There are, no doubt, mixed views among us about the wikileaks of U.S. diplomatic correspondence. I'd be interested in hearing the pros and cons. A quick look at what the NYTimes has posted seems to confirm much that rattles around in the papers anyway. The one new thing I learned was that "apparently" North Korea has supplied Iran with medium-range missiles.While waiting to hear the pros and cons, I chuckle over the Times toing and froing about why and how they published what they published--by no means all of the material.Here is their justificatory paragraph: "Of course, most of these documents will be made public regardless of what The Times decides. WikiLeaks has shared the entire archive of secret cables with at least four European publications, has promised country-specific documents to many other news outlets, and has said it plans to ultimately post its trove online. For The Times to ignore this material would be to deny its own readers the careful reporting and thoughtful analysis they expect when this kind of information becomes public."http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29editornote.html?hpAnd the front page story: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?hp
Margaret O'Brien Steinfels, a former editor of Commonweal, writes frequently in these pages.