TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Wikileaks releases over 90,000 secret cables related to the war in Afghanistan!

Wikileaks releases over 90,000 secret cables related to the war in Afghanistan!

http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/


I don't really care about anything "incriminating" or whatever that people are going to be looking for in here, but it certainly is an interesting look into the prosecution of this war so far.

wikileaks is fuckin awesome

Now it's time to wait for someone to post a c0r version of these documents.

The New York Times, Der Spiegel, and The Guardian among other news organizations have had access to these documents for some time now. They haven't reported on it due to condition that they do not till after the public gets to see them.

Tomorrow is going to be an interesting news day to say the least.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby The New York Times, Der Spiegel, and The Guardian among other news organizations have had access to these documents for some time now. They haven't reported on it due to condition that they do not till after the public gets to see them.

Source?

Politico's got a release out with the white house administration ripping Wikileaks for their irresponsibility. From the U.K. Guardian's report on the matter:

quote:

�For all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters � famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials � and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred. �A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of �rumours, baloney, and second-hand information� and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. �As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim,� said the officer, who has years of experience in the region. �If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.�

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40204.html

Makes sense since the Wikileaks founder is an anti-war hack vehemently against military efforts in Afghanistan. Don't mistake this for journalism.

I am quite surprised that the DOD, DOJ, CIA, NSA and others haven't tried to hack wikileaks.

I am just happy Wikileaks is around though. Makes the US government way more transparent

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Politico's got a release out with the white house administration ripping Wikileaks for their irresponsibility. From the U.K. Guardian's report on the matter: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40204.html Makes sense since the Wikileaks founder is an anti-war hack vehemently against military efforts in Afghanistan. Don't mistake this for journalism.

Wait. I'm confused now. So wikileaks is irresponsible. But also all the reports they released are bogus and just rumors. If they're untrue rumors than it doesn't seem like a big deal?

Transparency is a good thing. They don't seem to have released any highly classified information (I think I read the anti-war hack said somewhere he has been given a lot of CIA reports and the like also that he refused to release because it might end up hurting the troops), so what's the problem?

quote:

Originally posted by Lews Wait. I'm confused now. So wikileaks is irresponsible. But also all the reports they released are bogus and just rumors. If they're untrue rumors than it doesn't seem like a big deal? Transparency is a good thing. They don't seem to have released any highly classified information (I think I read the anti-war hack said somewhere he has been given a lot of CIA reports and the like also that he refused to release because it might end up hurting the troops), so what's the problem?

That's the point- the irresponsibility lies in the release of so much data that a large portion of had already been discredited as being bunk and of no merit. Knowing this, it was released anyway adding potential napalm to a small dumpster fire. It's not an objective person with no agenda doing this, so you must take that into account.

Transparency is good, but the information itself must be good. Most of the data released is from 2004-2009, mostly Bush years... so if the current white house administration is blasting the move, than you know there's quite a bit of irresponsibility involved.

Yea I been reading through a lot of these and most is low level paper work that has not been established through the normal processes. Its raw reports from the field which are not always accurate, especially for things like Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) from air strikes and artillery. Those are often not confirmed for some time due to the nature of those operations (often being behind the line of engagement) and you might not get BDA on it for a couple of days till forces take that ground. As such you get a lot of disconnected information and in some cases it looks like there might be more of an impact than there really is due to duplicates and triplicates of information being reported.

I trust though that large news organizations will have for the most part established clear lines of events when reading through these. Now that I think about it more, it might be a few weeks before we see any hard stories coming out of these documents.

quote:

Originally posted by Lews Source?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/w.../26warlogs.html

quote:

Originally posted by bananas wikileaks is fuckin awesome

Indeed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/dat...ents?intcmp=239

Wikileaks� War Logs Highlight Global Intelligence Facade Of �War On Terror�
http://www.prisonplanet.com/wikilea...-on-terror.html
CIA funds ISI � ISI funds Taliban, Al Qaeda

quote:

Two days before 9/11, the leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance, Commander Ahmad Shah Masood, was assassinated. The Northern Alliance informed the Bush Administration that the ISI was allegedly implicated in the assassination, stating: �A `Pakistani ISI-Osama-Taliban axis� [was responsible] of plotting the assassination by two Arab suicide bombers�. `We believe that this is a triangle between Osama bin Laden, ISI, which is the intelligence section of the Pakistani army, and the Taliban,� Thus the Afghans that would be fighting on the side of the U.S. in the upcoming war after 9/11 are on record with their belief that the ISI and Al Qaeda are intimately connected. Yet the Bush administration began operating with Pakistan and the ISI as an ally. Not even the corporate media could whitewash these facts and so explained it away by alleging that U.S. officials had sought cooperation from Pakistan because it was the original backer of the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic leadership of Afghanistan accused by Washington of harboring Bin Laden. Then the so called �missing link� came when it was revealed that the head of the ISI was the principal financier of the 9/11 hijackers.

quote:

Originally posted by iTranscendence Wikileaks� War Logs Highlight Global Intelligence Facade Of �War On Terror� http://www.prisonplanet.com/wikilea...-on-terror.html CIA funds ISI � ISI funds Taliban, Al Qaeda

RUMINT

Learn it. Do not be a tool.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Politico's got a release out with the white house administration ripping Wikileaks for their irresponsibility. From the U.K.

Politico can fuck off. After Lizard, Iguana was was the only one of his half arsed attempts at producing anything decent.

lol Mario Politico, Mauro Piccottos evil political brother.

Re: Wikileaks releases over 90,000 secret cables related to the war in Afghanistan!

I say this half heartedly -

If it is a national security risk to make the document - why make it?

You'd think that if people really needed to say something they could do it in a form that wasn't stored with 89,999 other files that are national security threats. I'd more so expect maybe that 1 file to be somewhere very safe - such as in delivery - then destroyed or altered in such as way that people wouldn't know what it was refering to.



The other points:

Either 1. US does not care about war crimes it commits
2. It really does feel guilty and wants to help others with the process of having the hauge backlogged.
3. The US is a miracle worker and relies on hope rather than intelligence.

4. Tom Clancey has been busy.

quote:

Originally posted by iTranscendence Wikileaks� War Logs Highlight Global Intelligence Facade Of �War On Terror� http://www.prisonplanet.com/wikilea...-on-terror.html CIA funds ISI � ISI funds Taliban, Al Qaeda

yeah but the head of ISI was in washington and a known triple agent (British/American/Paki) -speaking with the sentate foreign intelligence committee when 911 happened.

He is the man the FBI pinned with 911 NOT Osama, it was tenet that wanted osama out of the way (saudi emir very powerful). why face three when you can face 1 at a time, or two rather than 3? Even better if you can turn one or two against the others. The US preplaned the gulf invasion in 1988. I've been spouting this junk for 10 years... if you havn't clued in yet after the mass propaganda of 2001 - maybe you'll soon clue in.

Wikileaks founder thinks 911 conspiracy theorists are fuckwits.

quote:

His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? "I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/l...e-14880073.html

This is a good one.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/U.S._Inte...ks,_18_Mar_2008


There is something called an "injunction"

this is just stupid.

Re: Re: Wikileaks releases over 90,000 secret cables related to the war in Afghanistan!

quote:

Originally posted by ******** I say this half heartedly - If it is a national security risk to make the document - why make it? You'd think that if people really needed to say something they could do it in a form that wasn't stored with 89,999 other files that are national security threats. I'd more so expect maybe that 1 file to be somewhere very safe - such as in delivery - then destroyed or altered in such as way that people wouldn't know what it was refering to.

Thats the thing, any of these documents themselves alone do not constitute a threat to national security. It is the over all picture that they make that is the threat. It reflects operation procedures on the ground, that potentially are still the same and could end up being a threat to soldiers.

Remember as well ********, Canada and a dozen other countries are also in Afghanistan, and you haven't seen anything related to their operations. I have talked to a number of CF guys and most of them are just as crude and ready to shoot shit up as anyone in a branch of the US military.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Wikileaks founder thinks 911 conspiracy theorists are fuckwits. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/l...e-14880073.html

His TED talk:

He is so creepy...

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby He is so creepy...

Of course he is creepy, he is Australian!

Ps.:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Exclusives - Julian Assange Unedited Interview
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.