WikiLeaks damage and elucidation of
Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks is a criminal, no doubt about it . This international organization which he chairs (whose name means "leakage"), dedicated to the publication of political and diplomatic documents, whether countries or companies, has shown what can do without reflecting on the disastrous consequences for humanity that their actions may entail. Assange
advocates hide behind their actions under the banner of freedom of expression, although it is a basic right to the free world and should be recognized in any legal system does not cease in times like this to be politicized and therefore, handled . The use of a right is right, the exercise involves abuse contrary to the purposes for which the law had in view when it comes to recognize, or to unfairly prejudice the rights of others. Freedom of expression
WikiLeaks has been used to destroy the right to privacy, the state secret for reasons of security and classification of information for reasons of prevention. The skills and precautions you should have a state to handle sensitive data subtly addressing issues of fragility, adopting the necessary means to prevent disclosure therefore likely to cause conflicts (crisis diplomacy, boycotts, war) does not seem to matter to WikiLeaks, which achieve such fame and renown, closed his eyes and continued his campaign. Stand against WikiLeaks is not equivalent to defend the secrecy of corrupt policies of the States, to conceal the misdeeds of the rulers of the world. It is not synonymous with being an accessory of lies and betrayals. Being against what was done by WikiLeaks is not to promote negotiated and traps political leaders and diplomats, is to recognize the inherent risk of certain reports that merit caution, and wanting them to be handled with responsibility that is. A good person can not be in favor of deliberately concealing economic exploitation of a dominant state that generates extreme poverty in another subject with no chance to defend their rights, or to hide terrorism promoted by fascist governments that create and supply of weapons to terrorist organizations different countries to attack democracies over the murder of its civilians. But a good person he can claim the right of a country to protect military strategies, diplomatic negotiations that can only be routed if you avoid the interference of strangers, and communications in the protection of sovereignty and national interests only reach their true receptor. Assange
Responsibility for this affront to democratic states like the United States reveals, while the other side of WikiLeaks. Not exactly the courage of its defenders by getting hailed with state secrets, but the opposite: cowardice. Caroline Glick in her article "The Challenge of WikiLeaks" masterfully explains: "Founded in 2006, WikiLeaks is supposed to serve the cause of freedom. Stated that he would defend dissidents in China, the former Soviet Union and other places where human rights continue to be an empty term. But then China made life difficult for WikiLeaks and so four years later, Assange and his colleagues have declared war on the U.S., assuming correctly that unlike China, the U.S. would receive his attacks lying in bed. Why take risks to defend dissidents in a police state when it is both easier and more compensatory attempt to destroy free societies? ". Instead of fighting totalitarianism which formed the basis of its genesis, Assange and company opted for the easy, mediocrity, political opportunism and fame at any price. It did not matter betraying their ideals and the main goals of nuclear work. Exit on the covers of newspapers and magazines was what prevailed at the time of planning to sabotage democracy and accountability in the face of totalitarianism. Attack with all the heavy artillery to the counterpart of what was originally white, is a tacit white flag in front of the enclosure of the monstrous anti-democratic regimes exemplified by Glick. The WikiLeaks characteristic slogan "We found government" should be changed to "discover certain governments that we do not complicate things too much and make us work easier and bearable, and governments do not want to discover if you do not see as profitable."
Moreover, out of all the damage that WikiLeaks has led to the U.S. after his thrusts inferred conduct of international politics (with the publication of more than 800000 and 250000 documents classified diplomatic cables), the move has helped unwittingly , to demystify an old conception of the staunchest critics of the North country and its ally Israel: that U.S. foreign policy is directed or at most influenced by the Zionist lobby. Glick writes: "WikiLeaks showed that there is an Israeli lobby plotting to lead the U.S. into war to serve Jewish interests. There is something close to consensus Iran's international head of the snake to be cut, as described by the Saudi potentate ". With respect to Iran's nuclear program, Arab countries (among them, primarily Saudi Arabia) are calling on the United States attack on nuclear facilities in the State headed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. According to the revealed, the Arabs themselves feel the threat posed by a nuclear Iran as the center of power and hegemony in the region, and hope that both the U.S. and Israel's hands are dirty and carry out the difficult part of the case: military operation (the euphemism is "cut off the head of the serpent). In various parts of the world is perceived as that can become a machinery of destruction and indisputable power, and it calls on those intentions are braked in time. Conspirators Judeophobes, defamatory and buyers of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, his theories have been annihilated.
However, entering the nuclear issue, why would Saudi Arabia, an attack on Iran? The reasons are several. Should remember that the Saudis are a power, and so is Iran and intends to become an even greater. But in the ideological and idiosyncratic there are some differences: while both are Islamic, Saudi Arabia is Arab, while Iran is Persian, and Wahhabi Saudi Arabia is Sunni and Iran is Shiite. There is an ongoing struggle to see who is in power of true Islam, which is the nation that will succeed in their attempts to establish itself as authentic spokesmen of Allah, and will exercise hegemony in the Islamic world. Of course, as powers are jealous and look askance, and each seeks to be the dominant in weapons and economic fields, and enjoy the status of the most powerful in the Middle East without being able to challenge it.
But despite all the guesswork that can be done about the secrets revealed by WikiLeaks and overt disputes on the issue of Iran's nuclear plan, we can not pay attention the expert opinion of Daniel Pipes in his text "Jug of cold water to WikiLeaks." The author makes a preliminary observation: "The Arabs might be telling Americans what they think they want to hear (...) Their calls can be part of a game, that means displaying as their own fears and desires of allies of a ". In support, he quotes Lee Smith: "The words I said to the Americans the Saudis are not designed to open up a window transparent to the way we see the world, but to lead us through the manipulation to satisfy the interests of the House of Saud ", then asks "Do we, or not, they're telling the truth?" .
Pipes The second observation points to the credibility of the Arab leadership: "How do we judge the discrepancy between what the Arabs say Western partners and what they preach to their populations? (...) public pronouncements that have more private communications. None of these things provides guidance infallible, because politicians lie both in public and in private, but the former is a better indicator than the latter ". Concluding on WikiLeaks ends that "Ultimately, rather than clarify what we know of Arab politics, we can distract ". Accustomed
we have the Arab leadership to the double standard. Some words to the Western audience, and generally diametrically opposed to the Eastern public. The terms sweet employees or confessions uttered by Arab leaders in the Western media contrasted with the type of messages usually transmitted in their own countries. So we must be cautious when analyzing the information revealed by WikiLeaks, as it can be a trap between the Eastern powers to make people believe that there is a desire to attack the other, it may be a concerted plan to Use the West as bait to fall. Rubén
Kaplan writes correctly in "Iran and Saudi Arabia united by fear" that both countries share "visceral hatred of Israel" . Therefore, for the emergence of factors that could nucleate, the West's wariness should consider statements like the one made by Ramin Mehman Parast, spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran (quoted by Kaplan in his article) on differences that separate the eastern powers: "only serve the interests of the Zionist regime and enemies of the region and the Muslim world" later added "Iran and Saudi Arabia are two major countries in the region, with a very high potential for cooperation" .
In short, WikiLeaks is causing a large wound to the West, mainly to the U.S. now (since the revelations will continue and Israel is the next country in sight), whose consequences are still valuable because of the extent of its damage potential . Assange maybe he thought he gained fame would bring benefits not only professionals but also for his personal life, and allow him to influence and mobilize contacts to disengage before the Justice of the sexual abuse allegations against him. On the other hand, what can be extracted Judeophobic the plotters is that U.S. foreign policy has been laid bare is led by a Zionist lobby which manipulates American power at will. Saudi Arabia have a capital letter expresses concern that Iran to achieve compliance with its nuclear weapons development and get to be in possession of the bomb, and asked the West to stop it. And on the analysis of documentation, recommendation and warning to the perpetrators of the free world not to fall into the discursive and semantic game of people who have proven in the past have no trouble lying to use others in a misleading manner as a means to achieve their malicious purposes. Ezequiel
Eiben
29/12/2010 22 Tevet 5771
0 comments:
Post a Comment