

SecDef Gates on Wikileaks - tptacek
http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2010/11/quotable-secretary-gates-on-wi/

======
gfodor
It's classy responses like this that really contrast Assange et al as being a
bunch of classless amateurs. They got lucky and ended up dumping a bunch of
gossip and information that didn't serve any real political purpose than
making the U.S. look bad. No widespread conspiracy blown open, no major
corruption revealed, nothing but trashy gossip and a few questionable ethical
violations, but nothing even worthy of being in the same sentence as the
pentagon papers.

This will be, in the end, a net loss for the perception of Wikileaks in the
public eye.

~~~
runningdogx
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.

~~~
Helianthus16
>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.

------
wooster
That's a refreshingly honest and frank assessment. It's nice to see someone in
his position speaking to reality.

~~~
jonhendry
I think Gates was the only good hire of the Bush administration.

~~~
jacquesm
Colin Powell was as well until they decided to throw him under a bus by using
his stature to push a bunch of lies.

------
jcr
I wonder when Mudge will get off his lazy talentless ass and complete CINDER?
;-)

Whoa! --It's just a joke and pure sarcasm.

If you didn't laugh, you probably don't know about the complexity and
difficulty faced by the DARPA CINDER project, or you don't realize how
dedicated and talented Pieter "Mudge" Zatko is.

Automating behavioral profiling heuristics is a very heady task and well worth
studying even if you only have a passing interest in the topic. If you like
"undecidable" problems, you'll really enjoy it.

<http://www.darpa.mil/sto/solicitations/sn10-68/index.html>

Knowing a bit about the goals of the CINDER project will hopefully give a bit
of enlightenment to some Sec. Gates statements.

------
ashbrahma
In defence of wikileaks - Economist Post:

[http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/ov...](http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/overseeing_state_secrecy)

