Letters to the Editor
-
Wow.
Wow.
The most basic rule of electronic document management states that whatever documents are not strictly internal must be converted to pdf format, which is view-only and (almost) tamper-proof.
I have seen multiple cases of people surfing the web and stumbling upon internal documents due to poor network security, lack of firewall, etc. But documents for public perusal are usually first converted to pdf or some such format that is a snapshot of the final document, instead of the actual word or excel spreadsheet. The point being exactly that, to hide the sometimes too-convenient markups that friendly word tracks for us.
Interesting find... it's mind boggling how unprofessional the autor was. Its one thing to discreetly insert personal opinions or ideas, quite another to use terms like 'losers'.
And yes the iraqi businessman quoted said what myself and any number of people could have told you way back in 2003: economic measures mean squat when you're being occuppied by foreign forces.
Imagine your community being invaded for a foreign power (not easy I know but for the sake or argument). I think we would be resentful too, no matter the number of dollars pushed our way or how friendly they tried to be.
-
downloads
yes please confirm you downloaded them all *before* announcing this to the world, somewhere safe?
you know, that NSA/patrioc act thing.
-
Minor quibble
I believe Moore mischaracterizes the Bush Administration's position on withdrawal from Iraq. They seem to believe that setting a date would postpone insurgent violence until after the withdrawal, not necessarily increase it.
-
Palimpsest
Technology is inherently boring. The implications of technology are what is interesting. What electronic media have in common with all other media since cuneiform is the reader. People have been reusing documents since papyrus was invented. Presumably Lascaux has some overpainted handprints and depictions of megafauna.
This seems a revealing glimpse into a critical historical place and period that will be revisited far into the future. I'm not too worried that the writer will be renditioned (but his 8-year-old should be), but certainly drones (unpiloted autonomous workers) throughout the government will be set to cleansing innumerable web sites. Considering this administration regards "freedom of information" as an oxymoron, it isn't clear how much will be sacrificed.
The larger question is not the continued accessibility of currently visible online works - public access is a tool of propaganda - it is the preservation of the undisturbed contents of vast archives that may later become accessible to historians, journalists and citizens. (Should any of these three groups remain extant.) Does federal law protect only the overtly intended text of government documents for future generations - or rather the specific physical or electronic expression of those documents, steganography and all?
We've had a major news "anchor" (never was a better metaphor) entrapped with manipulated physical documents. How long until some spawn of Rove embeds a concocted palimpsest meant to sway an election or topple a public or private official?
This may be the single best justification for the WayBack Machine.
-
Sensationalism and Imperial Supidity
There are a number of issues here:
1st -- How the redactions became part of the record.
This IS important, because it affects how we read the documents. (Misreading the evidence IS after all what this piece is really about. See #3 below). Moore doesn’t fully address how the redactions became part of the record. He is more concened to explain how his eight year old stumbled on the additional information. But how the redactions bubble up from behind these Reports is dealt with, credibly and impartially, in the very first post, by “ Aholibah” -- which Salon for some reason decides NOT to acknowledge with an Editor’s Choice Star. (Wake the Hell Up, editor).
2nd -- Salon is clearly trying to sensationalize the issue, make it “sexier” (in the immortal words of Tony Blair to his “intelligence” boffos). The best example of this is the hook Salon uses to get us to flip to page two:
Next page: "Oh well, this is one time it might be best that folks don't fully understand things"
Am I the only one who thought this was going to lead to yet another example of the egregious criminality the BushClique, unilaterally deciding to shield us poor benighted folks from the awful Iraq truth? Boy, was I surprised to find that it’s really a backhander about the “insurgents” having miscalculated the duration of Uncle Sam’s stay. (And if the misperception that The Boots were leaving was responsible for keeping the violence down, wouldn’t you echo those sentiments?)
3rd -- The core issue here is the insight these redactions give us into the on-the-ground mindset of the Occupiers. For them the Big Question was: "Why Are the Attacks Down in Al-Anbar Province?" They had six theories: Both #1) “Rounding up the Bums” and #2) “unleashing Hell” credit aggressive use of superior American force. #3) suggests the insurgents have mistakenly assumed that handing over “sovereignty” means the U.S. Boots’ll be leaving soon. #4) credits US cash flow for improvement projects and local employment. #5) Credits US troops for "Engagement," with what it calls "the various groups of losers in the New Iraq." Theses have come to see the US military as their dog in the fight (? Am I misreading that?) And #6) the only really credible theory, "Operational Pause" suggests the lull is a temporary statistical blip.
What’s most astonishing in all of this, as Moore makes clear, is that the level of “analysis” revealed in the documents (or, "behind" the documents) tends to fly OVER THE HEAD of (if not in the very face of) the FACTS. This is less an example of “analysis” than of wishful thinking. There’s no real attempt to gather usable or reliable data. And, as the author shows, the evidence that does bubble up (a demobbed 400,000 man Army sitting at home with its AK-47s!) is ignored as somehow irrelevant!
The article provides additional evidence of Imperial Stupidity in operation … at all levels. This one is right up there with the Billion Dollar Palletts! It’s a classic example of the way in which Imperial Forces (at all levels of the game) misread the attitude of the locals. Having convinced ourselves that we’d be greeted as “Liberators”, we ignore the daily reality that fairly screams at us: YOU ARE NOT WELCOME HERE! GO HOME! (And that’s a polite version of the message. The grittier version is at Walter Reed and at your friendly neighborhood VA facility).