Wikileaks Iraq war documents - it hits the fan

[RED DAVE]

Here comes more shit:

WikiLeaks' Biggest Document Dump Yet Coming Monday: What to Expect


On Monday, the whistle-blower website WikiLeaks will release nearly 400,000 pages worth of classified U.S. Army documents on the war in Iraq, making it the single largest military leak in U.S. history. The number of documents will dwarf the 77,000 pages of sensitive material on the war in Afghanistan that WikiLeaks released in July.

...

According to GlobalSecurity.org, SigActs, as they are known, refer to "all incidents reported to Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I) through daily Significant Activity Reports." In other words, the documents might contain information on potentially damning incidents in Iraq that were reported to the military, but not made public.

Wired also speculates that the documents might shed light on a range of issues, from possible instances of ethnic cleansing in Baghdad to lost U.S. guns to more secret U.S. prisons. A source also told Newsweek that some of the documents detail the involvement of U.S. forces in what was described as a "bloodbath."http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk/article/wikileaks-biggest-document-dump-hits-monday-what-to-expect/19676512

RED DAVE

[¿Que?]

Oh geez! Sorry can't think of more to say. I was going to make a shit joke, but it wasn't that funny. Thanks for the heads up tho.

[Red Commissar]

I wonder what will be the next round of damage control by the DoD and government. The inevitable "they're putting people in danger" deal, but I wonder what kind of character assassination they will do. There was that whole rape thing last time.

[The Vegan Marxist]

We should also be ready to defend not only US veteran Jeremy Morlock, but anyone else the military may take aim at in order to try & relinquish any increase in classified leaks.

[The Douche]

I always wonder if I'm gonna see stuff about people I know or places I was at.

[Leonid Brozhnev]

Four hundred thousand. That's a lot o' jobby... /bestbillyconnollyimpression
More rape accusation round the corner for Assange.

[Triple A]

CIA will nuke wikileaks in one second
just wait to see

[the last donut of the night]

i'm gonna get my umbrella, this is gonna be a veritable shitstorm

[Ocean Seal]

The funny thing is that the capitalists think that this will somehow put the country in danger to know all the crimes of the US government. Good one Glenn "The Liberterian" Beck I wonder how people buy this crap and will actually defend those who are trying to silence the truth.
Keep it coming, the world pants for truth. :thumbup:

[synthesis]

This is good news, but I'm a little critical of their decision to release all 400,000 pages at once - it kind of seems like more of a publicity thing that way. I feel like if they just released 40,000 at a time, over three months or so, it would give people more time to sift through the information and extract everything meaningful.

[graymouser]

I wonder what will be the next round of damage control by the DoD and government. The inevitable "they're putting people in danger" deal, but I wonder what kind of character assassination they will do. There was that whole rape thing last time.
Honestly, at this point I am concerned about the kind of assassination that involves bullets.

[The Vegan Marxist]

This is good news, but I'm a little critical of their decision to release all 400,000 pages at once - it kind of seems like more of a publicity thing that way. I feel like if they just released 40,000 at a time, over three months or so, it would give people more time to sift through the information and extract everything meaningful.

Not really. Wikileaks is a direct threat to US national security. They will try & prevent any chance of people seeing these documents if need be. And if Wikileaks were to take these leaks gradually, for the sake of people taking time as well, then more than likely not all leaks will be able to be released. The best option is to release all at once & allow those of the public to start making copies for themselves through private hard drives.

[synthesis]

Posted on Wikileaks Twitter about twenty seconds ago:


WikiLeaks communications infrastructure is currently under attack. Project BO move to coms channel S. Activate Reston5.The site is down. Also this (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1811423120101019). Perhaps a review and summary could be a RevLeft collaborative project?

EDIT: Apparently their Twitter account is frozen, and the "less than 20 seconds ago" has been there all day.

[synthesis]

On that note, I hereby concede to TVM's argument.

[Salyut]

The "insurance" file is on the pirate bay.

[Obs]

Honestly, at this point I am concerned about the kind of assassination that involves bullets.
Too obvious. They'll probably use poison, then say he'd been in poor health for a while. In any case, Assange is a fool if he doesn't start worrying about his personal safety now.

[Salyut]

Too obvious. They'll probably use poison, then say he'd been in poor health for a while. In any case, Assange is a fool if he doesn't start worrying about his personal safety now.

That would still be really obvious though.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

DoD will crash the website as fast as they can.

[Salyut]

DoD will crash the website as fast as they can.

Looks like they are doing that as we speak.

[Nuvem]

Damn good work from Wikileaks. Hope this stuff actually sees the light of day.

[synthesis]

Does anyone think it's strange that it's been two days and they haven't at least found some way to release the password yet?

[synthesis]

OK, so for anyone who might be interested, I think I figured out what's going on here.

1. The story in the OP is false. (http://www.twitlonger.com/show/6hqu1n)

Apparently all reports of Wikileaks releasing 400,000 pages on Monday originated in a fabricated story by Wired Magazine, which Assange asserts had previously provided assistance to the government in pegging Bradley Manning as the whistleblower.

On Monday, they twatted, "@wired (http://twitter.com/wired) has spoken to no 'staffers'. No publication dates have slipped. @wired (http://twitter.com/wired) has agenda, doesn't check facts and is not to be trusted."

2. The facts are wrong.

The "400,000 pages" claim is a recent one, to my knowledge, and comes from the Pentagon itself. Back in June, Wikileaks noted that "allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified US embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect."

3. So what's really going on? Here's my hypothesis, although there's obviously a lot more going on than any of us will ever know. First, having read a lot of conspiracy-type shit today, I think that last cryptic twatter was just to confirm back-up protocol for their network, yet the cryptic-ness of it would provide a certain "viral" component in case the message got deleted from Twitter.

Moreover, perhaps I'm just late to the party here, but I think that basically the U.S. government is vividly overstating the length, breadth and depth of the information possessed by Wikileaks in order to provide a "national security" justification for bringing the website down. The government seems to be trying to find a balance between looking like they're covering something up while covering everything up at the same time.

Am I just stating the obvious, or am I completely wrong?


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5576e51be9fa.jpg

[Salyut]

OK, so for anyone who might be interested, I think I figured out what's going on here.

1. The story in the OP is false. (http://www.twitlonger.com/show/6hqu1n)

Apparently all reports of Wikileaks releasing 400,000 pages on Monday originated in a fabricated story by Wired Magazine, which Assange asserts had previously provided assistance to the government in pegging Bradley Manning as the whistleblower.

On Monday, they twatted, "@wired (http://twitter.com/wired) has spoken to no 'staffers'. No publication dates have slipped. @wired (http://twitter.com/wired) has agenda, doesn't check facts and is not to be trusted."

2. The facts are wrong.

The "400,000 pages" claim is a recent one, to my knowledge, and comes from the Pentagon itself. Back in June, Wikileaks noted that "allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified US embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect."

3. So what's really going on? Here's my hypothesis, although there's obviously a lot more going on than any of us will ever know. First, having read a lot of conspiracy-type shit today, I think that last cryptic twatter was just to confirm back-up protocol for their network, yet the cryptic-ness of it would provide a certain "viral" component in case the message got deleted from Twitter.

Moreover, perhaps I'm just late to the party here, but I think that basically the U.S. government is vividly overstating the length, breadth and depth of the information possessed by Wikileaks in order to provide a "national security" justification for bringing the website down. The government seems to be trying to find a balance between looking like they're covering something up while covering everything up at the same time.

Am I just stating the obvious, or am I completely wrong?


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5576e51be9fa.jpg

I completely agree.

[Reznov]

Like this will accomplish anything, you already know if the CIA/ U.S. Government deemed it threatening to them that they would have taken it away (Which they probably did to several of the documents)

[~Spectre]

In what is being described as the largest release of secret U.S. military documents ever, the whistle-blowing web site WikiLeaks has released a trove of classified reports (http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/10/pentagon-ready-for-wikileaks-release-of-iraq-war-documents.html#tp) about the war in Iraq, including a secret U.S. government tally that puts the Iraqi death toll between 109,000 and 285,000, according to news sources that received advanced copies of the documents.


Those documents include evidence of state sanctioned torture by the Iraqi government, new evidence of Iraqi government death squads, and Iran's involvement in funneling arms to Shiite militias, according to Arab news channel Al Jazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/), which has been able to review the documents before their release.
Al Jazeera has reviewed the 400,000 documents that are being released. WikiLeaks says it will hold a press conference Saturday morning in Europe. WikiLeaks (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wikileaks-preparing-release-video-alleged-us-massacre-afghanistan/story?id=10954929)' Web site is currently down, for what it calls "scheduled maintenance," and ABC News has not viewed the documents firsthand.
Among the highlights initially released by al Jazeera are claims that the death toll reached 285,000, and that 63 percent of them were civilians.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wikileaks-dump-put-iraqi-war-death-toll-285000/story?id=11949670


http://wikileaks.org/


The American media is already going into spin hyperdrive, and are accusing wikileaks of having "blood on their hands". Disgusting.

[Reznov]

I want to see a document which shows how the Americans invaded and the places they basically took over first.

I have a feeling its near all the major cities and oil deposits.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Some people in the media are so damn foolish because you know so many will say "It puts troops in danger" or some shit like that. YOU'RE THE FUCKING MEDIA, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO FIND THIS SHIT OUT! As if any regular Iraqi is totally oblivious of death squads and state torture when bodies with handcuffs are found on the side of the roads in cities all the time. Totally oblivious of what happens in their own country though[/sarcasm] :cursing:

[Communist]

.

Merged two threads on this topic and retitled thread to reflect it.

.

[Rusty Shackleford]

http://warlogs.wikileaks.org/

At 5pm EST Friday 22nd October 2010 WikiLeaks released the largest classified military leak in history. The 391,832 reports ('The Iraq War Logs'), document the war and occupation in Iraq, from 1st January 2004 to 31st December 2009 (except for the months of May 2004 and March 2009) as told by soldiers in the United States Army. Each is a 'SIGACT' or Significant Action in the war. They detail events as seen and heard by the US military troops on the ground in Iraq and are the first real glimpse into the secret history of the war that the United States government has been privy to throughout.
The reports detail 109,032 deaths in Iraq, comprised of 66,081 'civilians'; 23,984 'enemy' (those labeled as insurgents); 15,196 'host nation' (Iraqi government forces) and 3,771 'friendly' (coalition forces). The majority of the deaths (66,000, over 60%) of these are civilian deaths.That is 31 civilians dying every day during the six year period. For comparison, the 'Afghan War Diaries', previously released by WikiLeaks, covering the same period, detail the deaths of some 20,000 people. Iraq during the same period, was five times as lethal with equivallent population size.

[Rusty Shackleford]

A lengthy demonization of Assange and Wikileaks itself. Basically, it is saying that assange is on the run and portrays him as a paranoid freak basically. Also, it seems to be that they are carrying the story of multiple dissenters in the organziation...


Thank you New York Times for more garbage (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html)


LONDON — Julian Assange moves like a hunted man. In a noisy Ethiopian restaurant in London’s rundown Paddington district, he pitches his voice barely above a whisper to foil the Western intelligence agencies he fears.
He demands that his dwindling number of loyalists use expensive encrypted cellphones and swaps his own as other men change shirts. He checks into hotels under false names, dyes his hair, sleeps on sofas and floors, and uses cash instead of credit cards, often borrowed from friends.
“By being determined to be on this path, and not to compromise, I’ve wound up in an extraordinary situation,” Mr. Assange said over lunch last Sunday, when he arrived sporting a woolen beanie and a wispy stubble and trailing a youthful entourage that included a filmmaker assigned to document any unpleasant surprises.
In his remarkable journey to notoriety, Mr. Assange, founder of the WikiLeaks (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/wikileaks/index.html?inline=nyt-org) whistle-blowers’ Web site, sees the next few weeks as his most hazardous. Now he is making his most brazen disclosure yet: 391,832 secret documents on the Iraqi war. He held a news conference in London on Saturday, saying that the release “constituted the most comprehensive and detailed account of any war ever to have entered the public record.”
Twelve weeks ago, he posted on his organization’s Web site some 77,000 classified Pentagon documents on the Afghan conflict.
Much has changed since 2006, when Mr. Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, used years of computer hacking and what friends call a near genius I.Q. to establish WikiLeaks, redefining whistle-blowing by gathering secrets in bulk, storing them beyond the reach of governments and others determined to retrieve them, then releasing them instantly, and globally.
Now it is not just governments that denounce him: some of his own comrades are abandoning him for what they see as erratic and imperious behavior, and a nearly delusional grandeur unmatched by an awareness that the digital secrets he reveals can have a price in flesh and blood.
Several WikiLeaks colleagues say he alone decided to release the Afghan documents without removing the names of Afghan intelligence sources for NATO (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/north_atlantic_treaty_organization/index.html?inline=nyt-org) troops. “We were very, very upset with that, and with the way he spoke about it afterwards,” said Birgitta Jonsdottir, a core WikiLeaks volunteer and a member of Iceland’s Parliament. “If he could just focus on the important things he does, it would be better.”
He is also being investigated in connection with accusations of rape and molestation involving two Swedish women. Mr. Assange has denied the allegations, saying the relations were consensual. But prosecutors in Sweden have yet to formally approve charges or dismiss the case eight weeks after the complaints against Mr. Assange were filed, damaging his quest for a secure base for himself and WikiLeaks. Though he characterizes the claims as “a smear campaign,” the scandal has compounded the pressures of his cloaked life.
“When it comes to the point where you occasionally look forward to being in prison on the basis that you might be able to spend a day reading a book, the realization dawns that perhaps the situation has become a little more stressful than you would like,” he said over the London lunch.
Exposing Secrets
Mr. Assange has come a long way from an unsettled childhood in Australia as a self-acknowledged social misfit who narrowly avoided prison after being convicted on 25 charges of computer hacking in 1995. History is punctuated by spies, defectors and others who revealed the most inflammatory secrets of their age. Mr. Assange has become that figure for the Internet era, with as yet unreckoned consequences for himself and for the keepers of the world’s secrets.
“I’ve been waiting 40 years for someone to disclose information on a scale that might really make a difference,” said Daniel Ellsberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/daniel_ellsberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who exposed a 1,000-page secret study of the Vietnam War in 1971 that became known as the Pentagon Papers.
Mr. Ellsberg said he saw kindred spirits in Mr. Assange and Pfc. Bradley Manning (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/bradley_e_manning/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the 22-year-old former Army intelligence operative under detention in Quantico, Va., suspected of leaking the Iraq and Afghan documents.
“They were willing to go to prison for life, or be executed, to put out this information,” Mr. Ellsberg said.
Underlying Mr. Assange’s anxieties is deep uncertainty about what the United States and its allies may do next. Pentagon and Justice department officials have said they are weighing his actions under the 1917 Espionage Act. They have demanded that Mr. Assange “return” all government documents in his possession, undertake not to publish any new ones and not “solicit” further American materials.
Mr. Assange has responded by going on the run, but has found no refuge. Amid the Afghan documents controversy, he flew to Sweden, seeking a residence permit and protection under that country’s broad press freedoms. His initial welcome was euphoric.
“They called me the James Bond of journalism,” he recalled wryly. “It got me a lot of fans, and some of them ended up causing me a bit of trouble.”
Within days, his liaisons with two Swedish women led to an arrest warrant on charges of rape and molestation. Karin Rosander, a spokesperson for the prosecutor, said last week that the police were continuing to investigate.
In late September, he left Stockholm for Berlin. A bag he checked on the almost empty flight disappeared, with three encrypted laptops. It has not resurfaced; Mr. Assange suspects it was intercepted. From Germany, he traveled to London, wary at being detained on arrival. Under British law, his Australian passport entitles him to remain for six months. Iceland, another country with generous press freedoms and a strong WikiLeaks following, has also lost its appeal, with Mr. Assange concluding that its government, like Britain’s, is too easily influenced by Washington. In his native Australia, ministers have signaled their willingness to cooperate with the United States if it opens a prosecution. Mr. Assange said a senior Australian official told him, “You play outside the rules, and you will be dealt with outside the rules.”
He faces attack from within, too.
After the Sweden scandal, strains within WikiLeaks reached a breaking point, with some of Mr. Assange’s closest collaborators publicly defecting. The New York Times spoke with dozens of people who have worked with and supported him in Iceland, Sweden, Germany, Britain and the United States. What emerged was a picture of the founder of WikiLeaks as its prime innovator and charismatic force but as someone whose growing celebrity has been matched by an increasingly dictatorial, eccentric and capricious style.
Internal Turmoil
Effectively, as Mr. Assange pursues his fugitive’s life, his leadership is enforced over the Internet. Even remotely, his style is imperious. In an online exchange with one volunteer, a transcript of which was obtained by The Times, he warned that WikiLeaks would disintegrate without him. “We’ve been in a Unity or Death situation for a few months now,” he said.
When Herbert Snorrason, a 25-year-old political activist in Iceland, questioned Mr. Assange’s judgment over a number of issues in an online exchange last month, Mr. Assange was uncompromising. “I don’t like your tone,” he said, according to a transcript. “If it continues, you’re out.”
Mr. Assange cast himself as indispensable. “I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest,” he said. “If you have a problem with me,” he told Mr. Snorrason, using an expletive, he should quit.
In an interview about the exchange, Mr. Snorrason’s conclusion was stark. “He is not in his right mind,” he said. In London, Mr. Assange was dismissive of all those who have criticized him. “These are not consequential people,” he said.
“About a dozen” disillusioned volunteers have left recently, said Smari McCarthy, an Icelandic volunteer who has distanced himself in the recent turmoil. In late summer, Mr. Assange suspended Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a German who had been the WikiLeaks spokesman under the pseudonym Daniel Schmitt, accusing him of unspecified “bad behavior.” Many more activists, Mr. McCarthy said, are likely to follow.
Mr. Assange denied that any important volunteers had quit, apart from Mr. Domscheit-Berg. But further defections could paralyze an organization that Mr. Assange says has 40 core volunteers and about 800 mostly unpaid followers to maintain a diffuse web of computer servers and to secure the system against attack — to guard against the kind of infiltration that WikiLeaks itself has used to generate its revelations.
Mr. Assange’s detractors also accuse him of pursuing a vendetta against the United States. In London, Mr. Assange said America was an increasingly militarized society and a threat to democracy. Moreover, he said, “we have been attacked by the United States, so we are forced into a position where we must defend ourselves.”
Even among those challenging Mr. Assange’s leadership style, there is recognition that the intricate computer and financial architecture WikiLeaks uses to shield it against its enemies has depended on its founder. “He’s very unique and extremely capable,” said Ms. Jonsdottir, the Icelandic lawmaker.
A Rash of Scoops
Before posting the documents on Afghanistan and Iraq, WikiLeaks enjoyed a string of coups.
Supporters were thrilled when the organization posted documents on the Guantánamo Bay detention operation, the contents of Sarah Palin (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/sarah_palin/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s personal Yahoo email account, reports of extrajudicial killings in Kenya and East Timor, the membership rolls of the neo-Nazi British National Party and a combat video showing American Apache helicopters in Baghdad in 2007 gunning down at least 12 people, including two Reuters journalists.
But now, WikiLeaks has been met with new doubts. Amnesty International (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/amnesty_international/index.html?inline=nyt-org) and Reporters Without Borders have joined the Pentagon in criticizing the organization for risking people’s lives by publishing war logs identifying Afghans working for the Americans or acting as informers.
A Taliban (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/taliban/index.html?inline=nyt-org) spokesman in Afghanistan using the pseudonym Zabiullah Mujahid said in a telephone interview that the Taliban had formed a nine-member “commission” after the Afghan documents were posted “to find about people who are spying.” He said the Taliban had a “wanted” list of 1,800 Afghans and was comparing that with names WikiLeaks provided.
“After the process is completed, our Taliban court will decide about such people,” he said.
Mr. Assange defended posting unredacted documents, saying he balanced his decision “with the knowledge of the tremendous good and prevention of harm that is caused” by putting the information into the public domain. “There are no easy choices on the table for this organization,” he said.
But if Mr. Assange is sustained by his sense of mission, faith is fading among his fellow conspirators. His mood was caught vividly in an exchange on Sept. 20 with another senior WikiLeaks figure. In an encrypted online chat, a transcript of which was passed to The Times, Mr. Assange was dismissive of his colleagues. He described them as “a confederacy of fools,” and asked his interlocutor, “Am I dealing with a complete retard?”
In London, Mr. Assange was angered when asked about the rifts. He responded testily to questions about WikiLeaks’s opaque finances, Private Manning’s fate and WikiLeaks’s apparent lack of accountability to anybody but himself, calling the questions “cretinous,” “facile” and reminiscent of “kindergarten.”
Mr. Assange has been equivocal about Private Manning, talking in late summer as though the soldier was unavoidable collateral damage, much like the Afghans named as informers in the secret Pentagon documents.
But in London, he took a more sympathetic view, describing Private Manning as a “political prisoner” facing a jail term of up to 52 years, without confirming that he was the source of the disclosed war logs. “We have a duty to assist Mr. Manning and other people who are facing legal and other consequences,” he said.
Mr. Assange’s own fate seems as imperiled as Private Manning’s. Last Monday, the Swedish Migration Board said Mr. Assange’s bid for a residence permit had been rejected. His British visa will expire early next year. When he left the London restaurant at twilight, heading into the shadows, he declined to say where he was going. The man who has put some of the world’s most powerful institutions on his watch list was, once more, on the move.

[RED DAVE]

As of 14:16 EDT, Saturday, October 23, wikileaks, including all the good stuff is up and running.


At 5pm EST Friday 22nd October 2010 WikiLeaks released the largest classified military leak in history. The 391,832 reports ('The Iraq War Logs'), document the war and occupation in Iraq, from 1st January 2004 to 31st December 2009 (except for the months of May 2004 and March 2009) as told by soldiers in the United States Army. Each is a 'SIGACT' or Significant Action in the war. They detail events as seen and heard by the US military troops on the ground in Iraq and are the first real glimpse into the secret history of the war that the United States government has been privy to throughout.

The reports detail 109,032 deaths in Iraq, comprised of 66,081 'civilians'; 23,984 'enemy' (those labeled as insurgents); 15,196 'host nation' (Iraqi government forces) and 3,771 'friendly' (coalition forces). The majority of the deaths (66,000, over 60%) of these are civilian deaths.That is 31 civilians dying every day during the six year period. For comparison, the 'Afghan War Diaries', previously released by WikiLeaks, covering the same period, detail the deaths of some 20,000 people. Iraq during the same period, was five times as lethal with equivallent population sizewikileaks.org (http://WIKILEAKS.ORG)

RED DAVE

[synthesis]

Anyone else think Assange should fake his own death at some point? Two birds with one stone and all...

[Ele'ill]

You can't stop the signal

[ryacku]

Wait. What? Wikileaks denies that it will leak 400,000 documents. It then leaks 400,000 documents several days later.


In any case, I find it suspicious that Wikileaks seems to focus so much on the United States. Russia and China commit a lot of improprieties. Why doesn't Wikileaks ever release thousands of documents on Russia or China? On the Chechen War? On the Naxalite War? Who are their sources?

Of course I could simply be just overly paranoid... but you never know. Wikileaks is a world-spanning non-profit covert organization...

[¿Que?]

Who are their sources?

It's my understanding that their sources are mostly military documents. Or do you mean, who are the sources for the sources :lol:

[ryacku]

It's my understanding that their sources are mostly military documents. Or do you mean, who are the sources for the sources :lol:
I probably meant who are their sources of information.

[RED DAVE]

Wait. What? Wikileaks denies that it will leak 400,000 documents. It then leaks 400,000 documents several days later.


In any case, I find it suspicious that Wikileaks seems to focus so much on the United States. Russia and China commit a lot of improprieties. Why doesn't Wikileaks ever release thousands of documents on Russia or China? On the Chechen War? On the Naxalite War? Who are their sources?

Of course I could simply be just overly paranoid... but you never know. Wikileaks is a world-spanning non-profit covert organization...You are overly paranoid.

RED DAVE

[The Vegan Marxist]

You are overly paranoid.

RED DAVE

They have every right to be. We're not talking about someone like Avakian.

[Public Domain]

WikiLeaks never ceases to amaze me.

Excellent work as usual from them...

Hope this hits passivised America harder then the Afghan Documents.

Here's to DISSENT!

[Obs]

Wait. What? Wikileaks denies that it will leak 400,000 documents. It then leaks 400,000 documents several days later
Yeah, but openly announcing that you're about to leak 400,000 military documents is a bit like mailing a handwritten letter directly to Obama which only contains the text "Please kill me NOW" and your full name and address, only with a higher success rate.

[Public Domain]

Yeah, but openly announcing that you're about to leak 400,000 military documents is a bit like mailing a handwritten letter directly to Obama which only contains the text "Please kill me NOW" and your full name and address, only with a higher success rate.

Except it turns out that letter has anthrax and he's taking it all down with him.

[synthesis]

Clearly, my analysis was wrong. But isn't it obvious why they would do that? They're tempting fate simply by existing. Anything that throws the wolves off the trail is to their benefit.

[t.shonku]

Guys I found this video report on You Tube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF2miwIWOE4&feature=topvideos

[Aurora]

Did anyone else see the Channel 4 dispatches on the documents yesterday? you can watch it here: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/4od#3134558
I particularly think the maps they made were interesting, showing exactly where all the reported deaths happened across the country and talking to iraqi men and women who were involved in the killings and getting their stories which conflicted with the occupation account.

I think they had the best news coverage of the documents in their news as well, they openly showed footage of people surrendering and getting shot and unarmed civilians being shot, while all the other news channels with the exception of RT have just gone after Assange and havent shown anything from the documents at all.

[Nolan]

I can't watch it. It's currently not available in my area.

[RadioRaheem84]

There are some excerpts on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxwosDxy2_0

It's truly disgusting.

It should be noted that John Pilger was the first journalist to document the lies of the allied occupation propaganda machine in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[IndependentCitizen]

How long will it stay online for though? I beat US/UK intelligence are shitting themselves and trying to get the site taken down via DoS as soon soon and as long as possible :/

Good job though Wikileaks. I really wanna read the report of the British soldier who shot the 8year old girl. I wanna read the excuses pulled out.

[RadioRaheem84]

Let this is be a vindication to anyone who was doubted upon by naysayers and rightist oppositionists.

This is straight from the horses mouth. All detailed cases of abuses and crimes against humanity.

Naomi Klein, John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, Parenti, Dahr Jamail, Democracy Now! and anyone else who talked about the horrors going on in Iraq in an effort to promote liberal democracy and free enterprise at the barrel of a gun.

All VINDICATED.

Where is Christopher Hitchens? Where is the Euston Manifesto group?

Where are the pro-war liberal hawks of the The New Republic?

Some of the crimes documented in the war logs mirror the same shit Saddam and other client junta states were doing during the Cold War.

This is CAPITALISM.

End rant.

[Leonid Brozhnev]

The internet is vast, governments can't control it. A torrent of the full documentary is available for anyone interested.

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5910759/_C4_Dispatches_-_Iraqs_Secret_War_Files

[Barry Lyndon]

Let this is be a vindication to anyone who was doubted upon by naysayers and rightist oppositionists.

This is straight from the horses mouth. All detailed cases of abuses and crimes against humanity.

Naomi Klein, John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, Parenti, Dahr Jamail, Democracy Now! and anyone else who talked about the horrors going on in Iraq in an effort to promote liberal democracy and free enterprise at the barrel of a gun.

All VINDICATED.

Where is Christopher Hitchens? Where is the Euston Manifesto group?

Where are the pro-war liberal hawks of the The New Republic?

Some of the crimes documented in the war logs mirror the same shit Saddam and other client junta states were doing during the Cold War.

This is CAPITALISM.

End rant.

The only thing the imperialists and their liberal intellectual and media running dogs CAN do is change the subject and hope people will forget.
Because they have no argument and they know it.

[RadioRaheem84]

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/25/18662262.php

Enjoy!

[Aurora]

I can't watch it. It's currently not available in my area.
Ah sorry that link will only work in the UK

How about this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMxEuXb6dw4

[RadioRaheem84]

Anarion click on my link, it's a full video of the Dispatches episode.

[ckaihatsu]

The internet is vast, governments can't control it.


Hmmmm, but is this what the Founding Fathers originally *intended* -- ???


x D

[ckaihatsu]

The only thing the imperialists and their liberal intellectual and media running dogs CAN do is change the subject and hope people will forget.
Because they have no argument and they know it.


Here....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller_(journalist)


'Nuff said.

[~Spectre]

Where is Christopher Hitchens? .

You rang?


Sunday's New York Timesquoted a Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousaf Ahmadi, justifying an assault on the U.N. compound in the city of Herat (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/asia/24herat.html). One reason, said this eloquent envoy, was "a United Nations report that said insurgents had caused a majority of civilian attacks"! I note in passing that even the United Nations now feels some responsibility to be objective about these things.)Objective is not the word one would select for either the aims or methods of WikiLeaks. I was interested to read that one of Julian Assange's deputies recently resigned (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/secret-war-at-the-heart-of-wikileaks-2115637.html) over his decision to give the crass title "Collateral Murder" to a video from Baghdad. But no careful reading of the latest blizzard of documents (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/war-logs.html) could support any conclusion except that the verdict on responsibility for the murder of innocents is the same for Iraq as the United Nations' conclusion about Afghanistan.


http://www.slate.com/id/2272246/

[GPDP]

Ah, good ol' Hitchens. People defending themselves against an unjust occupation use reports of imperial atrocities committed against them, therefore the blood is on whistleblowers' hands. Conclusion: the truth must never be revealed.

[RadioRaheem84]

Damn! Hitch is a blatant imperial apologist. No bones about it.

[Barry Lyndon]

You know who else is utterly silent? NGNM85.

[RadioRaheem84]

Not long ago, I read an interview with Julian Assange in which he declared his ostensibly journalistic objective to be that of "ending" the war. Most edifying. The easiest way of ending it would be for one side to cease fighting it. (That almost happened in Iraq before the surge, when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and al-Qaida claimed control of a province or two.) I have an intuition that I know which side Assange wishes would capitulate. Call it an instinct if you like. And perhaps one day we will decide that we do not care who runs Mesopotamia or the Hindu Kush or the Khyber Pass or, indeed, how they run it. Even when that great and peaceful day dawns, we will still have to admire those of our volunteers who fought so hard to make sure that the decision was not a walkover.

Hitches accuses Assange of rooting for the terrorists?

The man is an utter waste.

[empiredestoryer]

the good ole us of a the biggest terrorist state in modern history guilty of RAPE... TORTURE... MASS MURDER...