Wikileaks and the Case of the Zimbabwean Opposition Leader

World • Views: 25,042

One of the diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks described a meeting between US representatives and Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, considered one of Zimbabwe’s brightest hopes for democratic reforms.

Well, he was considered one of Zimbabwe’s hopes for democracy, until Wikileaks destroyed that hope. Chris Albon reports at the Atlantic: How WikiLeaks Just Set Back Democracy in Zimbabwe.

Later that day, the U.S. embassy in Zimbabwe dutifully reported the details of the meeting to Washington in a confidential U.S. State Department diplomatic cable. And slightly less than one year later, WikiLeaks released it to the world.

The reaction in Zimbabwe was swift. Zimbabwe’s Mugabe-appointed attorney general announced he was investigating the Prime Minister on treason charges based exclusively on the contents of the leaked cable. While it’s unlikely Tsvangirai could be convicted on the contents of the cable alone, the political damage has already been done. The cable provides Mugabe the opportunity to portray Tsvangirai as an agent of foreign governments working against the people of Zimbabwe. Furthermore, it could provide Mugabe with the pretense to abandon the coalition government that allowed Tsvangirai to become prime minister in 2009.

It’s difficult to see this as anything but a major setback for democracy in Zimbabwe. Even if Tsvangirai is not charged with treason, the opponents to democratic reforms have won a significant victory. First, popular support for Tsvangirai and the MDC will suffer due to Mugabe’s inevitable smear campaign, including the attorney general’s “investigation.” Second, the Prime Minister might be forced to take positions in opposition to the international community to avoid accusation of being a foreign corroborator. Third, Zimbabwe’s fragile coalition government could collapse completely. Whatever happens, democratic reforms in Zimbabwe are far less likely now than before the leak.

Jump to bottom

86 comments
1 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:47:33am

oh geez.

2 [deleted]  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:51:35am
3 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:52:42am

And some say information is neutral, academic. Secrets are bad. Well what good has come of wikileaks at all?
Other than grist for the anti American propaganda generators that is.

I'm sure there are more examples of real harm done out there as yet unexposed.

4 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:54:49am

Fuck.

It's like these guys read Popper and completely got it backwards. The free and open exchange of information is the best good for a society.

A large part of that free and open exchange of information is the freedom. The freedom to keep information private. The freedom to have secrets. There are no rules that can be made that address every situation. All information should not be free, all information should not be hidden. It is always a case-to-case basis.

Privacy. It's a right. It's an important right.

5 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:58:00am

Wow. Now that's collateral murder.

6 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 9:59:13am

Dictators like Robert Mugabe couldn't ask for a better ally than Wikileaks.

7 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:00:07am
8 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:00:31am

re: #4 Obdicut

Fuck.

It's like these guys read Popper and completely got it backwards. The free and open exchange of information is the best good for a society.

A large part of that free and open exchange of information is the freedom. The freedom to keep information private. The freedom to have secrets. There are no rules that can be made that address every situation. All information should not be free, all information should not be hidden. It is always a case-to-case basis.

Privacy. It's a right. It's an important right.

I'm still pondering the Property Rights concept. Secrets/information are property IMHO. Even if they are "owned" by governments. In "free" countries one has to have a warrant to get such information.

But, I guess if you are a self-appointed judge and jury, you don't need such things.

9 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:03:43am

re: #3 Rightwingconspirator

And some say information is neutral, academic. Secrets are bad. Well what good has come of wikileaks at all?
Other than grist for the anti American propaganda generators that is.

I'm sure there are more examples of real harm done out there as yet unexposed.

There don't seem to be many leaks from 'non-free' countries? Wikileaks isn't working too hard, they are just exposing the easy stuff.

wimps.

10 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:03:48am

Assange is dangerously stupid. He has no idea what he's doing and who he's fucking with.

11 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:04:21am

re: #8 ggt

Obviously, if the government was hiding secrets about, say, murdering civil rights leaders, then it would be a huge good for anyone to reveal that, no matter what the law.

But revealing that civil right's leader's location when he was being hunted by extremist assassins would not be a good.

It matters what the information is, and the likely use it will be put to.

This is why Wikileaks sucks.

12 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:05:54am

re: #11 Obdicut

Obviously, if the government was hiding secrets about, say, murdering civil rights leaders, then it would be a huge good for anyone to reveal that, no matter what the law.

But revealing that civil right's leader's location when he was being hunted by extremist assassins would not be a good.

It matters what the information is, and the likely use it will be put to.

This is why Wikileaks sucks.

Computer Hackers are not Law Enforcement. In my perfect world, they would share such information with Law Enforcement first.

But they are soooo much smarter . . . .

13 Kragar  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:07:44am

The only person Assange cares about is Assange. The anarchist schtick is just how he promotes his image.

14 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:11:18am

Assange on the Zionist controlled media.........
Assange on Supposed Manipulation by Soros and Mossad


If you look closely, what has happened is that the New York Times as a media organisation has to be quite careful not to criticise Israel too much. So, if you look at the coverage in English that is coming out you will see little that is critical of Israeli behaviour and a lot critical of Iran, for example. That is not a true reflection of the "Cablegate" material. There is information in there that is critical of most countries - certainly including Israel.
15 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:11:58am

these leaks have the effect, in a sense, of manipulating events or history...it's almost as if he is playing God...who is he to take up such a role? and if people are threatened or maneuvered into unwanted or dangerous positions as a result, then he better have good life insurance...I agree with KT in that it would not take much to go over the edge and put his own life at risk....probably already has

16 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:12:17am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

Easy pickin's.

This guy is a wimp.

17 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:12:36am

Mugabe's one of those African presidential-dictators that have been in power for decades and will be until they die or are driven out of the country. No way he would ever have allowed democratic reforms.

18 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:13:33am

re: #15 albusteve

these leaks have the effect, in a sense, of manipulating events or history...it's almost as if he is playing God...who is he to take up such a role? and if people are threatened or maneuvered into unwanted or dangerous positions as a result, then he better have good life insurance...I agree with KT in that it would not take much to go over the edge and put his own life at risk...probably already has

If he wanted to risk his life, he'd go after KSA or Iran or Syria or a host of other countries where we know human rights violations are rampant.

He is a coward.

19 blueraven  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:13:52am

re: #17 000G

Mugabe's one of those African presidential-dictators that have been in power for decades and will be until they die or are driven out of the country. No way he would ever have allowed democratic reforms.

So, what is your point?

20 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:13:57am

re: #17 000G

Mugabe's one of those African presidential-dictators that have been in power for decades and will be until they die or are driven out of the country. No way he would ever have allowed democratic reforms.

Wikileaks is helping Mugabe's effort.

21 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:15:09am

re: #18 ggt

If he wanted to risk his life, he'd go after KSA or Iran or Syria or a host of other countries where we know human rights violations are rampant.

He is a coward.

he wants fame and respect....in the end he will neither

22 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:16:15am

Ok, the dogs want to go out and I have to run errands.

Have a great day all!

23 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:16:22am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

Assange on the Zionist controlled media...
Assange on Supposed Manipulation by Soros and Mossad

Soros is not much of a Zionist. It's pure anti-Semitism to just assume that he must be working with the Mossad when he just operates for himself.

24 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:16:53am

re: #19 blueraven

So, what is your point?

That I don't think it makes much of a difference for Mugabe.

25 Gus  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:17:34am

re: #17 000G

Mugabe's one of those African presidential-dictators that have been in power for decades and will be until they die or are driven out of the country. No way he would ever have allowed democratic reforms.

Why's that? I thought that once Wikileaks released these documents it would all be rainbows and sunshine.

26 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:17:57am

re: #20 Killgore Trout

Wikileaks is helping Mugabe's effort.

Wikileaks having published the cables about that US meeting with Tsvangirai is helping Mugabe's effort. Significant difference; IMHO.

27 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:18:04am

re: #23 Alouette

Soros is not much of a Zionist. It's pure anti-Semitism to just assume that he must be working with the Mossad when he just operates for himself.

who know where Soros has his hands...I'd believe nearly anything about that guy, but it's doubtful he's a Zionist, but who knows?

28 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:18:22am

re: #25 Gus 802

Why's that? I thought that once Wikileaks released these documents it would all be rainbows and sunshine.

I never said that.

29 Gus  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:18:51am

re: #28 000G

I never said that.

Did I say you said that?

30 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:19:51am

re: #29 Gus 802

Did I say you said that?

Why else reply to my post with that rhetorical question?

31 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:20:18am

re: #26 000G

Wikileaks having published the cables about that US meeting with Tsvangirai is helping Mugabe's effort. Significant difference; IMHO.

So, stop tap dancing... you have any problem with this cable/letter/correspondence being released by Assange?

32 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:20:33am

re: #23 Alouette

Soros is not much of a Zionist. It's pure anti-Semitism to just assume that he must be working with the Mossad when he just operates for himself.

At least regarding Soros, Assange seems pretty lucid:

(It is common) in the US to allege George Soros is behind everything. To be fair, the only vaguely conspiratorial things that George Soros has been behind is some of the 'Colour Revolutions' in Eastern Europe about five or six years ago that I know about.

33 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:21:28am

re: #30 000G

Why else reply to my post with that rhetorical question?

it's part of the artistic flow of the thread...what you see on your screen is just part of the larger piece

34 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:22:07am

re: #33 albusteve

it's part of the artistic flow of the thread...what you see on your screen is just part of the larger piece

Sorta like that Picasso dude.

35 blueraven  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:22:42am

re: #24 000G

That I don't think it makes much of a difference for Mugabe.

But it might make a big difference for Morgan Tsvangirai and the people of Zimbabwe. But as long as there is freedom of information via wikileaks, I guess that's OK with you?

This "nothing can be done" attitude is getting old quick.

36 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:23:34am

re: #34 Walter L. Newton

Sorta like that Picasso dude.

yes exactly...one must lose their restricted senses and become the work itself....be the comment

37 Aceofwhat?  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:24:13am

re: #26 000G

Wikileaks having published the cables about that US meeting with Tsvangirai is helping Mugabe's effort. Significant difference; IMHO.

See, in English, when you can strike a clause without altering the meaning of the main subject/verb/direct object, it's not significant.

Just trying to help.

38 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:25:03am

re: #35 blueraven

But it might make a big difference for Morgan Tsvangirai and the people of Zimbabwe. But as long as there is freedom of information via wikileaks, I guess that's OK with you?

This "nothing can be done" attitude is getting old quick.

it was real old yesterday...there is always something to be done depending on the cost/benefit of the situation

39 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:26:00am

re: #35 blueraven

But it might make a big difference for Morgan Tsvangirai and the people of Zimbabwe. But as long as there is freedom of information via wikileaks, I guess that's OK with you?

This "nothing can be done" attitude is getting old quick.

I did not say that it's okay with me. I just don't think that Tsvangirai ever had a realistic chance of winning an actual, fair election against Mugabe.

And: Nothing can be done about this new leaky world being leaky. The technology is out there, it's not like WikiLeaks has patented it. Like file-sharing, this is just going to be a part of the world we live in, now. If there is anything to be done, I would rather look at Manning and how he was able to get those documents.

40 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:26:28am

re: #26 000G

Wikileaks having published the cables about that US meeting with Tsvangirai is helping Mugabe's effort. Significant difference; IMHO.

What is the significant difference, please?

That they didn't think about the consequences, rather than intending to help him?

41 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:26:58am

re: #39 000G

I did not say that it's okay with me. I just don't think that Tsvangirai ever had a realistic chance of winning an actual, fair election against Mugabe.

And: Nothing can be done about this new leaky world being leaky. The technology is out there, it's not like WikiLeaks has patented it. Like file-sharing, this is just going to be a part of the world we live in, now. If there is anything to be done, I would rather look at Manning and how he was able to get those documents.

So... you would like to stop these sorts of leaks? Yes/no?

42 Gus  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:27:19am

re: #26 000G

Wikileaks having published the cables about that US meeting with Tsvangirai is helping Mugabe's effort. Significant difference; IMHO.

IOW the fault lies with the US having a meeting with Tsvangirai? I mean, after all, don't isolationists typically plead for the US to not "meddle" in the affairs of other countries?

43 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:27:19am

re: #37 Aceofwhat?

See, in English, when you can strike a clause without altering the meaning of the main subject/verb/direct object, it's not significant.

Just trying to help.

You are altering the meaning. It did make a difference what WikiLeaks published. Of course Mugabe did not pounce on just any cable but the ones refering to actual events having taken place in relation with the US and Zimbabwe.

44 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:28:53am

re: #41 Walter L. Newton

So... you would like to stop these sorts of leaks? Yes/no?

I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

45 jaunte  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:29:17am

Apparently randomly-released diplomatic information is objectively pro-fascist.

46 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:29:50am

re: #42 Gus 802

IOW the fault lies with the US having a meeting with Tsvangirai? I mean, after all, don't isolationists typically plead for the US to not "meddle" in the affairs of other countries?

Not ascribing any (moral or legal) fault, not much interested in that, sorry. Just cause and effect.

47 Kragar  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:30:36am

re: #44 000G

I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

My house could catch fire, that doesn't mean I'm not going to do everything in my power to prevent it from happening in the first place.

48 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:30:58am

re: #6 Charles

Dictators like Robert Mugabe couldn't ask for a better ally than Wikileaks.

This is what I meant some threads back when I said I didn't trust them to read what they released. Someone pointed out that they have a lawyer read them, but unless they have a lawyer who knows the political climate in every nation in Africa, say, shit like this is going to go down. And the stuff that gets released because no one knew if it was sensitive, or dangerous, or what, is the stuff relating to small countries with unstable situations, where it's real easy for the good guy to get stuffed in a car one fine evening.

49 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:31:04am

re: #44 000G

I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

It's not a moot question. It's a simple question. I'll repeat it slowly... and framed a little simpler... if it were possible, would you like to see these leaks stop ?

50 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:31:29am

re: #47 kragar (proud to be kafir)

My house could catch fire, that doesn't mean I'm not going to do everything in my power to prevent it from happening in the first place.

I think the proper analogy is trying to prevent any fire from ever happening again.

See also: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

51 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:31:54am

re: #47 kragar (proud to be kafir)

We can't ever fully stop leaks. Nor should we want to. We can, of course, affect the rate of leaks.

One way of doing this is by having a free and open society where things are not classified unnecessarily. That makes it a lot easier to keep real secrets secret.

That is about the only real, valid lesson to come out of this.

52 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:32:28am

re: #9 ggt

There don't seem to be many leaks from 'non-free' countries? Wikileaks isn't working too hard, they are just exposing the easy stuff.

wimps.

They're releasing what they can get. They had, for example, the stuff from Kenya, because human rights activists there were willing to give it to them. They have our stuff because Manning, allegedly, was willing to give it to them. I think this whole thing is very luck of the draw. I also think that someone willing to blow Russia's state secrets sky-high might get in touch with someone else.

53 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:32:33am

re: #49 Walter L. Newton

It's not a moot question. It's a simple question. I'll repeat it slowly... and framed a little simpler... if it were possible, would you like to see these leaks stop ?

Yes. And if it were possible, I would also want roasted chickens flying into my mouth when I was hungry, and peace and love be reigning over the world with everyone being their own master and nobody's slave and a happily ever after for all, too.

54 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:32:38am

re: #44 000G

I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

that's a naive response....there is plenty of state information that is nearly 100% safe and if there would be a crack, every power known would come to bear to protect it....Wikileaks can be stopped

55 Gus  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:33:42am

re: #46 000G

Not ascribing any (moral or legal) fault, not much interested in that, sorry. Just cause and effect.

I'm looking at an effect here. The Wikileaks release has led to Tsvangirai being "investigated" by Mugabe's attorney general. There is a moral fault here and it lies in Wikileaks hands. Simple as that.

56 blueraven  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:33:45am

re: #44 000G

I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

re: #39 000G

I did not say that it's okay with me. I just don't think that Tsvangirai ever had a realistic chance of winning an actual, fair election against Mugabe.

And: Nothing can be done about this new leaky world being leaky. The technology is out there, it's not like WikiLeaks has patented it. Like file-sharing, this is just going to be a part of the world we live in, now. If there is anything to be done, I would rather look at Manning and how he was able to get those documents.

I think it's a good thing you are not King of the World. So you dont get to decide these things. Neither does Assange.

57 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:33:53am

re: #51 Obdicut

We can't ever fully stop leaks. Nor should we want to. We can, of course, affect the rate of leaks.

One way of doing this is by having a free and open society where things are not classified unnecessarily. That makes it a lot easier to keep real secrets secret.

That is about the only real, valid lesson to come out of this.

That was one of the points debated in great detail in the Congressional Hearings on WikiLeaks. Worth checking out: [Link: cspan.org...]

58 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:34:27am

re: #50 000G

Oh come on, stop dancing with semantics, dude. You can't stop leaks. You can affect the rate of leaks.

This is a real, actual, result form these leaks. You can dismiss it all you want, you can say it doesn't matter, assert that Mugabe couldn't possibly be taken down. That's a completely unsupported assertion, but whatever. Feel free.

But stop the semantics. All leaks can't be stopped. Some leaks can be stopped.

Your argument has gotten sloppier and sloppier the longer you've engaged with this topic. It's getting really tiring.

59 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:34:27am

re: #54 albusteve

that's a naive response...there is plenty of state information that is nearly 100% safe and if there would be a crack, every power known would come to bear to protect it...Wikileaks can be stopped

There is no 100 % safety.

60 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:34:51am

re: #55 Gus 802

I'm looking at an effect here. The Wikileaks release has led to Tsvangirai being "investigated" by Mugabe's attorney general. There is a moral fault here and it lies in Wikileaks hands. Simple as that.

Okay.

61 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:35:14am

re: #56 blueraven

re: #39 000G

I think it's a good thing you are not King of the World. So you dont get to decide these things. Neither does Assange.

Okay, I think.

62 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:36:42am

re: #58 Obdicut

This is a real, actual, result form these leaks. You can dismiss it all you want, you can say it doesn't matter, assert that Mugabe couldn't possibly be taken down. That's a completely unsupported assertion, but whatever. Feel free.

My assertion is based on looking at the last decades of African history and the place of democracy therein.

But stop the semantics. All leaks can't be stopped. Some leaks can be stopped.

Yes. Exactly what I have been saying. No idea why you accuse me of "dancing with semantics".

63 blueraven  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:37:04am

re: #61 000G

Okay, I think.

Not so sure you do.

64 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:37:11am

re: #23 Alouette

Soros is not much of a Zionist. It's pure anti-Semitism to just assume that he must be working with the Mossad when he just operates for himself.

Yes, but people who dislike Soros continue to use very classic anti-Semitic imagery around him, so it's hardly surprising.

Can't see him working with Mossad to cover Israel's ass, though.

65 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:37:26am

re: #63 blueraven

Not so sure you do.

Okay.

66 albusteve  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:38:39am

re: #59 000G

There is no 100 % safety.

I didn't say there was....that does not mean that after a certain point you give up trying to protect it

67 Gus  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:39:44am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

Assange on the Zionist controlled media...
Assange on Supposed Manipulation by Soros and Mossad

But of course. That's been self-evident all along especially considering who ran to his defense on December 7, 2010. That majority of his supporters are largely anti-Israel.

68 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:40:35am

re: #62 000G

My assertion is based on looking at the last decades of African history and the place of democracy therein.

That doesn't raise it above the level of an assertion. What is an obvious truth is that any chance for democracy has been hurt by this release. An obvious truth that you seem to want to avoid desperately.

Yes. Exactly what I have been saying. No idea why you accuse me of "dancing with semantics".


Because you're pretending everyone else is a fucking moron who's seriously saying that we could stop all leaks. Sure, they're saying "We want leaks to be stopped" but that doesn't mean they're actually asserting that all leaks can be stopped, any more than someone saying they want rape stopped, they want corruption ended, or any other such statement is actually absolutist. Pretending that it is is weak-sauce.

69 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:43:20am

re: #67 Gus 802

But of course. That's been self-evident all along especially considering who ran to his defense on December 7, 2010. That majority of his supporters are largely anti-Israel.

Having now read the link, BTW, I think Assange is saying that people who say he's working with Soros and Mossad are idiots, and that the NYTimes is covering for Israel, which is different from saying that Soros and Mossad are working against him for Israel.

Just to clarify.

70 jaunte  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:43:47am

I don't understand why people who want to praise Assange and Wikileaks for 'setting information free' find it so difficult to assign some moral culpability to them when a leak causes unforeseen damage.

71 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:46:17am

re: #69 SanFranciscoZionist

Having now read the link, BTW, I think Assange is saying that people who say he's working with Soros and Mossad are idiots, and that the NYTimes is covering for Israel, which is different from saying that Soros and Mossad are working against him for Israel.

Just to clarify.

The idea that the New York Times "covers" for Israel is pure far-left craziness, with more than a hint of antisemitism. The truth is actually almost the exact opposite - the Times has been one of Israel's harshest critics for many years.

72 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 10:50:02am

re: #71 Charles

The idea that the New York Times "covers" for Israel is pure far-left craziness, with more than a hint of antisemitism. The truth is actually almost the exact opposite - the Times has been one of Israel's harshest critics for many years.

True--and the fact is, everyone on all sides of Israel issues will swear on a stack that the media is against them and for the other guy--myself included--but Assange is still saying something different from what I initially thought he was saying.

73 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 11:13:34am

A tweet from the author of this article, Chris Albon:

Comments on my WL article make one thing clear: People are more than eager to throw Zimbabweans under the bus to protect Assange.

74 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 12:09:03pm

re: #68 Obdicut

That doesn't raise it above the level of an assertion. What is an obvious truth is that any chance for democracy has been hurt by this release. An obvious truth that you seem to want to avoid desperately.

You call it an obvious truth, I call it an assertion. No idea what despair has to do with it.

Because you're pretending everyone else is a fucking moron who's seriously saying that we could stop all leaks. Sure, they're saying "We want leaks to be stopped" but that doesn't mean they're actually asserting that all leaks can be stopped, any more than someone saying they want rape stopped, they want corruption ended, or any other such statement is actually absolutist. Pretending that it is is weak-sauce.

Uhm, No I am not pretending any of that. I was responding specifically to specific questions.

75 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 12:13:12pm

re: #66 albusteve

I didn't say there was...that does not mean that after a certain point you give up trying to protect it

I was responding to Walter's question. He specifically asked whether I would like "to stop these sort of leaks", and I answered that the question was moot because in my opinion "these sort of leaks" are from here on out the condition of the world we are living in. I am not denying that or whether specific, concrete leaks could not or should not be stopped, but then again I did not take that to be the question.

76 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 12:13:19pm

re: #74 000G

You call it an obvious truth, I call it an assertion. No idea what despair has to do with it.

You consider it an assertion that a would-be-dictator arresting an opponent is harmful to democracy? Really? What a joke. Seriously, dude, you have been going downhill in your defense of Wikileaks. Welcome to your new low.

Uhm, No I am not pretending any of that. I was responding specifically to specific questions.

Yes, you have been pretending exactly that. Like right here:


I think it is a moot question because I do not think it is really possible.

That's you pretending people actually think it's possible to stop all the leaks.

And here:

And: Nothing can be done about this new leaky world being leaky.

Unless you really, really believe absolutely nothing can be done to even affect the level and frequency of leaks, which would be just absolutely wrong, especially since you already agreed that there are things that can be done.

77 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 12:36:57pm

It's a shame what will now happen to Tsvangirai, but Zimbabwe is in a rather persistent slump.

The government of Zimbabwe faces a wide variety of difficult economic problems. Its 1998-2002 involvement in the war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo drained hundreds of millions of dollars from the economy. The government's land reform program, characterized by chaos and violence, has badly damaged the commercial farming sector, the traditional source of exports and foreign exchange and the provider of 400,000 jobs, turning Zimbabwe into a net importer of food products. The EU and the US provide food aid on humanitarian grounds. Until early 2009, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe routinely printed money to fund the budget deficit, causing hyperinflation. The power-sharing government formed in February 2009 has led to some economic improvements, including the cessation of hyperinflation by eliminating the use of the Zimbabwe dollar and removing price controls. The economy is registering its first growth in a decade, but will be reliant on further political improvement for greater growth.


The GDP per capita is under $100 in 2009 USA dollars. The unemployment rate is around 95 percent. Fifteen percent of adults test positive for HIV.

Robert Mugabe has little of which to be proud.

78 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 1:40:52pm

Lets hope that something is done about keeping these cables secure.

79 Jymn  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 4:09:38pm

Why don't you all shoot the messenger while you're at it? WikiLeaks merely published a cable. It didn't write the cable, a cable that should never have been committed to traceable media. It published a document. That's what news companies should do.

If you want security, don't allow your words to be traced. Easy. Just don't do it and whine after you're caught. Democracy was hurt in this instance by a sloppy diplomat. We don't need to censor our press or whistleblowers; we need a better, more discrete, more intelligent diplomatic force.

Let's not slide back into Pamela Geller paranoia again.

80 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 4:16:29pm

re: #79 Jymn

Rofl.
What purpose did this leak serve?

81 wrenchwench  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 4:31:47pm

re: #79 Jymn

Let's not slide back into Pamela Geller paranoia again.

You used to be into Pamela Geller paranoia?

82 Tigger2  Tue, Dec 28, 2010 5:56:57pm

re: #27 albusteve

who know where Soros has his hands...I'd believe nearly anything about that guy, but it's doubtful he's a Zionist, but who knows?

And we would probably be very surprised what the Koch brothers have their hands it.

83 laZardo  Wed, Dec 29, 2010 12:22:41am

I disagree with this article mainly because there isn't much (if any) "democracy" to set back in Zimbabwe at this point. Mugabe's thugs probably have a whole number of reasons to smear Morgan, and this is just one piece of straw in the pile.

Dictators like Mugabe really want every excuse to cling to power, the only thing to do is wait for him to somehow kick the bucket and then let his dictatorship collapse in on itself. Unlike the Kim Dynasty or the Castro Brothers, it doesn't seem he's breeding a successor.

84 nakhish  Wed, Dec 29, 2010 2:08:53am

re: #79 Jymn
Sure Jymn. It's all because of the sloppiness.
How I wish all countries would have a strict security and human resources selection policies like they have in the non sloppy countries, the ones that don't have leaks. I mean yeah, they usually have dangling bodies, people mysteriously disappearing during the night, 95% unemployment, sorts of illnesses that you and I only read about and military sects harassing the civilians, but that must be a coincidence, right? I mean in Iran Manning wouldn't have got near a military computer. Hell, in Iran he wouldn't even be alive considering his sexual orientation. And in Russia, why, in Russia he and Assange would have known that leaking or publishing too much info that damages the government would mean either a bullet in the head by some unknown biker or a slow agonizing radiation poisoning, though I guess Russia is a bit sloppy, considering they got some leaks there.
I'm not saying you can't have better information security or psychological assessment methods, but I guess that some people need the obvious to be spelled out for them :
The reason most of the leaks come from the more open and free societies on this planet is that they are more open and free.
And about that shooting the messenger idiom - imagine you are a psychiatrist or a lawyer, and a self appointed "messenger" breaks into your house, takes your private information, and publishes it on his news company site all the while saying that he will do so again if possible. Maybe you shouldn't shoot him, but you sure are advised to call the police and sue the shit out of him for the damage that he has caused.

85 Charles Johnson  Wed, Dec 29, 2010 10:21:49am

re: #84 nakhish

Excellent comment.

86 PAUL_MACDONALD  Wed, Dec 29, 2010 11:51:39am

I posted a link to the story on my Facebook page and here are two of the responses (names redacted)

So a lying politician is exposed, and you cry a crocodile tear because it gives the monster Mugabe an excuse to act like a monster, while you cheer that it can be used To make wikileaks look imperfect?

and

He's not at dangerous as the governments that plot behind its people's backs. Zimbaweans voted for this guy to put him in a coalition position. Now he's trying to make deals with other governments to force his competitor out. It's obviously... something the electorate didn't want and now he's paying for it. Point the finger at Assange all you want. It's Tsvangirai's actions that put him in this position. If he didn't do it in the first place, or at least did it and explained it openly with the electorate, WikiLeaks wouldn't have anything to expose.
Politics in full sentences is the new way to go. These full sentences are way better to come out of your mouth, than on the page of a WikiLeaks document.

Yeah, so, apparently catching a politician in a lie is far more important than the well-being of the people in the country as long as stuff is "open". It's been said before, but it bears repeating: Thank goodness that wasn't anything resembling Wikileaks during the Cuban Missile Crisis.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 105 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 270 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1