Dec 02, 2010
So far, WikiLeaks have concentrated their efforts on U.S. foreign policy, from wars to diplomacy. Though little concrete action appears to have been taken in response to the leaks, their next target may spark a different reaction.
Bank of America shares fell 3 percent on Tuesday after Julian Assange hinted that he had as much as 5 GB worth of their documents revealing some shady behavior.
"We know they've made horrific acquisitions... taken massive write-downs... if they actually had to report that, they're probably technically insolvent," financial blogger Barry Ritholtz told cable news.
But we already know there's been plenty of mismanagement and even fraud on Wall Street, so what could Assange have on the Bank that we don't already know? Given their shameless theft of US assets, what could possibly embarrass them?
Maybe, however, it's not about what happens after, but what happens before WikiLeaks leaks. Ritholtz noted that maybe this is just about "shaking the tree--disturbing the status quo." And Assange has written plenty himself on the subject.
In one essay, Assange notes: "The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie."
So perhaps when we look for action to be taken as a result of the WikiLeaks, we're looking for the wrong thing. Instead, maybe what we're looking at is a long-term attempt to provoke a response that reveals the dysfunction within our most powerful institutions and possibly derails it by provoking an over-reaction.
Think lunch-counter sit-ins, updated. If Assange's cyber invasion is to Bankster Street what the civil rights marchers were to segregation, what are Wall Street's water cannons? And will they end up, by their reaction, shooting themselves in the foot?
I can hardly wait to find out.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
© 2023 Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders interviews forward-thinking people about the key questions of our time on The Laura Flanders Show, a nationally syndicated radio and television program also available as a podcast. A contributing writer to The Nation, Flanders is also the author of six books, including "Bushwomen: How They Won the White House for Their Man" (2005). She is the recipient of a 2019 Izzy Award for excellence in independent journalism, the Pat Mitchell Lifetime Achievement Award for advancing women's and girls' visibility in media, and a 2020 Lannan Cultural Freedom Fellowship for her reporting and advocacy for public media. lauraflanders.org
So far, WikiLeaks have concentrated their efforts on U.S. foreign policy, from wars to diplomacy. Though little concrete action appears to have been taken in response to the leaks, their next target may spark a different reaction.
Bank of America shares fell 3 percent on Tuesday after Julian Assange hinted that he had as much as 5 GB worth of their documents revealing some shady behavior.
"We know they've made horrific acquisitions... taken massive write-downs... if they actually had to report that, they're probably technically insolvent," financial blogger Barry Ritholtz told cable news.
But we already know there's been plenty of mismanagement and even fraud on Wall Street, so what could Assange have on the Bank that we don't already know? Given their shameless theft of US assets, what could possibly embarrass them?
Maybe, however, it's not about what happens after, but what happens before WikiLeaks leaks. Ritholtz noted that maybe this is just about "shaking the tree--disturbing the status quo." And Assange has written plenty himself on the subject.
In one essay, Assange notes: "The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie."
So perhaps when we look for action to be taken as a result of the WikiLeaks, we're looking for the wrong thing. Instead, maybe what we're looking at is a long-term attempt to provoke a response that reveals the dysfunction within our most powerful institutions and possibly derails it by provoking an over-reaction.
Think lunch-counter sit-ins, updated. If Assange's cyber invasion is to Bankster Street what the civil rights marchers were to segregation, what are Wall Street's water cannons? And will they end up, by their reaction, shooting themselves in the foot?
I can hardly wait to find out.
Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders interviews forward-thinking people about the key questions of our time on The Laura Flanders Show, a nationally syndicated radio and television program also available as a podcast. A contributing writer to The Nation, Flanders is also the author of six books, including "Bushwomen: How They Won the White House for Their Man" (2005). She is the recipient of a 2019 Izzy Award for excellence in independent journalism, the Pat Mitchell Lifetime Achievement Award for advancing women's and girls' visibility in media, and a 2020 Lannan Cultural Freedom Fellowship for her reporting and advocacy for public media. lauraflanders.org
So far, WikiLeaks have concentrated their efforts on U.S. foreign policy, from wars to diplomacy. Though little concrete action appears to have been taken in response to the leaks, their next target may spark a different reaction.
Bank of America shares fell 3 percent on Tuesday after Julian Assange hinted that he had as much as 5 GB worth of their documents revealing some shady behavior.
"We know they've made horrific acquisitions... taken massive write-downs... if they actually had to report that, they're probably technically insolvent," financial blogger Barry Ritholtz told cable news.
But we already know there's been plenty of mismanagement and even fraud on Wall Street, so what could Assange have on the Bank that we don't already know? Given their shameless theft of US assets, what could possibly embarrass them?
Maybe, however, it's not about what happens after, but what happens before WikiLeaks leaks. Ritholtz noted that maybe this is just about "shaking the tree--disturbing the status quo." And Assange has written plenty himself on the subject.
In one essay, Assange notes: "The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie."
So perhaps when we look for action to be taken as a result of the WikiLeaks, we're looking for the wrong thing. Instead, maybe what we're looking at is a long-term attempt to provoke a response that reveals the dysfunction within our most powerful institutions and possibly derails it by provoking an over-reaction.
Think lunch-counter sit-ins, updated. If Assange's cyber invasion is to Bankster Street what the civil rights marchers were to segregation, what are Wall Street's water cannons? And will they end up, by their reaction, shooting themselves in the foot?
I can hardly wait to find out.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.