Someone Leaked on the Leakers

Today WikiLeaks published this editorial, which, quite frankly, made my day (or ruined it).  It is almost insanely comical and it has hugely changed my perception of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange (more on that later).

To make a long story short, it would appear that someone leaked on the leakers and the resulting reaction from WikiLeaks is - ahem - interesting to say the least.

Let me dive right in.  The first paragraph reads:

A Guardian journalist has negligently disclosed top secret WikiLeaks’ decryption passwords to hundreds of thousands of unredacted unpublished US diplomatic cables.

 I am not convinced that disclosure was at all negligent and in fact in a later paragraph, WikiLeaks themselves states:

Guardian investigations editor, David Leigh, recklessly, and without gaining our approval, knowingly disclosed the decryption passwords in a book published by the Guardian.

"Knowingly?" - didn't they just say it was negligent?

However, where this becomes extremely fishy is when they write:

Over the past nine months, WikiLeaks has been carefully releasing US diplomatic cables according to a carefully laid out plan to stimulate profound changes. A number of human rights groups, including Amnesty International, believe that the co-ordinated release of the cables contributed to triggering the Arab Spring. By forming partnerships with over 90 other media and human rights organizations WikiLeaks has been laying the ground for positive political change all over the world.

I am sorry - "a carefully laid out plan to stimulate profound changes".  A conspiracy in other words.  A conspiracy to manipulate people into using undemocratic means to provoke changes.  Undemocratic means such as - well - revolution.

They go on to write:

Revolutions and reforms are in danger of being lost as the unpublished cables spread to intelligence contractors and governments before the public. The Arab Spring would not have have started in the manner it did if the Tunisian government of Ben Ali had copies of those WikiLeaks releases which helped to take down his government. Similarly, it is possible that the torturing Egyptian internal security chief, Suleiman—Washington’s proposed replacement for Mubarak—would now be the acting ruler of Egypt, had he acquired copies of the cables that exposed his methods prior to their publication.

First of all - they actually themselves use the word revolution here.  In other words, WikiLeaks real agenda is to provoke violent revolutions while using secrecy (read that again - WikiLeaks is deliberately keeping things secret) to achieve their goals.

Let me make it absolutely clear that I find it extremely hard to justify any form of government secrets in a democracy.  I profoundly believe that "people" have a right to know everything their elected "leaders" are up to.  But I find it hugely disturbing when individuals or an organisation such as WikiLeaks are using - what can only be described as stolen information - to fuel their own entirely unannounced political agenda.  A political agenda that obviously includes provoking - or attempt to provoke - violent revolutions.  And I am quite convinced that the poor guy who has been accused of causing this leak in the first place, and who are now rotting away in a military prison quite possibly awaiting execution, only meant for this information to be public knowledge, and not to participate in downright manipulation to aid dodgy political agendas.

On www.wikileaks.org, they write:

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for independent sources around the world to leak information to our journalists. We publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices.

Quite frankly - they can stuff this statement up where the light seldom shines. WikiLeaks have - in one pathetic and highly hypocritical editorial - lost all respect I ever had for them.  Initially I found their approach refreshing and even courageous, but now I am left with a feeling of having been manipulated by some self righteous charlatans who's real agenda they choose to keep secret.

It is time WikiLeaks and/or Julian Assange show the world what they are up to.  Release everything you got to the public and let the public make up their own mind.