''confidential'' or ''top secret''. But when this happens, the government dictates what the public will be allowed to know. That relationship has been turned on its head, however, since WikiLeaks began releasing the 251,287 cables, sent to or from 274 US embassies, that have come into its possession.

So far WikiLeaks has published only a tiny fraction - fewer than 2000 - of its cable cache, in association with newspapers including The Age. Yet even that is an avalanche of information compared with the usual drip-feed from leaks, and it has in equal measures unnerved, frustrated and infuriated the world's governments. This not because publication of the cables has endangered lives or threatened the security of the US, Australia or other nations, although politicians have been quick to make such claims. It is an accusation of last resort, made by people who have been profoundly embarrassed by the WikiLeaks revelations. What publication of the cables has done is to highlight the gulf between what political leaders and diplomats say privately and what they are willing to tell citizens. And because that gulf is so evident, their credibility has been erased on issues, such as the war in Afghanistan, on which they have grown used to lying with impunity.

...

It must be wondered whether the Prime Minister thinks the New York Times publication of the Pentagon Papers, which detailed the Johnson administration's deception of Congress and the US public about the Vietnam War, was grossly irresponsible. Those documents were also illegally copied and provided by a person with access to them. Yet it cannot seriously be argued that their publication was not in the public interest. It mattered to Americans that their government's public statements on the war were contradicted by actions it had concealed from them.

And so it is now with the WikiLeaks revelations, in Australia and many other countries around the world. As The Age has argued before, what has been learnt about the national security establishment's view of the war in Afghanistan demolishes the arguments Ms Gillard has used in justification of the war

...

Wikileaks on twitter Wikileaks website

[Jeffersons Ghost]

1. Does anyone really believe a low-ranking private could steal that many top secrets alone?

You better believe there's a hidden agenda behind these alleged "leaks."

[Pavulon]

3. whose agenda? and yes at 20 I had access to TS

data and again at 25 as a civilian had access to information that is still vital to national security and has an immediate cash value.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[malaise]

4. K & R for WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks rocks!!

[noise]

5. The public is led to believe that government officials act in good faith

This lie is made possible by way of secrecy and propaganda.

[glinda]

6. And don't forget Rupert! Just another layer of poop on top of it all.