Does Wikileaks demonstrate impotence of Obama administration?

posted at 2:55 pm on November 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Could the Obama administration have stopped any or all of the three Wikileaks data dumps?   Former Bush aide Marc Thiessen argues that not only could the White House have disrupted Julian Assange’s operation, but that given the potential damage that a breach of diplomatic and military security could mean on this scale, Obama had a duty to do so.  The failure to act shows a weakness in Obama that increases the risk for the US, Thiessen argues in today’s Washington Post:

WikiLeaks’ first disclosures caught the Obama administration by surprise. But how does the administration explain its inaction in the face of WikiLeaks’ two subsequent, and increasingly dangerous, releases? In both cases, it had fair warning: Assange announced what kinds of documents he possessed, and he made clear his intention to release them.

The Obama administration has the ability to bring Assange to justice and to put WikiLeaks out of business. The new U.S. Cyber Command could shut down WilkiLeaks’ servers and prevent them from releasing more classified information on President Obama’s orders. But, as The Post reported this month, the Obama administration has been paralyzed by infighting over how, and when, it might use these new offensive capabilities in cyberspace. One objection: “The State Department is concerned about diplomatic backlash” from any offensive actions in cyberspace, The Post reported. Well, now the State Department can deal with the “diplomatic backlash” that comes from standing by helplessly, while WikiLeaks releases hundreds of thousands of its most sensitive diplomatic cables.

Because of its failure to act, responsibility for the damage done by these most recent disclosures now rests with the Obama administration. Perhaps this latest release crosses a line that will finally spur the administration to action. After all, the previous disclosures harmed only our war efforts. But this latest disclosure is a blow to a cause Democrats really care about – our diplomatic efforts. Maybe now, finally, the gloves will come off. Or is posting mournful tweets about the damage done to our national security the best this administration can do?

Contrast this, Thiessen argues, to the way Obama protected Hollywood last week:

Just this past week, the federal government took decisive action to shut down more than 70 Web sites that were disseminating pirated music and movies. Hollywood is safe, but WikiLeaks is free to disseminate classified documents without consequence.

It seems more than passingly strange that this administration has taken stronger action against copyright infringement than in protecting the secrets of the US and its allies.  The Dept. of Justice didn’t use the US Cyber Command to take down the infringing sites, of course, and the Obama administration has publicly requested intervention by Sweden to essentially do the same thing to Assange that the DoJ did to the allegedly infringing websites, to no avail.  There is a certain amount of consistency between the two for the White House, even if the contexts are wildly disparate.

The US is not bound to act only through civil courts for its own defense outside of the borders of the US, whether those courts are ours or another nation’s.  The first release caught the Obama administration by surprise, but the subsequent two — and anything else that comes in the future — will not.  When diplomatic efforts failed, the US should have found other means to cripple Assange’s efforts.  If someone can sneak a Stuxnet into Iran, then surely it wouldn’t be impossible to conduct some counterespionage sabotage to put an end to Wikileaks as well.

The White House might be concerned that having the US conduct cyber warfare will give a green light for all nations to do the same.  That supposes an assumption that other nations won’t conduct cyber warfare without the precedent of a US cyberwar first.  If that’s really the reason for any reluctance, it’s a dangerously naive assumption.

Either the Obama administration is unwilling to go after Assange’s operation, or unable to do so.  I’m not sure which gives the greater appearance of impotence.

Note: In fairness, it should be noted that the best way to have stopped the leaks was to have prevented them in the first place with rational security.  That problem predates the Obama administration.

Update: Marc Thiessen, not Michael Gerson.  My apologies for the error.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I don’t see how, personally. There’s little comparison with violations that occur within our country to those that are coming outside.

No recourse, as far as I can see, anyway. The only solution, which will be galling, on a go-forward basis is to mark even more documents as top secret, I suppose.

My question is more why were so many damaging correspondance so easily available, anyway?

AnninCA on November 29, 2010 at 2:59 PM

That’s it! Forget Top Secret. Just stamp Copyrighted material on every document and the Justice Department will on it in a flash.

Rocks on November 29, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Poor security, unprofessionalism of diplomatic corps, failure to respond to rogue states, etc. I guess you could call it impotence. Like James Carville said, if Hillary gave him one…

huckleberryfriend on November 29, 2010 at 3:02 PM

In fairness, it should be noted that the best way to have stopped the leaks was to have prevented them in the first place with rational security. That problem predates the Obama administration.

Those rational security measures exist. Flash drives and other writeable media have been outlawed in not only classified, but also in unclassified DoD systems for 4+ years. The insertion of a writeable data storage device into a computer should have setoff alarms immediately.

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Just this past week, the federal government took decisive action to shut down more than 70 Web sites that were disseminating pirated music and movies. Hollywood is safe, but WikiLeaks is free to disseminate classified documents without consequence.

I guess Assange is safe at least until he tries doing a cover of Jay-Z’s newest album without permission and releasing it???

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:04 PM

This is the Inherent, ingrained idiocy of federal bureaucracy that is generations old. The RESPONSE to this idiocy- which has amounted to compounded idiocy- is all Obama’s.

michaelo on November 29, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Don’t blame Obama. He’s busy taking care of his bleeding fat lips. :(

Obama thinks the main things he has to do as president is no more than to play some basketball, hit some golf balls, and smoke a cigarette or two in the oval office. Afterall, what else is a community organizer qualified to do??

poxoma on November 29, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Ed,

The author of the linked WaPo article is Marc Thiessen.

irishspy on November 29, 2010 at 3:07 PM

ED is assuming that Obama has any interest in keeping America strong.

Au contraire, I would argue.

pseudonominus on November 29, 2010 at 3:07 PM

No, Obama probably gave the stuff to wikileaks to stop Hillary.

tarpon on November 29, 2010 at 3:08 PM

I’m sitting here listening to talk radio, so my opinion doesn’t count. I’m “uninformed” after all.

Mord on November 29, 2010 at 3:09 PM

We shouldnt discount the possibility that the regime very well wanted these leaks, not to mention the previous war leaks, for the damage resulting to America, the country they hate most. ✪

TXUS on November 29, 2010 at 3:09 PM

I would argue it’s the power of the truth. You could argue it’s the narcissistic attitude of a soldier, and the self aggrandizement of a website owner.

Snake307 on November 29, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Either the Obama administration is unwilling to go after Assange’s operation, or unable to do so. I’m not sure which gives the greater appearance of impotence.

Paralysis by analysis.

A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow
Patton

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:10 PM

As part of the Wikimedia Foundation ( a non-profit charitable organization), why can’t their tax exempt status be challenged and possibly be revoked with a stiff enough fine to keep them from doing business?

fourdeucer on November 29, 2010 at 3:10 PM

In fairness, it should be noted that the best way to have stopped the illegal immigrants leaks was to have prevented them in the first place with stepped-up security and patrols at the nation’s borders rational security. That problem predates the Obama administration.

There is a pattern here: through willful neglect, allow actions harmful to the well being and strength of the United States occur.

ya2daup on November 29, 2010 at 3:12 PM

Follow the money. It’s ALWAYS about the money. Seriously, does anyone really believe that these people have America’s or American’s interests in mind? The answer is … no. No they don’t. We the People need to wake up to the reality that is and stop trying to create more complicated explanations that make us feel better about the obvious – our political class, our government, is full of thieves and liars. It’s that simple.

j_galt on November 29, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Impeach odumbo….. he has violated his oath to protect and defend….. moron.

ultracon on November 29, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Using “U.S. Cyber Command” to try and “shut down” Assange’s servers wouldn’t have solved the problem; Assange had long ago given copies of the documents to the press. Thus, hacking his servers would only slow the process down until an alternative publication route could be found.

The way to shut down Assange’s operation is to shut down Assange (personally) and those who are feeding him. To do that requires stones–the kind Assange doesn’t have.

We should be careful, BTW, in how aggressively we blame Obama for the leak occurring in the first place. Presumably the lax security measures that enabled the leak existed in the Bush administration as well. It’s a bureaucratic failure, not a policy failure. Let’s keep our powder dry.

Outlander on November 29, 2010 at 3:20 PM

The spin has already started from the Administration, in a feverish attempt to contain and diminish the damage that the two little weasels, Manning and Assange, have caused. Obama’s problem is: It’s too late. He can’t put the Genie back into the bottle.

kingsjester on November 29, 2010 at 3:20 PM

The failure to act shows a weakness in Obama that increases the risk for the US,

as rush would say
SITYS

cmsinaz on November 29, 2010 at 3:20 PM

To do that requires stones–the kind Assange Obama doesn’t have.
Outlander on November 29, 2010 at 3:20 PM
Sorry–typo.

Outlander on November 29, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Obama doesn’t seem to care about anything, except for his own public image.

Paul-Cincy on November 29, 2010 at 3:21 PM

I don’t agree with Rush on this one. I think the administration can prosecute the Americans, of course, and should.

But other than that, it’s going to have to be a diplomatic effort to explain.

Hillary is good at that. And so far, nothing really was said that we generally didn’t know.

I agreed with her that the real shame of it was that so many individuals would be affected in dire ways, and I bet we never hear about them.

AnninCA on November 29, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Follow the money. It’s ALWAYS about the money. Seriously, does anyone really believe that these people have America’s or American’s interests in mind? The answer is … no. No they don’t. We the People need to wake up to the reality that is and stop trying to create more complicated explanations that make us feel better about the obvious – our political class, our government, is full of thieves and liars. It’s that simple.

j_galt on November 29, 2010 at 3:16 PM

I have decided for the moment, anyway, that this is an anarchist group, mostly.

We are talking about the effect on the US, but someone pointed out to me earlier that other countries were seriously affected, too.

That spells anarchy type organization to me. Am I being over-reactive?

AnninCA on November 29, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Taking down wikileaks.org would be nothing but closing the barn doors long after the horses have left. Once Assange was given the docs, he could have given them to his media buddies via any email account, delivered them by hand, or posted them on rapidshare. wikileaks.org is nothing but a convenient storefront; removing it would slow the dissemination of the material by, oh, 15 seconds or so.

The only solutions are the arrest and severe punishment of whoever leaked it, and some semblance of security implemented on the government side.

The Lone Platypus on November 29, 2010 at 3:28 PM

I guess Assange is safe at least until he tries doing a cover of Jay-Z’s newest album without permission and releasing it???

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Didn’t the CD/R that the info was transferred on say “Lady GaGa” on it?

It seems that the Obama Administration should have pounced.

portlandon on November 29, 2010 at 3:28 PM

All of these fears would once be dismissed as temporary challenges that would be eventually met by an America that won World War 2 and the Cold War. But what the financial meltdown and the execrable record of the Obama administration broadcast is that Obama’s USA is no longer what it used to be. It has beclowned itself to the point where it is unable to even prevent its secrets from being thrown in its face. The danger, argues the Asia Times, is that this contempt is cumulative; and that North Korea, Iran and China will either successfully challenge or miscalculate. Either way disaster impends.

J_Crater on November 29, 2010 at 3:30 PM

There is a way to stop this IF Obama, (or any other recent president), had any stones.

Revoke the executive order on assassinations and terminate Julian Assange and any backers and systems people associated with Wikileaks with extreme prejudice.

Then prosecute every single American news agency that received the files and published them. (New York Times)

At the very least the NYT management could be charged with espionage and possibly treason.

You will note that Wikileaks is NOT spewing stuff from countries like the People’s Republic of China, Russia or Israel. They all have a history of eliminating perceived threats.

Assange knows this and since he is a coward and knows the United States won’t go after him with lethal force. We need to change this belief in our enemies.

evilned on November 29, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Does Wikileaks demonstrate impotence of Obama administration?

“Gird your loins!”

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Does Wikileaks demonstrate the impotence of the Obama administration? No, I’d say Obama demonstrates the impotence of the Obama administration.

Smaulz on November 29, 2010 at 3:34 PM

There is a pattern here: through willful neglect, allow actions harmful to the well being and strength of the United States occur.

ya2daup on November 29, 2010 at 3:12 PM

I agree. Take into account the DOJ doing nothing about the NBPP, er, scratch that, they did something like letting them go after they were found guilty or plead guilty or something.

Anything that harms the US is okay with Obama, Holder et al.

If those in “charge” won’t protect the US….who will? Where is Captain America these days?

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Maybe now, finally, the gloves will come off.

with their track record, I’m doubtful…

cmsinaz on November 29, 2010 at 3:34 PM

NPR says Obooba’s lip stitches give him street cred in Pyongyang.

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Our security is ran by idiots.
You would likely never see Israel or Russia get pumped like this.

esnap on November 29, 2010 at 3:35 PM

ED is assuming that Obama has any interest in keeping America strong.

Au contraire, I would argue.

pseudonominus on November 29, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Maybe, this is that “transparency” he used to talk about…?

Fallon on November 29, 2010 at 3:36 PM

Our security is ran by idiots. esnap on November 29, 2010 at 3:35 PM

:-)

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Obama’s problem is that no matter how much he may be briefed on how these leaks will hurt U.S. interests and how people might die because of those leaks, he and his staff know that their core supporters think Assange’s actions are just the cat’s meow. Since the president lives in dire fear of taking any aggressive action that would anger his core liberal base, what we’re left with is sharply-worded warnings to the Wikileaks operator and little more.

To do anything more (at least publicly) means telling your base to pound sand and possibly losing votes in 2012 and just as importantly, their love and adulation, which is as very large part of the reason the president took this job in the first place.

jon1979 on November 29, 2010 at 3:39 PM

I have decided for the moment, anyway, that this is an anarchist group, mostly.

We are talking about the effect on the US, but someone pointed out to me earlier that other countries were seriously affected, too.

That spells anarchy type organization to me. Am I being over-reactive?

AnninCA on November 29, 2010 at 3:25 PM

What WikiLeaks is or isn’t is most definitely not dependent on what you decide at one moment or the other.

The TRUTH is always good. Governments in today’s world, just as they have always been, quickly become the tool for certain people to gain advantage over other people.

What surprises me is how so many people seem so puzzled and confused by the actions of those who rule in our government – Obama, Hillary, Holder, Bush, Paulson, Geithner, Bernake – these people have reasons for the things they do. Their actions benefit someone. The only question people should ask is, ‘Who’s interest is served by X?’

It’s really not hard. Of course, most people would rather rant and rave and call for assassinations than take time to think.

j_galt on November 29, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Mr. President, it’s her again- FaceBook.

NoNails on November 29, 2010 at 3:41 PM

In fairness, it should be noted that the best way to have stopped the leaks was to have prevented them in the first place with rational security. That problem predates the Obama administration.

Until PFC Manning’s access to these records is shown to be otherwise, it is best to assume that serious lapses in supervision and adherence to existing policy made this uberleak possible. The sitting Administration has to answer for this catastrophe — BHO has now pulled into the lead as Worst President Ever.

Mark30339 on November 29, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Mr. President, it’s her again- FaceBook.
NoNails on November 29, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Barry gets beat up by a girl again.

Where’d that fat lip really come from…?

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Aww give the poor guy break, its been a rough November. Voters gave him a black eye, basketball gave him a fat lip, and impotent OPSECS gave him a deflated staff.

canditaylor68 on November 29, 2010 at 3:49 PM

Hollywood is safe, but WikiLeaks is free to disseminate classified documents without consequence.

Hollywood donated big bucks to Obama, and perhaps more importantly, helped shape the popular narrative of Obama during the campaign as the cool, hip, intelligent, socially responsible choice. Barry owes them, big time.

As he did with the union thugs, Barry is just paying back his backers — and, as usual, using our tax dollars to do it.

AZCoyote on November 29, 2010 at 3:50 PM

http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/serious-questions-about-the-obama-administrations-incompetence-in-the-wikileaks-/465212788434

Sarah Palin cites Obama admin as incompetent in this one. Might be update-worthy…

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:53 PM

The govt is just bitterly clinging to secrets.

Akzed on November 29, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Just this past week, the federal government took decisive action to shut down more than 70 Web sites that were disseminating pirated music and movies. Hollywood is safe, but WikiLeaks is free to disseminate classified documents without consequence.

So the real answer here is to copyright all classified data. That way, when a leak occurs, WHAMMO! Book’em, Danno.

BobMbx on November 29, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Have to agree with Glenn Reynolds, right now a Carter-style debacle is a best case scenario.

We’re floundering in uncharted waters of incompetence here, folks.

Whodda thunk it?

Bruno Strozek on November 29, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Whodda thunk it?

Bruno Strozek on November 29, 2010 at 3:55 PM

rush limbaugh and everyone who agreed with him. I guess it wasn’t a matter of hoping that he failed, but being forced to stand here and watching him do so so miserably is maddening.

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Assange knows this and since he is a coward and knows the United States won’t go after him with lethal force. We need to change this belief in our enemies.

evilned on November 29, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Do you really think it would do more good than harm to kill Assange in an Israeli-like hit operation, when it would be clear who was behind it?

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM

So our federal government likes to pretend that it’s keeping us safe from terrorism by subjecting grandmothers, nuns, and little kids to patdowns and electronic strip searches — but on the other hand it can’t even keep its own secrets from being dumped onto the Internet by the truckload.

But show it a list of torrent sites and it springs like Superman into action.

Apparently the U.S. can’t or won’t protect state secrets unless they’re set to music.

Aitch748 on November 29, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Do you really think it would do more good than harm to kill Assange in an Israeli-like hit operation, when it would be clear who was behind it?

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM

The obvious fact of who is behind such a hit is exactly the point.

sharrukin on November 29, 2010 at 4:10 PM

By saying “could” are you implying he wanted to?

Ortzinator on November 29, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Governor Palin leading the charge again….

From Facebook

Serious Questions about the Obama Administration’s Incompetence in the Wikileaks Fiasco

by Sarah Palin on Monday, November 29, 2010 at 12:17pm.

We all applaud the successful thwarting of the Christmas-Tree Bomber and hope our government continues to do all it can to keep us safe. However, the latest round of publications of leaked classified U.S. documents through the shady organization called Wikileaks raises serious questions about the Obama administration’s incompetent handling of this whole fiasco.

First and foremost, what steps were taken to stop Wikileaks director Julian Assange from distributing this highly sensitive classified material especially after he had already published material not once but twice in the previous months? Assange is not a “journalist,” any more than the “editor” of al Qaeda’s new English-language magazine Inspire is a “journalist.” He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?

What if any diplomatic pressure was brought to bear on NATO, EU, and other allies to disrupt Wikileaks’ technical infrastructure? Did we use all the cyber tools at our disposal to permanently dismantle Wikileaks? Were individuals working for Wikileaks on these document leaks investigated? Shouldn’t they at least have had their financial assets frozen just as we do to individuals who provide material support for terrorist organizations?

Most importantly, serious questions must also be asked of the U.S. intelligence system. How was it possible that a 22-year-old Private First Class could get unrestricted access to so much highly sensitive information? And how was it possible that he could copy and distribute these files without anyone noticing that security was compromised?

The White House has now issued orders to federal departments and agencies asking them to take immediate steps to ensure that no more leaks like this happen again. It’s of course important that we do all we can to prevent similar massive document leaks in the future. But why did the White House not publish these orders after the first leak back in July? What explains this strange lack of urgency on their part?

We are at war. American soldiers are in Afghanistan fighting to protect our freedoms. They are serious about keeping America safe. It would be great if they could count on their government being equally serious about that vital task.

- Sarah Palin

SheetAnchor on November 29, 2010 at 4:18 PM

Do you really think it would do more good than harm to kill Assange in an Israeli-like hit operation, when it would be clear who was behind it?

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM
The obvious fact of who is behind such a hit is exactly the point.

sharrukin on November 29, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Sorry. It’s an overreaction in this case. If someone had killed a bunch of Americans or people generally, or was about to do so, it would be a different story for me.

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:20 PM

Can we stop with the qualifier “This problem pre-dates the Obama administration”?

So does Korea. And Iran. And terrorism. And the Palestinian-Israel problems. And Cuba. And FARC. And deficit spending. And government debt..

And all of the above issues are getting worse with the current administration failing to fix them and constantly b!t#$ing about how they inherited the current mess.

As does every problem we have. Quite giving them an out and an excuse. A LOT of things pre-date the current administration. Yet it is the current administrations problem to do something about it, break the chain and fix the damn problems.

Stop passing the gd buck for rice sakes!

Come on, Ed. You spend the entire post giving us the problem and how the Obama administration has botched it – even though they had fair warning the last two times it happened – yet give them the out in the end with the “out of fairness” schtick.

Out of fairness, he gets the mulligan on the first release. The two subsequent ones occurred, yet nothing was done by THIS administration, but since it predates Obama, it’s not really his fault?

Sorry, I’m ranting. But sheesh

catmman on November 29, 2010 at 4:22 PM

Sorry. It’s an overreaction in this case. If someone had killed a bunch of Americans or people generally, or was about to do so, it would be a different story for me.

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:20 PM

People are getting killed.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/28/wikileaks-exposed-hundreds-of-afghan-informants/

sharrukin on November 29, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Sorry. It’s an overreaction in this case. If someone had killed a bunch of Americans or people generally, or was about to do so, it would be a different story for me.

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:20 PM
People are getting killed.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/28/wikileaks-exposed-hundreds-of-afghan-informants/

sharrukin on November 29, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Maybe. But it’s different situation than killing someone who blew up a plane or a building with people inside. I still think it’s an overreaction in this case.

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:29 PM

If wikileaks is to be prosecuted, what about the NYTs?

huckleberryfriend on November 29, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Somebody told me that part of the problem is that the website is in Iceland or something and Assange has no real address or anything and just pops up from time to time. I don’t really understand what that has to do with it, but apparently the US is putting pressure on Iceland to shut down Wikileaks..or so I was told. And I also heard that there is pressure on Australia, his home country, to pursue criminal charges against Assange.

Assange is just such a hypocrite himself, he does not need to be judging other people.

Terrye on November 29, 2010 at 4:33 PM

Mr. President, it’s her again- FaceBook.

NoNails on November 29, 2010 at 3:41 PM

You don’tthnk about her,right Barry?HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA!

katy the mean old lady on November 29, 2010 at 4:35 PM

Do you really think it would do more good than harm to kill Assange in an Israeli-like hit operation, when it would be clear who was behind it?

Jimbo3 on November 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM

Yup.

katy the mean old lady on November 29, 2010 at 4:37 PM

It seems more than passingly strange that this administration has taken stronger action against copyright infringement than in protecting the secrets of the US and its allies.

Why does this seem strange? Obama love, love, loves Hollywood, (and they love him back), and he doesn’t want to see any harm come to them. As for this Country, he obviously hates it, and most of the citizens in it, so he screws the USA every chance he gets.
I don’t think he cares about the leaks, except that some of them are starting to make him look really inept, (to those stupid enough to still support him). As for the rest of us, we knew he was an unpatriotic zero before he even took office.

Susanboo on November 29, 2010 at 5:17 PM

Barry’s regime isn’t transparent – it’s flaccid.

BHO Jonestown on November 29, 2010 at 5:45 PM

I think a major point or two has been missed here.

1. If I wanted to stop WikiLeak’s web site, I could write the DDOS software in one week. I won’t because that would be illegal, but I could easily do it. The gubmint has many more resources than I and could base such an attack on servers and PCs all over the world. They haven’t done it.

2. Even if the public site is killed, that does nothing to stop anonymous FTP servers where the docs could still be downloaded secretly.

3. They shared the documents with several newspapers directly a few weeks ago. Nothing stops this activity.

4. The only way to truly stop WL is to kill their funding and put them in prison.

stvnscott on November 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Also…

I hypothesize that Zero knew this stuff was coming down and chose to do nothing assuming that it would mostly reflect badly on BOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!

stvnscott on November 29, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Sarah Palin’s most recent Facebook post show a lot of questions Americans have right now. Over this weekend we’ve had such a frenzy of the Assange WikiLeaks that have shown the worst of wars: Cyber wars. I believe that this could have been nipped in the bud, by continued changes on policies and procedures. If this started during the Bush administration, even back then the compromise of national and international security would have been prevented.

But this is Obama’s cyber war. The transparency that Obama offered to the public is quite a sarcastic statement; I guess going after other websites like LimeWire was easier than the lives and the family’s lives of those that are on the line. Obama was either aware of it and caught off-guard and could not stop it-because it was out already, but it seems that nothing rock solid was achieved to stop the wave of the following leaks.

He sure played basketball and got hurt-now he needs a pair to deal with the consequences of Assange’s actions. Go ahead, Obama…appease the enemies and stump on our allies.

(My post before her FB article)

ProudPalinFan on November 29, 2010 at 7:28 PM

WIKILEAKS ARE BEING HACKED!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637

ProudPalinFan on November 29, 2010 at 8:33 PM

I don’t need wikileaks to tell me Iran is backing Hezbollah, or that Obama is incompetent.

The Expert Knows

HAExpert on November 29, 2010 at 9:50 PM

I’m going with the mournful tweets.

These incompetents are moving from the extremely embarrassing to the downright dangerous stage as they demonstrate pathetic weakness in full view of ruthless enemies on an almost daily basis. Pray that we survive…

2ipa on November 29, 2010 at 10:27 PM

You would likely never see Israel or Russia get pumped like this.

esnap on November 29, 2010 at 3:35 PM

This past year Israel put a soldier on trial for stealing secret documents. She copied them to a disk on key.

The journalist who published them is still hiding in the UK, I think.

On the wikileaks dump, the Israelis claim they’ve learned in the past never to rely on the secrecy of cables, and to speak directly to whomever they need to.

Phoenician on November 30, 2010 at 12:39 AM

ted c on November 29, 2010 at 3:04 PM

I think ya got something there.

How bout we leak the “fact” that Assange/Wikileaks IS the guy who is pirating their CD’s!

DSchoen on November 30, 2010 at 3:15 AM

Folks when the most powerful nation on earth says it can’t stop some dude from posting these security documents then we have no leadership. G. Gordon Liddy would have stopped this

Herb on November 30, 2010 at 8:31 AM