iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Simon Jenkins

Simon Jenkins

Posted: November 29, 2010 07:58 AM

What is extraordinary to anyone reading the WikiLeaks material is not so much its content as the manner of its preparation and dissemination in the first place. The leaked documents did not carry a full top-secret classification and were apparently intended to promote debate across the widest possible range of people in the foreign service community. They amount to a running encyclopedia of the views, gossip and analysis of American foreign service officers, made available, we are told, to some 2-3 million authorized accessors to the State Department intranet worldwide.

This material went out uncensored, with names and sources disclosed, on an intranet with an unsophisticated coding system. That it could be downloaded by one, presumably authorised, person is strange enough. It is hard to believe no more menacing power did not have the ability to do likewise. The recklessness of such a casual approach to secrecy beggars belief.

By way of contrast, the five media organizations in receipt of the material went to extraordinary lengths over the past two months to check and "redact" the material that the State Department disseminated so widely. Dozens of names were removed, sources concealed and any danger to current operations censored. Diplomatic agencies were also given the opportunity to warn of risky areas and their views logged and taken into account. Each of the recipient media cross-checked with each other and with WikiLeaks itself. No such precautions were taken by the State Department in preparing its own intranet dissemination. If I were an American source, I would be far more afraid of the State Department than the world's media.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 245
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
10:02 AM on 12/01/2010
It is always easier for our government to blame the messenger than to "fix" the problem in the State Dept. This decision to use the diplomatic corps as spies began with Condi Rice and the Bush presidency and it might be a valuable tool but so far most of the leaked documents don't indicate that.
Sec Clinton is merely following the already approved path AND for sure President Obama's direction as well. If they don't want this stuff out there, and most of it is so snide it reminds one of high school revelations, they need to classify it more carefully, with code or whatever.
02:40 PM on 11/30/2010
Lots of proclamations about how the truth will set you free but I think that in order to process this thing properly, one has to recognize that there is such a thing as information that is not and should not be made public. A government, like any organization or any person for that matter, has secrets and statements and positions it does not display publicly. Imagine what kind of damage you would do to your relationships if you walked around being 100% honest and disclosing your every thought. Discretion is a big part of diplomacy. While I sort of expect the media to do what it does, I do think WikiLeaks has behaved somewhat irresponsibly in this case.
01:47 PM on 11/30/2010
The post is right on point: any unencrypted communications should be assumed to have been intercepted. During the Vietnam war encryption was so widely used in the services that in the 1960s we would send benign, unclassified messages via "EFTO" - Encrypt For Transmission Only". Anything classified was required to be encrypted, and I assume that requirement is still in place. The unsophisticated among the readers might think that codes are routinely broken, and that anyone on the inside of the Government can read any message. Both Untrue! That so much material was accessible speaks volumes about the adequacy of information protection within the Government.

Those of us who are old enough recall the great right wing outcry when the Pentagon Papers were published. The harm that their publication caused to individuals was insignificant in comparison to that which it prevented by enabling millions of open minded Americans to properly inform themselves concerning the Vietnam war. The same will be true of the Wikileaks documents, I hope.
12:45 PM on 11/30/2010
Although I agree with Mr. Jenkins criticism of the State Department, I must add that I hold Private Manning responsible for hacking into classified information, even though it may have been made ridiculously easy to do so. I also have serious concern about any other sources which may have provided some of this information to Wikileaks in the first place. I find it incredible to accept that it all came from one low-level army private. The big question is for me: who gave this information to Wikileaks other than Private Manning?
03:50 PM on 12/05/2010
I don't hold Private Manning responsible, I hold the Army responsible for allowing this kid to access all this information, so easily.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Madagain
antirepublicanism
05:14 AM on 11/30/2010
It seems to me if there is to be someone prosecuted for exposing the leeks to the world, it should be those responcible for letting this info out. After all, is the security of our private documents the responcibility of our enemys? Wikileaks founder should be rewarded for exposing the ineficiency of our agencies to guard our secret info.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cadawa
04:42 AM on 11/30/2010
Thank you Simon for your thoughtful article in the Guardian and for injecting some rationality into a self serving media frenzy meant to discredit Assange, impugn the important work WikiLeaks is doing and to make the American public doubt the information that is, at last, being made available to them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aarontastic
"Mr. Cain instead decided to try to provide her wi
12:19 AM on 11/30/2010
You're right. The media is expected to run with stuff like this when it gets the chance, assuming it properly censors out anything which could be construed as potentially dangerous to the US (or whichever country is in question). The really sad thing is just how lax the State Departments security was; hopefully this will serve as a wake up call. The President and Secretary of State ought to be thanking god that these flaws were exposed by a Wikileaks agent, instead of going undetected longer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ConsensusReality
RootenTootenZooten
11:24 PM on 11/29/2010
Our government has way too many secrets.
photo
OzzieTonto
“Hatred, the only thing that lasts.”
11:22 PM on 11/29/2010
Sounds as if a lot of our noble commenters need some focus. How about we focus on the many thousands of tortured, murdered, incarcerated, renditioned human beings in Fallujah and other poor places, whose horrific ends would never have been known to the world but for the noble Prince Elric (-Ooops!) Julian Assange, my fine compatriot and hero.
06:58 AM on 11/30/2010
Fact is we and the media already knew about this before the wikileaks releases (albeit with not as much detail). What's makes us think the media will do more than it did before the releases to tell the news and portray a more likely version of going ons?
10:42 PM on 11/29/2010
The government's contention is that an Army private had access to and leaked hundreds of thousands of classified document. If they're that incompetent then anyone could have leaked these documents. It's like leaving all of the windows and doors wide opened in your house and then getting upset because your stuff disappeared.
09:51 PM on 11/29/2010
Taken from another HuffPo article: "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange alleged that the [U.S.] administration was trying to cover up evidence of serious "human rights abuse and other criminal behavior" by the U.S. government."

This is nothing but an attack on the United States. I wonder what tune you'd be singing if classified UK documents were released to the world.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Reno Fickler
Head Lifeguard/Dead Sea Marina
09:07 PM on 11/29/2010
Allow me to hazard a guess.
The Govt will have to update our computer system at a cost of hundreds of billions, and then we can go forward yadda, yadda, yadda. And some company gets a contract for $XXXXXXXXX! But no more leaks. Yea, sure. Follow the money.
photo
SamEllison
I feel so clean!
08:10 PM on 11/29/2010
When everything is a secret nothing is a secret.
Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted everything secret,
they were warned. Just another debt they ran up
that we get to pay for.
photo
Cloud7Raymaker
He who digs a hole for another may fall in himself
11:38 PM on 11/29/2010
Not to mention their decision to 'leak' an active CIA agent's info during a time of war for political reasons... with no consequences after cheapened the value of top-secret information.

It was only a matter of time before lower level government personnel emulated the behavior of those in charge in handling classified information imho. And I still believe there needs to be some consequence handed down for the criminal acts (and that is what leaking classified info is) committed by the Bush Administration.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VirginiaJeff
Waiting for the "Jennifer Government" movie
07:55 PM on 11/29/2010
 
Excellent essay.  Well said.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
cplKlyde
07:39 PM on 11/29/2010
The only people blaming the media are those afraid of the truth.