WikiLeaks, a website that anonymously publishes secret documents from governments around the world, has been a source of controversy since its first post.
In April, the organization released a classified U.S. military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in Iraq and recently published more than 75,000 secret U.S. military documents on the war in Afghanistan.
When Chris Anderson of TED Talk asked WikiLeak’s spokesperson Julian Assange about the effects of the leaks, he replied, “It's a worry, isn't it? That the rest of the world's media is doing such a bad job that a little group of activists is able to release more of that type of information than the rest of the world press combined.”
Last week, prosecutors canceled an arrest warrant for Assange on accusations of rape and molestation, saying he was no longer suspected. Then they changed their minds as a senior Swedish prosecutor ordered the reopening of a rape investigation. All this conveniently happened after the leaks.
Many argue that WikiLeaks has overstepped its journalistic bounds by daring to publish military insider documents regarding the war in Afghanistan, thus endangering national security. However, an ongoing Pentagon review of documents has so far found no evidence that the disclosure was a smoking gun, a Pentagon official told NBC News.
Despite what the Pentagon official said, The New York Times, Guardian and German news source Der Spiegel managed to hype the documents by touting them as a “secret archive.” Also, the Obama administration strongly criticized WikiLeaks and considered legal action.
Government officials and journalists have cozy off-record relationships that lead to those who are supposed to be impartial acting as mouthpieces for the administration’s views. Last June, Vice President Joe Biden hosted a pool party for “friends” in the journalism industry including Wolf Blitzer and Ed Henry of CNN, David Sanger of The New York Times and The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder. These are the journalists that are supposed to watch out for us, not cuddle with those they must hold accountable. The mainstream news organizations have lost touch with the American people.
The US government already has a track record of lying to its people about war.
President William McKinley told the American people that the U.S.S. Maine had been sunk in Havana Harbor by the Spanish. Franklin Delano Roosevelt claimed Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack. President Lyndon B. Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin to send Americans off to fight in Vietnam. George W. Bush lied about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Whether you agree or not with the war in Afghanistan or Iraq, what the government tells us should be transparent and verifiable. We have spent billions and risked American lives — the least we can have is accountability.
These wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were unfounded not only because they were expensive and unproductive, but also because the masses believe our presence in Afghanistan was in retaliation to the 9/11 attacks. In reality, the attacks were used to continue imperialist foreign policy in the region.
The CIA has ousted and replaced democratically elected leaders in the Middle East since the 1950s, but also trained militias to fight sovereign governments and political enemies like the Soviets.
The government is resisting these leaks to control public opinion. History shows that when government goes unchecked, wars are started and lives are lost that the truth could have saved.
In other nations, the government is afraid of the people, but in the U.S., the people are afraid of government.
What happened here is simple: We attacked the messenger because of the terrifying, truthful message. The people who run WikiLeaks are heroes and are commendable for questioning our government.
Reach Oday at oshadin@asu.edu
