According to James Fallows of The Atlantic, âÄúAt face value it is the most damaging documentation of abuse since the Abu Ghraib prison-torture photos.âÄù On April 5, the whistle-blower Web site WikiLeaks released, in its words, a âÄúclassified U.S. military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad, including two Reuters news staff.âÄù An Army Counterintelligence Center report leaked by WikiLeaks in mid-March branded the Web site a security risk. Inasmuch as the truth condemns American foreign policy in the Middle East, the Army is right. Debate has swirled around the admittedly hard-to-watch video. Troops are overheard mocking their targets and laughing after successful sweeps, seeming to enjoy their somber duty. Military officer Anthony Martinez âÄúwrites with authority about the aerial attackâÄù according to the New York TimesâÄô Timothy Hsia. Martinez writes of the complexity of clearing such targets for fire, but does write that two of the men gunned down, âÄúit is quite clear to me âĦ are carrying photographic equipment.âÄù The real threat to national security is not, as some military intelligence officials charge, WikiLeaks or even individual whistle-blowers. These actors risk their livelihoods to give the democratic public the truth it needs to arrive at sane policy, however unlikely. The real threats to American security are the wars themselves; may we never live to see our benevolence reciprocated. As the behavior in this WikiLeak illustrates, AmericaâÄôs futile nation building project, responsible now for the lives of 100,000 civilians, will do little more than ignite outright hatred among the families bereaved by American arms.