RSSThe WikiTsunami
Gene Lalor | November 29, 2010
There are leaks and there are leaks, there are floods and there are floods, there are tsunamis and there are tsunamis and even though “WikiLeaks” flows from the tongue somewhat more fluidly that “WikiTsunamis,” what happened over the weekend can only be described as a diplomatic tsunami of epic proportions.
The chief difference between that criminal release of purloined documents and a literal tsunami was that the leak has had precedents and the United States knew it was on the way, even if it acted as if it were impotent to prevent or de-fuse it.
Without solely assigning responsibility to the Obama administration for the release of a quarter million mostly classified, some labeled “secret,” United States State Department-embassy cables, it cannot be held totally blameless either.
Sarah Palin Facebooked her thoughts which are right on the mark. She reminds that WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, is not a journalist who should be accorded journalistic privilege. He should have been regarded as an anti-American terrorist, which he is, and treated as such.
Rather than preparing for damage control, as is the modus operandi of the Obama administration, after Assange’s earlier leaks, Palin believes our government should have exerted worldwide pressure and the assistance of NATO, the EU, and other allies to pre-empt WikiLeak’s next attack: http://tiny.cc/zyw0k
Instead, led by the Ditherer-in chief, America dithered as the WikiTsunami approached and ultimately hit with full force.
WikiLeaks and its founder evidently had no regard for repurcussions of its leakage of those sensitive American documents but someone should have.
It was anything for notoriety and anti-Americanism, eh, Julian, no matter how much damage you do, how much chaos you effect, or how many deaths you cause? I would hope that you will eventually be prosecuted and, with any luck at all, be strung up by your gonads.
In no danger of that latter fate since the New York Times lacks both figurative and literal gonads, especially when it comes to resisting the urge to publish any material detrimental to the better interests of the United States, the Times has issued its rationale for publishing allegedly carefully-redacted excerpts of stolen documents.
That rationale essentially boils down to: We did it because we could.
The newspaper of record, the Old Lady Grey Lady which prints all the news it sees fit to print gave this explanation: “The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match:” http://tiny.cc/2ajn3
Well said, Editor-in-chief Bill Keller! Russia’s Pravda or China’s People’s Daily couldn’t have said it any better nor with more deliberative dissemblance.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her troops in Foggy Bottom spent the weekend manning the phones desparately trying to mop up the pieces of what remained of America’s diplomatic reputation after the WikiLeaks leaks but whether she or her fellows had any long term success is highly speculative.
After all, what mitigating circumstances could they offer to members of the United Nations whom Sec. Clinton ordered spied on in July, 2009? And this was not to be ordinary department skulduggery.
According to Der Spiegel, Hillary wanted both dirt and other info from American diplomats on their fellow diplomats, including ”personal credit card information, frequent flyer customer numbers, as well as e-mail and telephone accounts. . . ’biometric information,’ ‘passwords’ and ‘personal encryption keys.’ “
Foreign diplomats were to be secretly virtually strip-searched, sent through virtual airport naked privacy scanners, having virtual pat-downs of everything including their “junk,” and the U.N.’s top echelon were not exempted. “The US State Department also wanted to obtain information on the plans and intentions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his secretariat:” http://tiny.cc/zyw0k
How very un-diplomatic!
What could Hillary and her trusty, fellow foggy bottomites say after they said they were sorry? Will grovelling work? Will pledges to make nice in the future and never, ever do that nasty stuff ever, ever again cut it? Will pleas that the world please trust us have any credibility?
Only if Mr. Ban Ki-moon and all the others are damned fools.
There are a few silver linings to this leak catastrophe in all this diplomatic gloom, all involving the Islamic Republic of Iran. 
According to WikiLeaks:
. The treachery and hypocrisy of Iran and its twisted leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have, once again, been exposed. He and his Muslim nation disgraced itself and Islam by utilizing Red Crescent, (their equivalent of our Red Cross), ambulances to smuggle weapons instead of transporting sick and injured to Lebanon during Hezbollah’s 2008 war with Israel: http://tiny.cc/el8my
. Saudi Arabia, home to the most sacred cities in all of Islam, Mecca and Medina, secretly turned on Islamic Iran, turned with a vengeance: “The Saudi king [Abdullah] was recorded as having ‘frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons programme. He told you [Americans] to cut off the head of the snake,” said one cable: http://tiny.cc/fp9qc. It’s always easier to have some vile infidel to do Muslim dirty work.
. Finally, and this must be categorized as a tarnished silver lining, the sick brotherhood between Iran and its equally-disturbed buddy nation, Kim Jong-il’s North Korea, has been confirmed: “Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal:” http://tiny.cc/ef6sq.
The silvery feature of that leaked news is that it provides more than adequate cause to expunge both Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il before they expunge the planet.
Contributor's website: http://www.genelalor.com/
Content posted by users from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use and each author is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or its owner.
Leave a Reply
Loading ...Recommended Reading:
