backtop


Print 28 comment(s) - last by inperfectdarkn.. on Apr 12 at 8:52 PM

Cables quote Kissinger as joking about breaking the law, violating Constitution

It was a dark era in U.S. history.  The homeland was rife with protests.  The communist Soviet Union was threatening nuclear action.  Israel was at war with Egypt and Syria.  And in Asia scores of young Americans were dying in the bloody stained jungles of Vietnam.

I. Wikileaks Parses, Publishes Late Vietnam-era Cables Collection

Wikileaks and its controversial editor-in-chief Julian Assange have scoured recently published diplomatic cables from the U.S. State Department from this period --1973-1976.  After meticulous script-driven extraction of the raw data, the leaks site is advertising some of its controversial findings in a release called the "Kissinger Cables".

In one cable titular U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger quips, "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer."

Of course that quote may be a bit out of context; but it's certainly a bad joke at best.

Kissinger wide
U.S. SoS Henry Kissinger is quoted joking about illegal actions. [Image Source: Foreign Policy]

To build its searchable database Wikileaks combed through 1.7 million declassified PDF files, which totaled over 380 gigabytes of data and 700 million words.  The records were released via a declassification/publication process, that's supposed to occur within 25 years of their publication, according to U.S. State Department policy.

The cables join previous leaks in the central WikiLeaks Public Library of US Diplomacy (PlusD) database.

Wikileaks PlusD

The publication process of State Department cables is initiated by the State Department declassifications and releases.  The cables are then passed off to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for final review.

II. Documents for 1976-1988 are Behind Schedule

The leaks site points out that the cables for 1976 through 1988 should be out, but that the release is 12 years "behind schedule."  But Wikileaks cites a 2006 review by US National Security Archives, an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at George Washington University, which suggests the delay was not entirely accidental.  The review found that the Bush administration had reclassified 55,000 releasable pages.  And reportedly, that process has been ongoing under President Obama's regime in the years since the review.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange jabs, "The [Kissinger Cables] collection covers US involvements in, and diplomatic or intelligence reporting on, every country on Earth. It is the single most significant body of geopolitical material ever published.  The US administration cannot be trusted to maintain the history of its interactions with the world. Fortunately, an organisation with an unbroken record in resisting censorship attempts now has a copy."

Julian Assange
Julian Assange has accused the U.S. government and global media of a grand conspiracy. 
[Getty Images/AFP]

Unlike a past release of current State Department classified cables, which drew a harsh rebuke from U.S. politicians and charges for alleged-leaker U.S. Private Bradley Manning, the current release was more of an exercise in targeted data mining.  While it's likely to ruffle feathers, it did not involve gaining any sort of unauthorized access.

To date over 95 percent of the leaks on Wikileaks have targeted the U.S. individually or in collective activities with its allies.  While these leaks have exposed some interesting and potentially incriminating details, they also have been at times indiscriminate, releasing sensitive, but not-incriminating documents along with more sensitive releases.

An important on-going question is whether Wikileaks -- which claims it needs tens of millions of dollars yearly to stay online -- is acting as a true whistleblowing site (which typically only publishes incriminating evidence, not sensitive, but immaterial operational details) or as a foreign espionage organization.  That question is unlikely to be resolved any time soon, though, as site founder Julian Assange explicitly refused multiple requests from reporters to identify whether any nation states fund his site or funding levels by nation.

Source: Wikileaks



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Hype...
By Captain Orgazmo on 4/8/2013 6:51:53 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, poor old communist Russia, never hurt a fly. Except for murdering 30 million people, sponsoring wars and terrorism around the world, oppressing and repeatedly invading Eastern Europe for 40 years behind the Iron Curtain, constantly threatening the West with 45,000 nuclear weapons, unknown tens of thousands of chemical and biological weapons, and 100,000+ tanks and armored vehicles, and flooding the undeveloped world with over 100 million AK-47s and other actual "assault weapons."

But dang that evil USA for wanting to defend Western Europe with short range tactical nukes (the only counter to the Russian tank hordes), or wanting to defend itself against a potential nuclear holocaust that would have left at minimum 150 million Americans dead (and nearly happened in 1983 due to the paranoia of the insane and senile Soviet leadership).

When will Wikileaks target Russia, or China, or North Korea, or Iran, or Myanmar, or Sudan, or any other great free "Peoples' Republic"?

Answer: the day they crave a Polonium sandwich, bullet to the head, or "random" beating to death in a dark alley.


RE: Hype...
By ClownPuncher on 4/8/2013 7:54:41 PM , Rating: 2
While mostly true, I don't see what you say as entirely relevant to the post you responded to.


RE: Hype...
By tamalero on 4/8/2013 11:33:21 PM , Rating: 2
You mean like invading or affecting directly and indirectly a whole bunch of nations.. setting violent and murderous dictatorship in key countries?
yeah, poor old USA, they are saints!


RE: Hype...
By maven81 on 4/9/2013 11:25:58 AM , Rating: 2
What does this have to do with what I said about the state of the cold war in the 70s?
The rest is just hyperbole. The soviets were good at bluffing. Take the non existent missile gap, the laughable strategic bomber force, and oh sure, the tank numbers sounded good on paper, but you're counting models that were completely obsolete as well.
Funny you should mention senile leadership. Prove that Reagan was better. You're falling right into the fear-mongering trap politicians everywhere want to believe.


RE: Hype...
By Captain Orgazmo on 4/11/2013 6:58:16 PM , Rating: 2
You've fallen into the trap of revisionist history.

My father fought the Soviet tanks invading Czechoslovakia in 1968, ask him if they were "bluffing," you pathetic armchair judge of history.

In the 1970s Brezhnev started a massive buildup of weapons during American defense cuts and recession following the Vietnamese War (the fault of combined US naivety, and French/Soviet imperialism). This resulted in Soviet military superiority in Europe, on an order of at least 5 to 1 Soviet to NATO in all aspects (numerical and technological) when Reagan took office.

History proves Reagan was better you fool, unless you are truly too ignorant to realize that the US won the cold war.


"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki