| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| DoD response to Wikileaks document dump |
| 2010-10-24 |
| Following is the response to the WikiLeaks documents from Geoff Morrell, the Defense Department press secretary: “We deplore WikiLeaks for inducing individuals to break the law, leak classified documents and then cavalierly share that secret information with the world, including our enemies. We know terrorist organizations have been mining the leaked Afghan documents for information to use against us, and this Iraq leak is more than four times as large. By disclosing such sensitive information, WikiLeaks continues to put at risk the lives of our troops, their coalition partners and those Iraqis and Afghans working with us. The only responsible course of action for WikiLeaks at this point is to return the stolen material and expunge it from their Web sites as soon as possible. “We strongly condemn the unauthorized disclosure of classified information and will not comment on these leaked documents other than to note that ‘significant activities’ reports are initial, raw observations by tactical units. They are essentially snapshots of events, both tragic and mundane, and do not tell the whole story. That said, the period covered by these reports has been well chronicled in news stories, books and films, and the release of these field reports does not bring new understanding to Iraq’s past. “However, it does expose secret information that could make our troops even more vulnerable to attack in the future. Just as with the leaked Afghan documents, we know our enemies will mine this information, looking for insights into how we operate, cultivate sources and react in combat situations, even the capability of our equipment. This security breach could very well get our troops and those they are fighting with killed.” |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #19 If the DoD did, infact make this information available. Would the Mainstream Media have reported on it? Or would they have tried their best to suppress it and crucify anyone who does? Not reported, or reported as "another Bush lie" (remember General Betray-us?), and tarred with the same brush anyone who spoke up for the truth. That's what started happening about 12.September, 2001. They were full-voiced baying for blood by the end of that week. Remember the complaints that President Bush continued reading that storybook to the schoolchildren before leaving to hide on Air Force One for a week or so? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-10-24 14:17 |
| #18 I have to ask James.... If the DoD did, infact make this information available. Would the Mainstream Media have reported on it? Or would they have tried their best to suppress it and crucify anyone who does? This is the same MSM which absolutely refused, and in fact went extreamly out of their way to provide cover to the Islamist of Beslan and what happened there by refusing to mention that they were muslim, were religiously committed, as well as some of the monstrosities committed there in the name of Allah. This is the same MSM which spend 18 months of daily reporting on Abu-Graib which occurred during 1 [to 3?] nights total by a few mal-contents which the DoD was already investigating. The same MSM which, along with MF-ker Congressman Murtha convicted the marines of Haditha in the press while the investigation was only beginning. While at the same time refusing to mention some of the things Al-Quaeda in Iraq has been doing to people. OTOH Ive always said we simply weren't fighting the media war. Everytime a 'freedom fighter' (MSM's label) hid behind a civilian or used a child as a human shield, a video camera should capture it and it broadcast and it should lead each and every press conference. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2010-10-24 14:05 |
| #17 We classify because you never know where a source or source's family might end up in 30 years. Thus WINTEL "Warning Notice: Intellignece Methods or Sources" |
| Posted by: whitecollar redneck 2010-10-24 13:34 |
| #16 You know Karl, My take on this is that the DoD has a strange way of classifying information and keeping it out of the public domain. A lot of the stuff I am seeing seems to reinforce a lot of what Bush, you and Rummy were saying about foreign interference and foreign money behind the violence. With all of these documents showing vast Iranian involvement, it is hard to call the violence in Iraq, especially after 2004, as an "insurgency". They should have declassified and blasted tons of this stuff all over the place, it would have made it very hard to say we were not needed over there. Jimmy,...er Jim, I apologize again, you are right, there is evidence of WMD, Iranian involvement, Czechnians, Syrians and Saudis running around committing most of the violence and it could have gone a long ways toward shutting up George's critics on the war. I've never understood why DoD insists on classifying stuff that makes them look good and then blasting stuff all over every time one of the young warriors screws up. |
| Posted by: James Carville/Karl Rove 2010-10-24 13:17 |
| #15 It's always nice for people who live in other areas of the country to tell us we should respect other cultures. Always fun isn't it? |
| Posted by: PrivateEye 2010-10-24 12:55 |
| #14 "None more than he knows that loose lips sink ships. " Exaaaaaccctly. |
| Posted by: PrivateEye 2010-10-24 12:54 |
| #13 It's always nice for people who live in other areas of the country to tell us we should respect other cultures. We have probably one of the largest if not the largest Vietnamese population in the country, and I've never had an incident with any of them. And in fact, the death threat was from an English speaking Afghani. Sorry, but I think our policies are wrong. |
| Posted by: Black Charlie Chinemble5313 2010-10-24 12:52 |
| #12 "Not to mention that she has a very legitimate point that she is arguing very effectively." Perhaps that is because it goes back to my last comment, wherein I stated Anon1 gets tingly about wikileaks, insofar as he is an Australian mover and shaker she halfheartedly identifies with. Wink wink. |
| Posted by: PrivateEye 2010-10-24 12:48 |
| #11 I am calling Anon1's bluff. Beneath it all, I think she likes wikileaks. I also think her complex hatred of Australian men is exhibiting itself, but what lies beneath is she secretly feels tingly that Assange is Australian and he is such a power player. Ye olde love/hate dichotomy. Assange can sit and spin. I hope someone offs him pronto, it wouldn't be a moment too soon. |
| Posted by: PrivateEye 2010-10-24 12:44 |
| #10 Yeah, screw the people who help us when we go to rescue their country and we then bug out as soon as a Democrat takes over. Let whatever wacko dictatorship that takes over with Democrat assistance do whatever they want to those who help our soldiers. That's the way to get recruits when we have to go to the next country to fight. We have no idea who the Mohammedans you're dealing with are. If they even are Mohammedans. They may well be "refugees" as opposed to those who helped us before we abandoned their country. I know few native borns who are a thorough Americans as the Vietnamese I know. Especially the ones who got free housing from Hanoi before they managed to escape on small boats. We need to get out of Afghanistan, especially, ASAP in my opinion. It's not worth the life of one more American. But we should not abandon our brothers and sisters in arms. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-10-24 12:31 |
| #9 Anon1, Stop thinking we can invite all the muslims who helped us to come to our countries. I live in an area with lots of these immigrants and refugees and we don't want them. They are an aggressive and nasty lot that do not fit into our society. My family has been threatened with death. I've been told to move behind a muslim in a check-out line either because I'm an infidel or a mere woman. When I didn't, the friendly muslim cashier made ridiculous faces at me for his fellow muslim. (Yes, a neighborhood Costco). I've been followed by a middle eastern student as I drove through a local university with him flipping me off the whole time apparently because I'm either a mere woman or I must look Jewish. Really, don't invite them here. They don't fit. And western civilization is collapsing fast enough as it is. |
| Posted by: Black Charlie Chinemble5313 2010-10-24 12:20 |
| #8 Not to mention that she has a very legitimate point that she is arguing very effectively. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-10-24 12:13 |
| #7 To be fair, anon1 has posted using that nym for years, as I have posted as trailing wife. We know her here, that interesting fortyish lady from Australia who properly appreciates American men. The really anonymous ones get nyms generated by Fred's clever random name generator, a different one each time. So let's stick to the issues here. Rantburg has always only printed open source material, from news media and websites around the world. We have never revealed anything secret, nor have posters revealed things from their personal knowledge that was covered by a Classified designation or operational security. Not even those posting from Iraq or Afghanistan or weapons development, fascinating though it would be to all of us. Fred Pruitt is a retired military intelligence analyst, for God's sake. None more than he knows that loose lips sink ships. This really is a world war. If the jihadis win, it will be worse than if the Nazis did. More than just the lives of those fighting it are at stake when secrets are revealed. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-10-24 12:03 |
| #6 Commenter #2, great defender of passing info that could bring death to Americans and allies to butchers signs off as anonymous? |
| Posted by: wr 2010-10-24 10:43 |
| #5 freedom of speech and the freedom to report what is going on and to talk about it is the bedrock of our democracies I think the right for our ideals to survive is just as important. They won't if we lose the war of ideas. Publishing information about what our allies did and then conflate it to our values is not "1st amendment." It's lies. without it we are nothing Freedom of speech is not an absolute value, never has been. I can no more publish the date and time of at attack in which you are participating and call it "freedom of speech" than if I publish lewd photos of you in the act. without it we are no better than Russia or any other oligarchy where the rich and powerful make all the decisions leaving us public peons in the dark. Wrong. In Russia they protect their secrets. we need wikileaks I condemn the Department of Defense for trying to control the news with PR managers and spin doctors Unlike the pristine wikileaks? Puleez! i condemn the australian government for repeatedly hiding facts that are important to the australian public, and for hunting down those that leak information and hounding them through the courts and through their workplaces Called of the Official Secrets Act which is a perfectly legitimate function of government. I condemn those that force their employees to sign a confidentiality agreement as part of their contract for employment, which is every single public sector worker in Australia, ensuring they are gagged. Confidentiality agreements protect rights and are an integral part of free speech. we need to return to the basic principles which made our societies great in the first place: respect for the truth and for the right to speak the truth Agree. But what wikileaks does is anarchy respect for an independent media and its right to report the facts so we can understand and fix problems instead of pretending they don't exist. You act as if the media is the aggrieved party. The aggrieved party is every operative your beloved wikileaks had placed in the crosshairs of some very unsavory and undemocratic enemies who don't care about our "basic rights" that is what made Rantburg great in the first place. Those who recall after the 9/11 attacks, the politically correct bureaucrats who control so much of our societies would not allow the media to even so much as mention the word "islam" in connection with "terrorism" though the truth was plainly obvious They still don't. Do try to pay attention. at least here at Rantburg we could talk about it openly so Wikileaks is now reviled but what an important job it does how will we ever find out what is going on in a world where nobody is free to talk to the media this is information the government cannot control Bravo wikileaks, this is really important. if there are problems in revealing this information, we can fix it. By getting secret operatives killed, just what is fixed? if the lives of iraqis who helped us are imperilled, we can give them asylum, citizenship and shelter - instead of the thousands who come to our countries illegally for money alone. but whatever - don't shoot the messenger. Don't shoot down wikileaks or we will live in darkness never knowing what is really going on. Package this up and shop it to field operatives dearie. You may be surprised their reaction. |
| Posted by: badanov 2010-10-24 09:25 |
| #4 cut-and-paste |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-10-24 09:16 |
| #3 ..as posted by "anon1". I just love irony in the morning. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-10-24 09:07 |
| #2 freedom of speech and the freedom to report what is going on and to talk about it is the bedrock of our democracies without it we are nothing without it we are no better than Russia or any other oligarchy where the rich and powerful make all the decisions leaving us public peons in the dark. we need wikileaks I condemn the Department of Defense for trying to control the news with PR managers and spin doctors i condemn the australian government for repeatedly hiding facts that are important to the australian public, and for hunting down those that leak information and hounding them through the courts and through their workplaces I condemn those that force their employees to sign a confidentiality agreement as part of their contract for employment, which is every single public sector worker in Australia, ensuring they are gagged. we need to return to the basic principles which made our societies great in the first place: respect for the truth and for the right to speak the truth respect for an independent media and its right to report the facts so we can understand and fix problems instead of pretending they don't exist. that is what made Rantburg great in the first place. Those who recall after the 9/11 attacks, the politically correct bureaucrats who control so much of our societies would not allow the media to even so much as mention the word "islam" in connection with "terrorism" though the truth was plainly obvious at least here at Rantburg we could talk about it openly so Wikileaks is now reviled but what an important job it does how will we ever find out what is going on in a world where nobody is free to talk to the media this is information the government cannot control Bravo wikileaks, this is really important. if there are problems in revealing this information, we can fix it. if the lives of iraqis who helped us are imperilled, we can give them asylum, citizenship and shelter - instead of the thousands who come to our countries illegally for money alone. but whatever - don't shoot the messenger. Don't shoot down wikileaks or we will live in darkness never knowing what is really going on. |
| Posted by: anon1 2010-10-24 02:03 |
| #1 The only responsible course of action for WikiLeaks at this point is to return the stolen material and expunge it from their Web sites as soon as possible. Too late. The only responsible course of action is one that the DoD would not be authorized to take. Unfortunately. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-10-24 01:16 |