You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Fifth Column
WikiLeaks and U.S. Computer Security: The 'Second Spy' Theory
2010-12-07
Of course, there's another explanation: someone at a higher level of trust than Pfc. Manning is the real source, and Manning is just a convenient fall guy.

We can draw a picture of that source, just from what we know already. The source has access to diplomatic cable traffic, U.S. war reports, and even gun sight video across both major theaters of the war. Compartmentalization puts that person back inside the Washington, D.C., theater.
I was asking recently about the source of these leaks. I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but I've wondered if Manning was the sole source. I'd love to know the whole story.
Posted by:Spot

#7  At least now some of the typical leftists are on our side regarding classified information. Imagine their glee if this happened under Bush. No one on our side is defending Assange because it embarrassed the Big O.
Posted by: whitecollar redneck   2010-12-07 20:14  

#6  WikiLeaks was founded in 2006.[19][37] That year, Assange wrote two essays setting out the philosophy behind WikiLeaks: "To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not."[38][39][40] In his blog he wrote, "the more secretive or unjust an organisation is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie. ... Since unjust systems, by their nature induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance."[38][41]

Assange sits on Wikileaks's nine-member advisory board,[42] and is a prominent media spokesman on its behalf. While newspapers have described him as a "director"[43] or "founder"[21] of Wikileaks, Assange has said, "I don't call myself a founder";[44] he does describe himself as the editor in chief of WikiLeaks,[45] and has stated that he has the final decision in the process of vetting documents submitted to the site.[46] Like all others working for the site, Assange is an unpaid volunteer.[44][47][48][49][50] Assange says that Wikileaks has released more classified documents than the rest of the world press combined: "That's not something I say as a way of saying how successful we are – rather, that shows you the parlous state of the rest of the media. How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined? It's disgraceful."[37] Assange advocates a "transparent" and "scientific" approach to journalism, saying that "you can't publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results; that should be the standard in journalism."[51][52] In 2006, CounterPunch called him "Australia's most infamous former computer hacker."[53] The Age has called him "one of the most intriguing people in the world" and "internet's freedom fighter."[35] Assange has called himself "extremely cynical".[35] The Personal Democracy Forum said that as a teenager he was "Australia's most famous ethical computer hacker."[20] He has been described as being largely self-taught and widely read on science and mathematics,[23] and as thriving on intellectual battle.[54]
Posted by: Water Modem   2010-12-07 19:16  

#5  Just because there is the possibility of additional sources doesn't mean Manning is a fall guy, it just means he's the only one caught at this point.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2010-12-07 15:24  

#4  In the current administration OS, we'll be lucky if they suspend his access.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-12-07 14:09  

#3  If he had access to JWICS (which he allegedly did), and a couple of other intelligence networks, then it was probably easy for him to grab some of this stuff if his job gave him need to know and access to the networks and data therein.

No conspiracy needed. Hang the little traitor.
Posted by: OldSpook   2010-12-07 14:05  

#2  The US government bureaucracy is seriously "challenged". They put a lot of energy into getting something done, then fuc& it all up by leaving holes in the process.

I'll bet a dollar to a dog turd that someone like Manning could very well do this very easily.

AFAIAC, TOTUS although TOTUS may be waiting for an opportunity to use this crisis, he may be angry and his hands may be tied. It's a high-profile case. It would look bad if we were caught red-handed in Switzerland.
Posted by: gorb   2010-12-07 10:40  

#1  The source has access to diplomatic cable traffic, U.S. war reports, and even gun sight video across both major theaters of the war. Compartmentalization puts that person back inside the Washington, D.C., theater.

I see only one possible culprit: the TOTUS.
Posted by: JFM   2010-12-07 08:57  

00:00