Wikileaks — short on intelligence

Maybe Wikileaks has come to the cynical conclusion that in the contemporary media environment the headline is more important than the story.

CIA Red Cell Memorandum on United States “exporting terrorism”

That sounds like damning material. Plans to insert US-trained terrorists into Iran or Venezuela perhaps? Is Wikileaks exposing yet more dirty secrets from the CIA’s ugly history?

No.

Indeed, if we are to define a leak as the revelation of confidential information in which the public has a compelling interest — information that must be published as a matter of conscience — then the latest offering from Wikileaks hardly qualifies being described as a leak. Indeed, the US intelligence community may actually regard the release of such a report as something that overall enhances their public image.

This Red Cell report has a couple of interesting details — confirmation that there are those in the US government who understand that Jewish terrorism has played a significant role in triggering Palestinian terrorism, and (reading between the lines) that CIA officers engaged in kidnapping can be perceived as American terrorists — but the overarching topic here is not a secret acknowledgment that the US government has been involved in promoting and exporting terrorism.

If Wikileaks wants to provide the best public service it is capable of, it needs to focus attention on improving its image. It has made the medium more important than the message as though we should be more interested in Wikileaks than the leaks. Instead of the brand “Wikileaks” signalling the release of important information, it now signals a theatrical drama in which Julian Assange demands a spotlight while he is supposedly jousting with the dark forces of government. Is that what he and his cohorts want to be known as? A band of attention seekers?

Whistleblowing is a noble exercise in which individuals follow the dictates of their conscience and place public interest above personal interest. I assume that Wikileaks was created as a way of honoring such a spirit.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterrss
Facebooktwittermail

4 thoughts on “Wikileaks — short on intelligence

  1. Norman

    Conspiracy, spin, propaganda, what ever. This thing is getting off the tract here. The American public, who are on the hook for the trillions of dollars that this Government wastes each year on the so called defense of the homeland, needs every bit of information available to look at, in order to see what’s being done in their name. So what, if the Wiki people are tooting their own horn. They also take a shitload of flack for what they do. Of course, they just might be a C.I.A. front, to lure the uninformed into complacency! Goodness graces sakes alive, why our Government wouldn’t try to pull the wool over our eyes now, would it?

  2. Enzo

    Couldn’t disagree with you more about Wikileaks.

    They, and Assange in particular, have done very well so far and are learning on the fly.

    The Red Cell report has not only its own merit but is a middle finger to its enemies to help fill in the vacuum until the next big leak.

    This is the most intelligent and determined group of activists I’ve seen in a ~long~ time.

Comments are closed.