No evidence that WikiLeaks releases have hurt anyone

[kpete]

Source: Miami Herald

No evidence that WikiLeaks releases have hurt anyone

By NANCY A. YOUSSEF
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- American officials in recent days have warned repeatedly that the release of documents by WikiLeaks could put people's lives in danger.

But despite similar warnings before the previous two releases of classified U.S. intelligence reports by the website, U.S. officials concede that they have no evidence to date that the documents led to anyone's death.

Before Sunday's release, news organizations given access to the documents and WikiLeaks took the greatest care to date to ensure no one would be put in danger. In statements accompanying stories about the documents, several newspapers said they voluntarily withheld information and that they cooperated with the State Department and the Obama administration to ensure nothing released could endanger lives or national security.

The newspapers "established lists in common of people to protect, notably in countries ruled by dictators, controlled by criminals or at war," according to an account by Le Monde, a French newspaper that was among the five news organizations that were given access to the documents. "All the identities of people the journalists believed would be threatened were redacted," the newspaper said in what would be an unusual act of self censorship by journalists toward government documents.




Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/28/1947638/no-evidence-that-wikileaks-releases.html#ixzz16di5ZvjW

[Odin2005]

1. K&R

[TheWraith]

2. They couldn't prove that outing Valerie Plame killed anyone either.

That's a pretty useless metric.

[southmost]

14. beat me to it, that was also my first thought....

eom

[mulsh]

3. Well thank god. That settles it, nothing to worry about here.

good to see our government is on top of things and taking control of this matter.

[Freetradesucks]

4. To say that these leaks in no way damaged

either a specific person or national security is ludicrous. Those responsible for this should be tracked down and dealt with within the full extent of the law.

[Hissyspit]

5. The article clearly says "put people's lives in danger" and then emphasizes

proven deaths. It doesn't say "damaged specific persons or national security." They discuss those issues further into the article.

[Freetradesucks]

6. These leaks do put people in danger,

Perhaps you should check your disdain for our government for a moment and reflect......

[Hissyspit]

7. I have been breaking the WikiLeaks issues here, researching them, following their developments

and lecturing on them to my students for three years now. And have followed the debates on the merits of the leaks and the potential impacts, reading all sides of the issues - this includes the fascinating counter-propaganda techniques and talking points. It also includes awareness of the danger that the disdainful acts our government commits put people in.

[EFerrari]

10. Easier for you to back up your baseless claim.

[ronnie624]

15. Endless war for profit and control is far more dangerous in the long run.

I can never support it, so my disdain will remain as it is for now.

[liberation]

17. Technically it is the knowledge of the actions by our government which puts people in danger...

... of retaliatory actions for our government's criminal activity.

But I don't think that works with the script you have been given... ooops.

[No Elephants]

19. Anything specific in mind? Any proof?

So far, the only two people I know who of have been hurt by these leaks are Manning and Assange. And the people who are pissed off by them on general principles. So, if you have a credible source pointing to something specific, I and a lot of folks here would be very interested.

[de novo]

24. Repeating it doesn't make it true. Perhaps you should check your

submission to authority for a moment and reflect...

[wisteria]

8. +1 n/t

[Hissyspit]

9. +1 for a misrepresentation of what the article says?

O.K.

[JDPriestly]

11. Have you read the Wikileaks released in the Guardian?

I read a few and, although I thought that releasing them might be dangerous when I heard about it, I certainly did not find anything that would do any harm other than bruise a few inflated egos. I haven't read very many, but I hope you are not just assuming that the leaked documents are dangerous on principle and without having actually read anything that could create a problem.

[No Elephants]

18. Lots of things are "damaging," including classifying tons of stupid, boring crap.

[ProSense]

12. That was fast. Have all the documents been released?

No danger, no crimes, just embarrassing and/or private communications made public.

Transparency for entertainment and reading material? These are not the Pentagon Papers.

Would have been great if these actually revealed a crime, corrected a wrong or anything related to the Bush administration horrors. Embarrassment is a low bar for compromising foreign policy.

Transparency is a good thing, but foreign policy is not being conducted in an environment in which all parties value Democracy and transparency. If world representatives fail to show or believe they can't speak freely, that is not condusive to diplomacy. The world is not paradise, and there are people in it who don't trust each other and those who would do others harm.

[No Elephants]

20. If "world representatives" don't realize anything in writing

may embarrass them one day and people may be listening in on their telphone conversations and even many of their in person converesations, they haven't kept up with the news for the last decade or more, let alone watched a movie or followed Spy vs. Spy, and should be shit canned on those grounds alone.

Besides, most of this massive international gossip column is very likely news only to lay people, not to the intelligence gathering arms or governments of the nations involved. And, I would bet mostly American lay people. We seem to be more insular, uninformed and naive than the average bazaar vendor in so-called third world nations.


Besides, both sunlight and absence of sunlight are dangerous.

[Arrowhead2k1]

13. To be honest, I do think these leaks have the potential to cause some yet unforeseen consequences.

But I still think they are necessary. The veils of secrecy need to be opened up a little so that things can finally get worse before they get better. The status quo can't last like this forever anyways. State secrets aren't meant to conceal scandals from the people.

Things I'm keeping my eye on are reaction in the middle east for the revelation that Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Qatar have been urging a military strike on Iran.

Also, the yet to be released cables from the embassy in Lebanon are almost certainly bound to have some damaging information regarding the wars there and the assassination of Hariri. This is a country that is already teetering on the edge of another civil war. I fear it won't take much to send them into a tissy...

[elana i am]

16. it's been rather underwhelming so far.

not that i was looking forward to the schadenfreude, but there haven't been any real revelations yet.

[No Elephants]

21. Same pattern every time: before publication, the U.S. government is Chicken Little. After

the leak, it shrugs and says "Ain't no thang." Somewhere in between may be a kernel of truth, or of truthiness.

[melm00se]

22. I think that

releasing these documents does not put specific individuals in danger, the release does pose a risk in that releasing mid and high level diplomatic activities can create a destabilizing atmosphere were individuals will be offended, peoples outraged and countries will have concrete proof that their allies (and NOT just the USA) live the quotes:

Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer

Trust but verify

Additionally, there is the likelihood of misunderstanding as these documents are, more than likely, incomplete. While there may be comments like "Democracy is dead in Russia" there may be other documents that indicate the USA course of action which is and should continue to be non-confrontational.

Take this (fictional) quote:

you get to read that ""Bob" is going to get a gun for you" but you don't get to read "as a gift and token of our friendship". the former, without the latter, could be interpreted as a threat.

[MineralMan]

23. Seems a bit early to be making such pronouncements.

Only a tiny fraction of the stuff has been released, and that only a couple of days ago. I wouldn't expect any of the direct repercussions to be evident this soon. In reality, most such incidents won't become news in any case.

We still have no idea of what is in the vast majority of these cables, nor do we know how individual countries will react to the information. Time will show us what the results will be. Virtually no time has passed since the first few cables were made public.

Irresponsible journalism on the part of the linked material, in my opinion.

[EFerrari]

25. The Pentagon had no problem making the opposite claim last week. n/t

[MineralMan]

26. Yes, that's true. Again, my point is made. They responded too

quickly, as well, with regard to this...even before the materials had even been released. Who is correct and who is not correct will be determined over time. It's too early, and too little has been made public for any judgments to be made. That is my opinion, and the only opinion I'm stating.