Hacker News Reader

Comment by willart4food | Hacker News Reader

> Barr says he cannot even explain why the material must stay secret without putting national security at risk.

I apply a bit of hyperbole here, but I'm convinced that "national security" is a monotonic function that will eventually encompass everything in the federal government.

And a large part of it to cover up embarrassing details.

I think it was in the discussions related to one of the embassy cables that I found this concept of 3rd order facts that leads to things being classified. It goes something like this. Say US is supporting some brutal dictator somewhere. The fact that he is evil is the main fact (1st order). People in that country and all over the world know it. That's the 2nd order. However the knowledge that the US govt knows (3rd) order is classified. The reasoning is because then the US govt might have to explain its inaction in regard to all the brutalities inflicting by that ruler.

> And a large part of it to cover up embarrassing details.

Yes, but it is more than that. Way more.

Chinese ask me why in the world did Americans threw themselves on Saudis when they attacked them.

Chinese don't understand that. They cannot comprehend it at all. It breaks their mind. Chinese there think there must be some completely bizarre, terrible secret that is the reason for that.

I give them one popular explanation:

Imagine, some serious guy in the suit comes to completely shocked people after 9.11 and tells there is a "completely bizarre, terrible secret" behind this mess, and "this is why you trust me on this, and we must go help Saudis with Saddam."

Then years pass, US is in its 10th year of Iraq war. Everybody has since forgot Saudis, and can't care more why this has started when they have to finish this war at all costs. The guy serious guy in the suit keeps shouting "This is all Saddam who did all this! I have a proof, but is a state secret, just trust me!"

Imagine now somebody coming out and telling everybody: "there was no terrible secret" to begin with, and you had no reason to listen to that serious guy in the suit for all that 19 years long war.

National Security, but what about the children?

Those two excuses are the all purpose, catch all ones that work every time.

I wonder if he is confusing the security of the nation with the security of the government.

Of course he is, and frankly I wouldn’t put it past this or even most administrations to do the same thing.

Zero accountability. It’s disgusting.

Yes. Downvote this. For calling out the issue of accountability for what it is on this topic: disgusting.

I dare someone to defend it convincingly. Please someone defend this.

While I agree with you, I'll play devils advocate: The information in the documents is so bad, the damage it would cause would be worse than 9/11 itself.

What other logical reason is there for keeping it secret for this long?

Okay, damage to whom? The American people or individuals with compromised interests? I am unconvinced it's not the latter and that's a shame akin to the reality that we have to find of squaring with that it took a comedian pleading with tears in his eyes to convince Congress to do the right thing and even authorize funds for first responder's families.

Next question: More damaging than 9/11? Does that preclude the loss of life the morning of? To say nothing of the lives lost during the resulting military actions and regional fallout?

Let me end this by asking this: does this of all things really need a devil's advocate? The devil seems to be doing just fine pro se.

This information would probably make it politically impossible to maintain peaceful, diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia. That’s probably why.

All the more reason for it to be made public. We all deserve to know the truth.

If peace and diplomacy are the goals, conducting it in the dark terrifies me as to what steps the interested parties aim to use in 'getting there' or the questionable trades and concessions they make outside of the spotlight.

I mean let’s turn this on its head: if peace and diplomacy are the goals, what do they have to hide? That’s a pretty universal outcome that I can’t imagine many people having a problem pursuing.

Can we stop treating the devil like an indigent defendant now and look this diseased horse square in the mouth? This is kabooky-simulacra-governance disguised as security policy.

Yes, you are very correct. Interested people can google "Operation CONDOR"

Why does the US need to maintain peaceful, diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia?

It doesn't, but if it is uncovered that it isn't, people will have to ask their politicians why they keep spending billions on Saudis is there is no terrible secret reason to do so.

The Saudis no longer control enough oil to explain it.

But maybe it's all connected to Epstein, or rather to the group that he ostensibly headed. That would account for the links to both Israel and Saudi Arabia. And there's the possibly that they're blackmailing many senior politicians from the US and who knows how many other countries.[0]

0) https://medium.com/@dylanhoward/russia-israel-and-saudi-arab...

If that is the case, then some action carried out by Saudi Arabia already makes it ethically impossible to maintain peaceful, diplomatic relations.

There happen to be one major Saudi company that happen to be a privileged accessory to their monarch...

https://s.france24.com/media/display/aa00e3a4-0eb0-11e9-818f...

Basically yes, USA has went to absolutely unexplainable, completely bizarre extent to shield Saudis from the fallout, and even took out their biggest enemy in the region for them.

A document rendering multiple US administrations complete insert expletive will be deeply detrimental to political careers of many political clans on the hill.

But that's what OP is asking/saying right? If the information was made public it would mean that heads would role (proably even prosecutions) but the nation would be just fine (other than that lots of people might have to get to terms that their government has been lying to them for decades).

I read their response as more of a "yes, and" versus a "no but".

If there’s any damaging or damning info, the people should hear it and decide how to respond. If the truth has been told to us already, then nothing could be that much more damaging. If we were deceived from the beginning, then that has already resulted in massive amounts of damage.

The only people who would lose are those within political organizations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com