WIKILEAKS: LOOKING INTO THE WORLD'S KEYHOLE

Years ago, I had a conversation with someone dear to me and spoke with complete candor.  A few days later I received a phone call from the person about whom we spoke.  Since the major focus in that conversation was rather negative, there was a great deal of anger and confrontation when that person reached me.  It seemed I was expected to deny that I had said the things that were being repeated to me.  As annoyed as I was at my conversation having been shared with the party, I could only say that what was being repeated to me was accurate but as my conversation was meant for someone else's ears, I was sorry our conversation had not remained private. I felt I had no choice but to be direct with my attacker.and defend that I may not have said flattering things, but I spoke my truth in my opinions.

As with the current 'wiki' leaks, there should be no apologies for whatever had been written or said. People who listen at keyholes to conversations not meant for their ears rarely hear flattery.  Tactfulness is lessused when it is thought to be a private conversation about a third party.  It is likely that the shock of what actually was said may be new to the  public at large, but is less likely to be so for the parties involved since each side spies on the other constantly and probably quite successfully.

There may be a few people embarrassed that their lack of tact was exposed but from what has been aired so far, I hardly see anything that will start a war. Iran is unlikely to have learned anything that wasn't already quite apparent.  That the Americans fought Iraq with an abuse of Geneva Convention.  That betrayal cannot be a surprise to anyone.  It has already been much publicized.  However, those who think they are safe as long as what is said and done is not proven to the public, will learn otherwise.  Those who believe the lies being provided by some media might continue denying what they hear and will make up a new scenario to explain whatever comes out of the leaks.  We have many 'open mike' examples with considerable embarrassment.

The government will continue to focus on the whistle blower rather than the content of that which was blown.  Julian Assange will continue to be hunted like a criminal simply because he wants transparency.  That the transparency is involuntary is really what bothers people.  They will read everything in which they are not quoted but abhor anyone quoting them.  Isn't it time some people have to be honest about all of what they say not meant for public consumption?  If there is really to be top secret communication, safer ways of encrypting it will have to be worked out.  Meanwhile, it is important that people in government work not have the illusion that they remain hidden.  What Cheney managed to do the Valerie Plame was much worse!