Simply Irresponsible!

Posted 30 Nov 2010 by Walaa Idris

Wikileaks Logo

When Wikileaks first surfaced most saw it the same as or similar to Wikipedia – a web based source of information most of which is already available in the public domain and the rest volunteered personally or added on by those in the know.

However, the recent batch of leaks showed clearly that’s not the case, as it turned out, Wikileaks is exactly what the name says, wee leaks. Plus its latest instalment is of a sensitive rather embarrassing nature – the kind both sides prefer to keep private. The information leaked was neither readily available in the public domain nor obtained legally. Yet their eminent reveal was publicised a few days before hand, the site’s proprietor is known, some say, too are those who helped disclose this sensitive information.

All very interesting!

The person who stole the information and his accomplice who published them have said they did it because the public had the right to know, know! Know what!? That Obama thought Cameron was a light weight, and Prince Andrew has bad table manners or Saudi Arabia wants rid of Iran – how is any of these leaks going to improve anyone’s life, ease poverty, eradicate disease or end wars? Or how is knowing diplomats say one thing to your face and another behind your back going to help the world or matters of diplomacy? What the diplomatic circuit thinks about a host’s leadership, dignitary and their attitudes towards different matters are at the heart of diplomatic work. The information gathered by a nation about its allies is as vital as that they gather about their enemy.

The thinking that what they did is honourable is absurd yet dangerous at the same time – because sadly as disgraceful and as it is, there will be those who will seize on this opportunity to misuse the leaked information for their own personnel agenda. Now, how is that helpful to the public?

This latest leaks did not fill Joe Public with confidence that his human rights and freedom of information are being protected and respected nor did it serve any national or international endeavour. On the contrary it made most of us feel vulnerable and exposed. It also raised questions about the US and the manner in which it handles sensitive information and the world’s trust in those it puts at the top. It also increased doubts about its ability in managing its security and the security of those that work with them!

If confidential diplomatic cables can find their way to Wikileaks so easily what other intelligence is readily available for sale for the right price!? This administration is famous for being lax and too relaxed but this is simply deplorable!

Categories: ,

3 comment(s)

Floyd Codlin

Floyd Codlin
30 Nov, 16:33

Walaaa, you mentioned “This latest leaks did not fill Joe Public with confidence that his human rights and freedom of information are being protected and respected nor did it serve any national or international endeavour”.

It was wikkileaks amongst others that exposed the horrors of Guatanemo bay as well as Abu Gharib prison. It was also WikkiLeaks that exposed the fact that the US army seemed to regard the war in both Afghanistan and Iraq as one big video game.

Your chagrin seems based upon the fact that those who would be our masters might have to be called to account and answer questions concerning their conduct. Regarding diplomacy, you think its okay for negotiations to take place under bad faith..because what we get from some of these cables at least is that America and Britain like to indulge in the Imperial sneer at the antics of the funny foriegners while pretending to treat them as equals.

I must say this point “ If confidential diplomatic cables can find their way to Wikileaks so easily what other intelligence is readily available for sale for the right price!? This administration is famous for being lax and too relaxed but this is simply deplorable” is both tenuous and tendatious.

On the one hand you get in a bit of Obama bashing while putting the not so subtle point that anyone recieving this sort of information must be abit dodgy.

Edward Green

Edward Green
30 Nov, 16:45

Well said, Walaa. I wholeheartedly agree. There are a lot of people who will always have a different view however.

When this story broke, most of the “headline leaks” being talked about were about all the Middle Eastern Arab States asking the USA to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. The immediate reaction of a rather left wing friend of mine was “Oh, so the US Administration is now using Wikileaks for its own propaganda purposes!” My opinion however is that the volume is so large and the scope of diplomatic damage is too large to too many bi-lateral relationships for this attitude to be true.

I am worried about he arrogance and stupidity of some the people who steal the information and pass it on to Wikileaks. The people who stole this particular tranche of information are, in my opinion, breathtakingly stupid and arrogant regardless of the fact that they are also criminals. As you pointed out, Walaa, they thought the public had a right to know. I am one of the “public” and I will shout from the rooftops “I DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW! I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW!”

Until now my life has been much safer because very senior military, security and diplomatic people have exercised their right to know things that I don’t and they have also exercised a right to tell me things that they consider me to have a right to know. That is why they are senior people and the treacherous, treasonous disgusting scum that leaked this stuff are not senior people.

The fact that stupid little desk-jockeys have started thinking they are better placed to decide what is in the public interest than those who have spent decades in military, security or diplomatic service gaining experience and expertise fills me with horror.

Edward Green

Edward Green
30 Nov, 17:07

Having read your comment, Floyd, I agree that the “leaks” about Abu Ghraib and the gunship treating the shooting of civilians as a video game were in the public interest, but much in the current tranche is not.

It is fair to say that some of that said by the Middle East Arab Government is akin to “leaks” that the Pope might be a Catholic and that bears do indeed generally defecate in forested areas. Nevertheless, it is still damaging to diplomatic relationships for such matters to be so widely publicised.

If people who have a conscience are in a position to make a difference by bringing criminal acts like the Apache or whatever helicopter gunner chaingunning civilians as if for fun (oh yes I most definitely consider that a war crime!) into the public domain via Wikileaks, then this is a vital and noble thing. This tranche was just a couple of stupid geeks copying Gb after Gb of information and passing it on without giving any care as to what they were passing on.

The information leaked about the UK/USA stuff, I think, however, is actually very good for the UK’s national interest and the benefits far outweigh any damage it might do to the diplomatic relationship between the two nations. Perhaps more people on this side of the Atlantic might start to realise that the so-called “Special Relationship” is a figment of their own fevered immaginations.

Commenting is closed for this article.