At Least One Of Us Is Woefully Ignorant

Floyd Abrams writes on Wikileaks in the Wall Street Journal and delivers a bit of a headscratcher:

In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg decided to make available to the New York Times (and then to other newspapers) 43 volumes of the Pentagon Papers, the top- secret study prepared for the Department of Defense examining how and why the United States had become embroiled in the Vietnam conflict. But he made another critical decision as well. That was to keep confidential the remaining four volumes of the study describing the diplomatic efforts of the United States to resolve the war.

...

The diplomatic volumes were not published, even in part, for another dozen years. Mr. Ellsberg later explained his decision to keep them secret, according to Sanford Ungar's 1972 book "The Papers & The Papers," by saying, "I didn't want to get in the way of the diplomacy."

Julian Assange sure does. Can anyone doubt that he would have made those four volumes public on WikiLeaks regardless of their sensitivity? Or that he would have paid not even the slightest heed to the possibility that they might seriously compromise efforts to bring a speedier end to the war?

Good question, and I am hardly an authority on "What Does Julain Want?" However, there is ample room for doubt as to just what he may have ultimately published, since (unlike his file dump of the Afghanistan field reports) Assange worked closely with five newspapers to edit his trove of State Department cables.  From the AP:

PARIS (AP) — The diplomatic records exposed on the WikiLeaks website this week reveal not only secret government communications, but also an extraordinary collaboration between some of the world's most respected media outlets and the WikiLeaks organization.

Unlike earlier disclosures by WikiLeaks of tens of thousands of secret government military records, the group is releasing only a trickle of documents at a time from a trove of a quarter-million, and only after considering advice from five news organizations with which it chose to share all of the material.

"They are releasing the documents we selected," Le Monde's managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann, said in an interview at the newspaper's Paris headquarters.

WikiLeaks turned over all of the classified U.S. State Department cables it obtained to Le Monde, El Pais in Spain, The Guardian in Britain and Der Spiegel in Germany. The Guardian shared the material with The New York Times, and the five news organizations have been working together to plan the timing of their reports.

They also have been advising WikiLeaks on which documents to release publicly and what redactions to make to those documents, Kauffmann and others involved in the arrangement said.

Obviously there are some game theory issues here - if all five newspapers had refused to publish anything, Assange could have simply looked for other, more cooperative partners, subject to the fallback option of publishing everything himself.

On the other hand, I don't know how Abrams can know that Assange would ultimately have taken that step.

Comments

[MarkO]

So, Floyd Ambrams, lawyer for the NYT in the Pentagon Papers case is explaining why his episode of treason really wasn't? How quaint.

[clarice]

Better yet, was there a conservative paper in on the decision of which leaks to print?
Note that in the Pentagon Papers case the stuff used to bring a diplomatic close to the war were not revealed for fear of prolonging the war, only the stuff that made people want it ended were made public.

[Sue]

On the other hand, I don't know how Abrams can know that Assange would ultimately have taken that step.

1.5 million dollars?

[Tom Roberts]

Abrams was concerned with the issue of espionage being a legitimate charge, not treason. Read the latter half of the op-ed. But the issue for treason or espionage is similar: in either case the US has to prove Assange had malign intent versus US interests, and at this point that is not superficially clear. (The fact that he damaged interests through these releases is an effect, not a motivation, in this case.)

[LouP]

I continue to be baffled by the Wikileaks reactions. Actually, there have been so far 3 leaks. The first 2 dealt with Pentagon leaks, much like the Pentagon Papers. These leaks were met with a yawn by the MSM and moderate to left-leaning pundits.

No, where the real uproar began was with leak #3 - the state papers. It's this leak that has got the pundits' panties in a wad.

All of the leaks are criminal in my opinion. But leaks #1 & #2 actually named real names that put people's lives in danger. Leak #3, though it can be considered damaging to diplomacy, does not do - as far as I can see - any direct harm to persons or to the military effort; it by and large just embarasses the diplomats, and in some cases proves some of the points that the right has been saying and the MSM ignoring.

But these leaks certainly reveal some interesting information about the "news" and idealogical orientation of the selected conduits. And what's with the coordinated slow leak of only selected material - and only from Leak #3 - that the conduits feel is appropriate? News conspiracy, anyone?

[Jack is Back!]

I know what he wants. He wants attention, applause, acclimation and unsafe sex -all in that order.

[Jack is Back!]

::acclimation::= ::acclaim::

Damn spell check without checking the results.

[Stephanie]

I know what he wants. He wants attention, applause, acclimation and unsafe sex -all in that order.

I thought you were still discussing the troll til you threw in that last tidbit.

[BobDenver]

JiB, how can any man come up with a list like that and make sex number 4?

[TGSG]

follow the money

[Jack is Back!]

Bob,

It's what he wants not me:)

But think about it - does he look like someone who wants sex over notoriety?

[Captain Hate]

LouP, I've been pretty amused at the embarrassment to the tools in the State Dept by the leaks which, as you pointed out, only deflates their massive egos.

[BobDenver]

But think about it - does he look like someone who wants sex over notoriety?

Yeah ... personal grooming-wise, it doesn't look like he's trying too hard.

[Rob Crawford]

Leak #3, though it can be considered damaging to diplomacy, does not do - as far as I can see - any direct harm to persons...

Mugabe has announced a "treason" investigation into his leading opponent based on material contained in the DoS Wikileaks. Given the... structure of Zimbabwe, Assmange may just have cost people their lives and given a second breath to Mugabe's tyranny.

I won't give my opinion on whether this is considered a bad thing by Assmange and his cohort.

[Threadkiller]

I finally placed where I saw Assange before.

[Jack is Back!]

Ah, how I miss Charles Bronson. They don't make movies like that anymore.

[Extraneus]

Oh, I don't know. He seems interested.

[Extraneus]

"Do not write to me if you are timid. I am too busy. Write to me if you are brave."

[LouP]

RC, I'll stand corrected on that one.

But I think my point is still valid. The Zimbabwe disclosure is very recent; the uproar on #3 from MSM was well underway before that one, and no way am I going to be convinced that the MSM has a crystal ball that works.

[The Sky is the Limit, Icky, Me Boy.]

Assange has a telling side history in the climate debate. Several of the skeptic sites feature the revelation a few weeks ago of video with him seeming to claim some credit for the ClimateGate leaks, though he had nothing to do with them. His crowning inglory, however, is missing the whole point of the leaks and coming down on the consensus view side of the whole climate date.

Really, he's just insane with leftism plus.
===============

[Boo boo de doop]

Date, debate oh
What the heck, I don't write it.
Fingers fail me now.
=======

[Rob Crawford]

LouP, I was more responding to the (all-too-common) idea that the Wikileaks crimes have had no victims.

Assmange's quest for... whatever... has damaged diplomacy and made war more likely in many places. His avowed pacifist stance is just fashion; he's as much a wrecker as Charles Manson.

[MarkO]

While we are on this topic---and not the codes of behavior----why is no one in State or in the military being fired, demoted, prosecuted [except the actual leaker] or otherwise subject to the ridicule and scorn rightfully heaped upon Assange?

Can we really expect him to forego the benefit of making public the trove of information given him through the combination of stupidity, negligence and criminal behavior? Especially in light of the Pentagon Papers case. He is a diversion from those who permitted the leak.

[LouP]

RC, I couldn't agree more. As far as I'm concerned Assange is nothing more than a media whore, probably backed by Soros money.

I've observed that public reaction to the leaks initially fell within three rough groups. The solid right condemned him from the first. The hard left hailed him as a hero. It was the area between the hard left and the solid right that was sitting on the fence for a while. Initially they remained pretty silent (thereby condoning his leaks) through leaks #1 & #2. But with leak #3 - the state papers - they started roaring. Since that time I've noticed some of the hard left actually starting to question his hero credentials.

So, everybody to the left of center was OK with leaks #1 & #2, it was only leak #3 that seemed to conflict them. And I find that curious and fascinating.

[theauthoritys]

He still does CIA favors after Val's dating games.Cables were always leaked.been in one,except val 'poking around files?

[(Another) Barbara]

Mark Steyn said today in a radio interview (paraphrased): "Nothing revealed in Wikileaks helped the left at all and only verified that Cheney and Rumsfeld were right about everything."

[Captain Hate]

While we are on this topic---and not the codes of behavior----why is no one in State or in the military being fired, demoted, prosecuted [except the actual leaker] or otherwise subject to the ridicule and scorn rightfully heaped upon Assange?

Because he's unwittingly revealed the most damning thing to lefties: The government is incompetent in everything they do.

[Pagar]

Good Morning to all. I too would like to thank TM for all he does for us.

"The government is incompetent in everything they do."

No where is that better illustrated than
90 yr old PO workers still getting tax free Workers Comp.

Still wondering why stamp prices keep going up?

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

Hey AB,

How's the neighborhood with your first family guests? Are you allowed out of the house?

Pagar,

I heard today that stamps are going up to 46 cents and they will all be forever stamps. Not that that does anything but prove your point.