The Guardian’s Revealing Zimbabwe/WikiLeaks Admission

by Kevin Jon Heller

Last week I noted the remarkable spectacle of the Guardian publishing an editorial that blamed WikiLeaks for releasing a State Department cable that had, in fact, been initially released by the Guardian itself.  At the time, my evidence of that fact was circumstantial, based on the time-dates provided by the Guardian and WikiLeaks websites.  But no longer — eight days after publishing the editorial, the Guardian quietly appended the following to the editorial (my emphasis):

This article was amended on 11 January 2011 to clarify the fact that the 2009 cable referred to in this article was placed in the public domain by the Guardian, and not as originally implied by WikiLeaks. The photo caption was also amended to reflect this fact.

In other words, the Guardian has now admitted that if Tsvangirai is murdered as a result of the cable — which is unlikely, as I explained in the previous post — the newspaper, not WikiLeaks, will have blood on its hands.

As Glenn Greenwald points out today, the Guardian should have made the correction more apparent (especially in related news stories) and has tried to distance itself from the editorial by claiming — falsely — that it was simply an open forum submission.  But at least the newspaper has admitted that the cable was not initially released by WikiLeaks. That stands in marked and revealing contrast to WikiLeaks’ critics, who continue to promote the zombie lie that the release of the State Department cables has been driven by WikiLeaks, not by its partners in the media.

http://opiniojuris.org/2011/01/12/the-guardians-revealing-zimbabwewikileaks-admission/

3 Responses

  1. “zombie lie”  is this a new term to describe what might have been said in early times was the “big lie”?  Just have not heard it before and think it is a very interesting phrasing.
    Best,
    Ben

  2. Progressive blogs use “zombie lie” to refer to a lie that simply cannot be killed, no matter how many times it’s debunked.  I think I first saw it regarding “death panels.”

  3. Are you saying that Wikileaks (the organization that actually accepted the stolen cables and released them) would have NO BLOOD on its hands if Tsvangirai is murdered? How does that logic work?

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. There are no trackbacks or pingbacks associated with this post at this time.