WikiLeaks: Or What Battlestar Galactica Can Teach Us About Everything

I’ve made references in blogs before, I’m sure.  But the best show on television ever is Battlestar Galactica, not only because of the robots and everything – which is gravy or, if you are the type of person who acts needlessly dismissive of a genre simply because it falls in a genre, fodder for your “I’m gonna watch The Bachelorette instead.”  If it sounds judgmental, that’s because it is.  That show is absurd, and I think less of you and our country because you like it.

Anyway, I know you are going to dismiss the show because Dwight from The Office likes it, and hey, that’s fine, you’re entitled to your stupid opinion.  The reason that this is showing up here is because the show is the smartest show to have ever been on TV in terms of understanding the complexity of politics.  When is a government justified in killing?  When is revolt okay, when is it not?  Is terrorism ever justified?  What defines our concept of who is human and who is not?

And that’s how I’m going to tie it to this, a political blog.  The topic for this entry is the massive leak of materials to WikiLeaks.  You’ve undoubtedly heard of the leak:  There are about 91,000 documents that were leaked to the site, designed as a middle-man between the public and the whistle-blowers, and the documents, entitled the “Afghan War Diary” essentially describe how the ISAF forces are worried about interference in operations and possible collusion with the Taliban coming from Pakistan and Iran, the upsurge in recent Taliban attacks, and a long listing of civilian casualties that were previously unreported.

At its core, it’s particularly disturbing, because this information is mostly classified as “secret,” which is not a high level designation, unlike, for example the Pentagon Papers, which were significantly more revelatory about the war efforts.

What exactly is one morally obligated to do when they have access to this material and don’t believe in what is being done?  To what extent does this material “endanger American operations” and servicemen?  Wouldn’t any bad publicity about a war technically endanger the operations?  Wouldn’t that lead to total government control of the situation?  Isn’t that in itself far too dangerous?

The suspected leaker is Bradley Manning, an intelligence analyst for the Army, who is also suspected of leaking the recent video to the press that showed the killings of a number of civilians and reporters in Iraq.   He apparently had been becoming disillusioned with American foreign policy and made the mistake of transferring information to a grey hat hacker/journalist known as Adrian Lamo, who breached confidentiality and gave his name to the authorities.

Ultimately, this whole event has made it clear to the public that the operation in Iraq – McChrystal aside – is very much in danger of failing.  Obama’s commitment to the war – despite the fact that it is Bush’s war – may be a part of his potential political downfall, and the transparency promised during his campaign seems to be becoming increasingly tarnished.

I don’t really have anything else to say about this subject, but I’m actually going to request comments here:  is leaking ever justified?  Where should the line between right-to-know and security be drawn?  Is anything more awesome than Battlestar Galactica?