–cross-posted at Huffington Post–
Wikileaks has proven that the American government is running on an arcane set of principles led by people with their frame of reference in the past, with neither the infrastructure or the people running it or serving it having adapted to the times in which we live. This last century thinking is the most dangerous threat to America today.
This is the state of the U.S. government at a time in history when Mark Zuckerberg created the notion of Facebook from his dorm room at Harvard, which made him a billionaire. It’s Zuckerberg who is tagged with saying that it’s “okay to break things” as long as you’re plan is “to make them better.” The book Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution was published in 1984! Fast forward to the cusp of 2011 and we have 20th century minds running the government who are still shocked that Zuckerberg’s hacker culture has turned itself on the U.S. government.
The unprepared idiocy boggles the mind.
It’s exploded the heads of the Old Fogy guard inside the behemoth American bureaucracy.
Watching “Morning Joe” yesterday, I could only chuckle at Mike Barnicle and Joe Scarborough as they expressed their shock and dismay at some, as they saw it, lowly private in the Army, to paraphrase their characterization of the Army intelligence analyst and hacker, allegedly getting his hands on so much secret diplomatic material. Where have these guys been, the moon?
But in the modern military, which relies on information as much as bullets and bunkers, it’s more easy than one might think to gain access to classified material and to disseminate it, according to interviews with numerous officials.
Manning’s job was to make sure that other intelligence analysts in his group had access to everything that they were entitled to see. That included incoming intelligence streams from across the world on something called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS), the Department of Defense’s computer network for Top Secret information. Manning also had access to another information stream dubbed the Secure Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet), the Pentagon’s server for information classified as Secret. (Secret and Top Secret are differing levels of classifications for materials.)
Using keyword searches and a knowledge of routing nomenclature, any intelligence analyst — even if he’s sitting in a shack in Iraq — can access pretty much any piece of data classified at the level of access he has.
[...] The important thing to know is that diplomatic cables are no longer transmitted over wires to clattering teletype machines. They’re sent via e-mail over secured networks, and they are also stored on servers until they’re erased. Cables and incident reports from the field are stored on servers in the form of PST files — PS stands for “personal storage” — e-mail archives that Microsoft’s Outlook program uses to compress and store data.
So how did Manning allegedly manage to get access to the diplomatic cables? They’re transmitted via e-mail in PDF form on a State Department network called ClassNet, but they’re stored in PST form on servers and are searchable. …
I’ve been on the web since 1996 and I find the hacking that has so thoroughly embarrassed the Obama administration not only unsurprising, but predictable.
Richard Clarke, cyber guru to former Pres. Bill Clinton, has been warning about a cyber attack against the U.S. since the ’90s. “Good hackers can get through any password,” he warned on NPR. Former Pres. George W. Bush and Dr. Condi Rice couldn’t be bothered to listen to him about Al Qaeda back in 2001. Rice demoted Clarke and his position to outside Cabinet level where Bill Clinton positioned him, because the Bush administration didn’t think counterterrorism was much to worry about. Cyber terrorism barely crossed their radar. The Pentagon can’t do everything.
“The Pentagon is all over this,” he says. “The Pentagon has created a four-star general command called Cyber Command, which is a military organization with thousands of people in it to go to war using these [cyber]weapons. And also, Cyber Command’s job is to defend the Pentagon. Now, who’s defending us? Who’s defending those pipelines and the railroads and the banks? The Obama administration’s answer is pretty much, ‘You’re on your own,’ that Cyber Command will defend our military, Homeland Security will someday have the capability to defend the rest of the civilian government — it doesn’t today — but everybody else will have to do their own defense. That is a formula that will not work in the face of sophisticated threats.”
Today we find, almost 10 years later, Pres. Obama was handed an archaic system from Mr. Bush, with neither president of either party bringing the technology of the United States government up to speed so that an intelligence analyst hacker couldn’t break into secure files, download them, then walk away with the world diplomatic version of Peyton Place.
As for Sect. Clinton and the State Department, in the few documents released, Wikileaks has made red many faces of the diplomatic branch of our government, which still believes “secrets” in the technological age means that what you say or write won’t likely come back to haunt you on some web page on the Internet.
I’m not ginned up about what’s been released, but what it reveals about how unprepared we still are after 9/11 for the realities of the dangers in our world is frightening. Nobody seems to get it. We are nowhere near ready to counter cyberterrorism, which is a very real threat and has been for the last decade.
Former governor Sarah Palin tore of a Facebook rant revealing she doesn’t get the cyber world either. She sounds exactly like Barnicle and Scarborough, oblivious to the talents of hackers, including the youthful skullduggery that often is a characteristic of the inquisitive and the hyper intelligent on a mission. That said, it’s very hard to argue with one particularly thing she wrote:
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?
The part in bold is dead on. Palin’s foreign policy adviser, Randall Scheunemann, knows how to couch this stuff all too well. Democrats simply got lucky it’s Sarah Palin posing the question in a Facebook rant where she buries her lede under breathless bloviating that includes calling Assange an “anti-American operative with blood on his hands.”
Republican Rep. Pete King wants Wikileaks to be charged as a terrorist organization. Now, I think that’s daft, but he might actually have a case if our government actually took cyber security seriously, as Clarke tried to get done during his tenure with Clinton and into George W. Bush’s first year. But our entire government is way behind in anything remotely resembling 21st century cyber security.
Pres. Obama was supposed to represent both new politics and a new 21st century era. So, you’ve really got to ask why in the hell U.S. technological and cyber security wasn’t a top priority and why we’re not leading on this issue, making it a top priority as part of the responsibility of being the largest super power in the world.
As the dust settles, the embarrassment will settle in at the State Department as well. Sect. Clinton has had a miserable mess dumped in her lap via Wikileaks, which she handled with grace yesterday, but it doesn’t diminish the obvious lack of understanding at State about the technical world in which we live, with the security breach allowed serious. You’ve also got to wonder when the diplomats are going to get that this isn’t 1950 anymore.
Well over ten years after Richard Clarke made his warnings a cyber attack has occurred and the Democratic administration of Pres. Barack Obama has been embarrassed to the bone, because it didn’t come from China or some other nosy country looking for our secrets, it came from within.
Listening to everyone squealing about the horrors of what Wikileaks perpetrated, including Jamie Rubin and many other experts today, their defensive protestations and the accusations leveled at Wikileaks had a cornered animal quality. Rubin saying Wikileaks “stole” the material then posted them on the web seemed to excuse and even ignore the lax security protocol that allowed State to be burgled.
There is also something oddly out of tone about people representing a democratic republic taking the position that the American public needs to be shielded from knowing that diplomats can be petty, too. But also that U.S. foreign policy aids thugs in defrauding their own people, while maintaining 20th century foreign policy that no longer serves anyone.
Bob Woodward got something right last night when he talked on CNN about the sheer volume of the document load and what might await, but also the necessity and daunting task of combing through what is still unknown, which is the responsibility of Wikileaks. The Pentagon Papers this latest leak is not, because there is something vastly random and unknowable about all that’s contained within, no road map foreseeable.
Last July the Washington Post published a stunning article on the hidden world of secrets that has grown out of control, reporting about “1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies” involved in our secret national security complex, now with over 2 million people by some estimates involved, and in Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings – about 17 million square feet of space.
Count the computers, new platforms, and technologically shared data bases that span this massive secret metropolis.
There were many warnings about the eventuality of secrets being spilled, but also that a cyber attack was inevitable. Pres. Obama isn’t the only one to blame, that’s for sure. He’s just the latest leader to ignore them.
And it’s not over yet. As Forbes teases, Julian Assange isn’t done, not by a long shot. The banks are next.
This essay has been updated.
a bannana republic.
I think we’re just facing the usual monolithic problems of big government.
It’s tough to implement effective policies when so many people are involved.
good comment. I totally agree, especially about Richard Clarke. It is inconceivable that we have had two Presidents in a row who are strangely removed from the real world….and vastly unprepared to govern…It should give everyone pause. And it makes us even more vulnerable. Bush was as least feared by some. Obama is laughed at. His weakness and passivity is frightening. And to think so many Democrats had the nerve to attack Bill Clinton….I guess some didn’t appreciate how lucky we were to have Bill Clinton leading the country….Too late now. Obama is the new Jimmy Carter…hapless. All this while the European Union falls apart or is neutered.
And still no urgency about jobs. I repeat my Manchurian candidate meme, however odd and inconceivable. How bizarre is it that Obama is focused on freezing federal workers salaries, gutting social security and making deals with Republicans that damage Democratic chances in 2012? Who can explain the apparent determination of the Obama administration to destroy the Democratic party? After disastrous economic policies…we now have national security failures plastered across the front pages? The depth and breadth of the incompetence of this administration defies logic and consistently astonishes even those who thought they saw this coming.
A good article concerning cyber attacks.
But, concerning this wikileaks dump, it should be emphasized that this is human error (which TM mentioned) and not a technological problem. If emphasizing it as a cyber attack, the obvious solutions; for most people, would be to spend more money on technology, but that might not be the case. Technology is only as good as the people involved with that technology (as of now, who knows about the future). With this particular case, it seems the problems lay with the people. If people can’t ask the basic questions: Who? What? Why? Where? When? and then develop proper protocols for those questions, the technology will never prevent a cyber attack.
What I don’t understand is how there is no outrage that we are under attack. Not the same as 9/11, but a direct effort to bring down our government, a threat to attack our banking system which is directly tied to an already fragile economic system and the ominous threat of what is next. The attacks like 9/11 may not impact all of us today, but will eventually.
Question, has anyone heard that the Obama administration may make Hillary the fall guy?
I certainly hope not.
Well of course you are absolutely correct Taylor in all that you point out in this piece.I mentioned Clarke yesterday. If anyone would like to know his thinking on the subject read his novel,”Breakpoint”. Evidently, frustrated by the demonization done to his crdibility by the Bushies and their MSM enablers he decided that fiction was the best way to get the message out.
It still amazes me (I don’t really know why) how fast and low this country has fallen in terms of leadership and competence.I guess that is how it happens in a culture that is motivated by self interest only with no thought to the collective good.
For eight years I thought it was Bush and his low brow followers but I have come to realize it is all of the Washington elite.
http://www.slate.com/id/2276190#add-comment
Jack Schafer over at Slate just couldn’t wait to blame it on Hillary. The case he makes is very weak but he probably is getting cudos from the village.
His commenters are having none of it,including those who say they are not Hillary fans.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of Schafer’s post there can be no doubt that the Wikileaks diplo dump has not done Clinton any good, LLady.
It’s absolutely true that Sect. Rice & Clinton have similar State policies, but Clinton is going to increasingly take some heat over this debacle, fair or not.
It happened on her watch, though it’s Pres. Obama who failed, as Bush did, to heed warnings.
I really wanted to get Taylor’s read on this. As someone totally clueless here, my own reaction is that the Wikileaks group is basically anarchist in nature. The more trouble they brew, the better, in other words.
But, I lost my naive trust in public figures in politics during the primary. Anyone remember those ridiculously unprofessional tweets from Donna Brazille? Now, I suppose one could say that Donna is different from your run-of-the-mill diplomat.
I’d disagree. I’ve met a few in real life. They put their pants on one leg at a time, too. They are hardly the TV image of always sharp and cool. That’s one of the elitist myths: They pick great representatives.
No, a lot of them are about as smart about their communications as teenagers on Facebook!
And so we find out the truth. Today, I’m actually wondering just how this hurts the world to know that buffoons are running the show, anyway? It’ll manage expectations, I suspect!
I think the leaks also lend a lot of muscle to the Israeli issues. Let’s get real. The entire world wants them to blow up Iran. *haha
Finally, Palin’s post was pretty good. And don’t make the same mistake Joe Scarborough is doing now, laughing at her like she’s a joke. Believe me, she’s choosing which messages recommended are the ones she’s emphasizing. Nobody but her is running this show. Well, Todd probably influences her alot.
But she’s not the dummy most liberals think she is.
I think Wikileaks and others who support them think that secrecy for the sake of it is stupid when it hides lies that prop up foreign policy notions that have outlived their purpose.
I guage that’s actually a fair, if slightly premature, stage.
The only part that makes me personally wince is that I agree, people who came forward whose names weren’t redacted, will probably be assasinated.
That’s not OK as a consequence. Wikileaks can’t take the high road, when that’s the result.
They’re not interested in the high road, AnninCA. If anything they want transparency in foreign policy.
The up side of Wikileaks is to remind partisans that Rep. & Dem. alike today haven’t a clue how to run the gov. This is *very* bad for Dems if this takes hold. The midterm elections is a warning that could turn into dismal foreshadowing.
Bradley Manning is a hero in this veteran’s eyes. He is a soldier of honor in that he exposed our own war criminals and those around the globe. He wasn’t the robot he was trained. Unfortunately, that is what happens to the military by brainwashing. Mr. Manning ROSE above it all for our benefit and I salute him. 12/12/00 and 9/11 proved our government cannot be trusted with ANY secrets, regardless of party affiliation.
The U.S. government requires TOTAL EXPOSURE and ASAP! This same government finds no problem spying on me as a private citizen, with the Republican tainted remark of: “What have you got to hide?” Same theory and enforcement should equally apply to the U.S. Government. Isn’t that what Obama was promising us in 2008? Notice centrists, moderates and Republicans are NOT making that argument today. But all of them will defend the Federal government and its secretive lies. OOPS!
This BS in that it endangers our troops is TOTAL PROPAGANDA. No evidence, whatsoever, from our Feds and media claiming it.
The biggest danger Wikileaks has exposed is the fact that our government and most of the other governments in this world have zero credibility — all value wars of death (war profiteering) over sustaining life for the citizenry of this planet. Austerity my ass. Sheer evil.
As far as Secy Clinton being blamed? She is not responsible for this mess, however, she’s a big girl whom signed up for the huge responsibility this job entails KNOWING FULLY WELL that Obama was totally incompetent. She had insider knowledge. Why’d she join his team? This neverending victim card played by her fan base is really overwrought and boring. Slate is a magazine for RWers. You expect a different direction from RWers concerning Hillary? Come on, man, who cares what they think!
Bottom line: Both the Clintons and Obamas are corporatists. Again, Obamabots thinking they are superior to Clintonistas or vice versa is just NOISE. Same applies to Bushitas. All *tools* of the government and its media. All part of the problem, NOT the solution.
Wikileaks is also exposing the fact that USA has spent TRILLIONS on our defense and intelligence. While 98% of Americans got no return in those investments. We know who did. This is never discussed by our political punditry. Wikileaks is further proof we are a banana republic. That is transparency, I CAN BELIEVE IN!!!
Speaking of political pundits? They are all owned by the same criminal syndicate that elects our politicians. There is no left/right with these folks. No matter how nice they look or speak, no matter how logical their viewpoints they make, no matter how excellent their *analysis* sounds, they are the distraction enabling this same criminal syndicate to go unscathed. Their solutions are to keep this “game” going, it makes them rich. Human suffering means nothing to this bunch as long as it’s not their own. Dismiss them, do your own research and have a nice day without all their GD *noise*
I may be guilty of over-analyzing, but I honestly don’t think that anyone is “owned.” They make good money, enjoy the benefits, and probably have fallen into the trap of thinking they MUST continue their lifestyle. I think people in other cultures are motivated, too, by the same idea. They MUST have goats to trade.
But I don’t think that’s actually true, in any culture.
It’s definitely not a crime syndicate. But then, I always thought that American culture is, by definition, pragmatic.
Pragmatism means that you recognize cultural norms. The “truth” is defined merely by what people believe to be true. That isn’t necessarily “true,” according to another standard, which is probably beyond human reach. Who knows, in other words, what we’ll believe in 3 generations?
We do know, today, what we’re actually debating. The US was catapulted into a position of great world leadership after WWII. We aren’t entirely comfortable.
We do, clearly, believe in exceptionalism. We’re not entirely sure that should be promoted.
It’s just a luxury, it seems today. And yet, I don’t think that entirely explains the conflicts we’re engaged in.
My own take? We are engaged in an unspoken goal: Surround the Arab countries, with their oil, and rope them in.
I am not sure this strategy will win. But I do imagine that I get the strategy, nevermind the poltiical talk.
War criminals? There is no such thing as utopia. There is such a thing as leadership. Comparing the Clintons to Obama is absurd. Bill Clinton was a leader. Of course he had flaws…such is human nature. And Hillary Clinton would have been a far better President than Obama. Again there are no comparisons. Obama is a loser in every respect. Or worse. And if anything, he was backed by certain sectors because of his weakness, passivity and obvious non leadership abilities. Hillary was too threatening. But it was the liberals and progressives who were the most gullible and the most fanatic in their support of him…and the academics and elites and the African Americans and the youth…they all backed Obama. So it doesn’t say too much about their discerning abilities….or their brains. They were the first to be taken in by the slick marketing of a political product. Obama could not have made it without all the gullible suckers who abandoned reason and experience for the short term fantasy of a shiny toy. They helped the Republicans oust Hillary from the primaries so they bear a lot of responsibility for this mess. As for Hillary, she is too loyal to the party that dumped on her…Obama is President…he sets the policy, not her. And I’m sure he was apprised of everything she was doing…But your inability to analyze the real world as it is versus how you wish it to be is troubling. There are a lot of bad actors in the world….and if its human suffering you’re worrying about, I suggest you focus on the truly evil places and dictators in the world. Obama is pathetic. But the progressives and the left who pushed him over the finish line enabled this weak impostor in the first place.
The Economist wrote:
***The actually-existing structure and strategy of the American empire remains a near-total mystery to those who foot the bill and whose children fight its wars. And that is the way the elite of America’s unelected permanent state, perhaps the most powerful class of people on Earth, like it.***
And whom is defending the American empire for the world’s ruling elites? Your beloved Hillary. Give me a break in how she’s ANY different than Obama — she is not!!!
obama is nto an idealogue. not a liberal. hillary is. she voted against the medicare drug bil bc her bill to negotiate drug rates was not approved. and she was rt- the govt must reg our drug prices. obama doesnt see govt as the citadel for us and thus scrapped reg drug costs to get big pharma to love the hcr bill. let us not conflate husband and wife. hillary is very different than her husband on key issues – bil is prgamatic, hillary is not as such. this is common knowledge. read her book to see what i mean.
note the hcr debate- when she spoke about her plan the first thing she said was it was a necessity to have a medicare option for all, drug cost regs etc.. she talked more about the medicare option and nationalizing mediciad than anything else. obama when he spoke of his plan mentioned a public option, didnt tout it much etc.. what does that tell us? Millions of americans, many who didnt even vote for hilary are seeing they needed a tough fighter in the wh. hillary also spoke about opening medicare to 55 and up and in the senate i recall she attempted to open medicare to 55 and up but got shot down. facts are a very stubborn thing. i wanted a partisan dem firebreather who has demonstrated int he past an advocacy for using govt to help people in major ways. to bad we didnt get her hcr plan in 94- it was superior to the one obama passed- it opened medicare turned big ins into regulated non profits, covered all kids on schip etc… issues matter.
however- the time has past on whether hillary would have been a superior presidnet for the dems. we are in the greatest assualt on the new deal- and yes u can take it to the bank hillary never ever would have summoned a comminission in her name to carve up the new deal afte she fought to expand it for 40 yrs.- and all our efforts now must be to save it. obama is gunning to undo the new deal. until dems reconcile this we wont go anywhere but down
you are totally correct….But remember, many who supported Obama (and especially the ones who hated Hillary and both bought and promulgated the right wing meme about her) are closer to those on the right in terms of the way they deal with facts. Eight years of intelligent policy under a prospective Clinton presidency was blown by Democrats….I will never forget that. And Al Gore was characterized as a corporatist by the left also. He was pushed by Democrats to keep Bill Clinton at arms length and thus did not have Bill go out campaigning for him in Arkansas. It was bad advice. Makes one wonder who these “smart” people are…in the Democratic leadership….Clearly not real Democrats who want to win and implement good policy. Although this time…Howard Dean picked wrong…and many of the state parties picked wrong…This was all predictable…and self inflicted. It will be interesting to see who turns up in this vacuum. Because there clearly is a vacuum. Obama was the Manchurian candidate for some. Though not so Manchurian anymore. We’re on notice. Anyway, you raised excellent points.
The left is truly deranged. They empowered Obama. They imbued in him their fantasies. Now they rant against America as the real problem?…Your answer is the evil American empire? Please…take a long vacation in Syria, Iran, North Korea, Africa and all the other countries where the majority of the people on this earth live… This insanity of attacking this country, whatever its faults, instead of the truly bad actors in the world underlines why the left should never be trusted anything….They brought us Obama….so their judgment is always to be questioned. And of course you want to equate Hillary with Obama. Those that empowered Obama never take responsibility for their stupidity…They are the purveyors of this non thinking nonsense that got us to this place with a Senate super majority, and 70+ seat margin in the house. Frittered away….by morons.
i agree
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/senate-passes-sweeping-fo_n_789771.html?view=print
For some odd reason when I clicked on the link,it had no schrool bar so I could only read the first two paragraphs. I will jut go over to Huffpo.
What exactly are you agreeing with Ronc99 about?
Lake Lady,
FYI, Texan4Hillary was not agreeing with me, it might upset TM or her fan club. He was agreeing about the HuffPO article saying the new FDA reforms are great. They are not. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce endorsed it and lots of Republicans voted for it — meaning it’s another bill that protects corporations over U.S. citizens’ safety. Status quo achieved, again. And Taylor that is not cynicism, it is fact easily proven by the last 30 years of reform. It’s not Top Secret. You just have to constantly pay attention, which I’ve done. And it is EXACTLY why I despise the past three presidents, their wives and both corrupted, political parties.
Reform now means (maybe it always did), whatever Wall Street wants, Wall Street gets. See Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama for THE evidence. It’s well documented for any of you that still suffer a delusional crush on one of the above named three poisons.
Do I believe Secy Clinton would have created a Catfood Commission like Obama? You betcha. She answers to the same Masters of the Universe as Obama. You think President Hillary would not be subject to those Masters? You think she would have been independent? Get real. In fact, she campaigned on the mandate to force Americans to buy MONOPOLIZED insurance. You voted FOR that in the primaries in 2008. I did not. So I don’t want to hear any bitching that Obama went Hillary’s way, because that is what YOU wanted! I wanted Obama’s campaign message of NO MANDATE. He said if the American government could mandate things, every American would be homeowners. Simply impossible. He lied. But Hillary was for Wall Street’s insurance companies from the get-go. So for all of you HRC fans to hit Obama on the issue of the mandate is total hypocrisy. And that includes you, Taylor!
Thanks for clearing that up texan,that is what I thought you thought.
Ronc99~ All I can say is I think you are wrong about Hillary and I could site many examples of her reaching out and helping people but I won’t bore you with them. You have a right of course to believe anything you want and like texan says it is past time to even be arguing about it,we will never know.
I agree with Ronc99 that Bradley Manning is a courageous person and that we Americans know next-to-nothing about the empire that does so much in our names. When I was young, I believed that we were the good guys who saved the world from Hitler in WWII. My idealism took a major beating when I studied what was going on with Vietnam. When I think of Bradley Manning as a young man in his 20′s who joined the military and then found out the truth about the American empire, I can’t help but empathize. I think his actions were foolhardy in many ways, and he is going to pay a terrible price. But he also did something he believed was right. I think it was a great service to the idea of democracy (something on its last legs in this world). I found myself worrying about Bradley as a young person a lot. I’m not sure I would have been able to take such a bold step myself, and I really hate that he is going to spend his life in prison for offending the powerful. I hope that there are people who are fighting for him.
Taylor made the best point about the State Dept. and this government lost in 20th century thinking…The sad thing that is revealed is a complete lack of leadership. Assessments a plenty….effective action…rarely. What good is diplomacy without a leader with vision and strength of character?
To the extent that the fecklessness of this government is revealed, it is a good thing…We are a great country….with good people….it’s just that the capable ones have no desire to be in politics. But by seeing this vacuum in 3D, it is now a necessity that we find a capable leader.