| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Wikileaks releases 'secret' 75,000 mil reports, holds 15,000 back |
| 2010-07-26 |
| Posted by:Anguper Hupomosing9418 |
| #13 They only released 80% of the material they have, which itself is obviously only a portion of some larger quantity? How can we reach conclusions in this context? What would Shirley Sherrod say? Sec. Vilsack? Professor Gates? The POTUS? Inquiring minds want to know! |
| Posted by: Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division 2010-07-26 19:58 |
| #12 Has an 'official' line about these been agreed upon by the CABAList (nee JournoList) lefties? I haven't heard an in-unison parrot-squawk yet... |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2010-07-26 17:34 |
| #11 WaPo comment: White House officials and their allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan sought Monday to play down the political and military impact of the unauthorized release of thousands of classified Afghan war documents, saying they portray a reality on the ground that is already largely known. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-07-26 14:27 |
| #10 If the people running wikileaks obtained and released Chinese or Russian secrets, then they would all die. That might be a way to disable Wikileaks, have the US plant Chinese & Russian secrets on their website. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-07-26 12:46 |
| #9 If the people running wikileaks obtained and released Chinese or Russian secrets, then they would all die. |
| Posted by: rammer 2010-07-26 11:28 |
| #8 Why doesn't Wikileaks ever seem to get it's hands on Chinese or Russian secrets? |
| Posted by: anon1 2010-07-26 11:21 |
| #7 I am saddened to say that the release of some of this documents may actually be a good thing. If half of this crap is authentic, then Afghanistan is worse than Viet Nam. We have more widespread corruption, the same vacillating loyalties, police and soldiers fighting on the other side while hope visiting the family, grass roots psyops that works much better than ours and finally a complete cluster $%#@ of an intell program. Seems to me everytime the CIA gets their hands on a war they screw it up to the max. They seem more interested in playing spy games and acting like bitchy little girls than winning a conflict. That's the biggest similarity to VN. At this time we should carpet bomb the entire mess. Mass evacuate everyone at least semi friendly to us and then carpet bomb the rest of it into a large rock pile. Then we say, "be our friend and prosper, be our enemy and we wrap your dead butt in pig hide." |
| Posted by: James Carville/Karl Rove 2010-07-26 11:14 |
| #6 Some of that went out the window when they started classifying toilet paper. Control on classification has been a losing battle for 40 years. Lots of stuff is classified that should never be. Then that was compounded by modern technology. When you only generate enough paper/data created by trained cleared typists and antiquated printing machines, the volume could be 'managed'. They gave up on real management around the 80s. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-07-26 10:53 |
| #5 I am assuming these all have some of level of secrecy classification. If so where in the hell are the investigations into who leaked them? I was almost courtmartialed in the late 60's for leaving our company morning report on the top of my desk. What has happened to opsec? |
| Posted by: Angavimp Sforza1099 2010-07-26 10:17 |
| #4 When will Pvt Manning's sentencing take place? Will this release of info make the sentence harsher? |
| Posted by: lex 2010-07-26 09:38 |
| #3 Treason. Find the leaker(s), jail them. Find the Wikileaks people, jail them for aiding and abetting. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-07-26 09:14 |
| #2 NY Times: Deciding What to Publish Various reactions to disclosure of documents |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-07-26 00:51 |
| #1 Update: The online whistle-blower organization Wikileaks was planning to post the documents on its website today, but The New York Times, London's Guardian newspaper and the German weekly Der Spiegel were given early access to the records. The New York Times said the documents - including classified cables and assessments between military officers and diplomats - describe US fears that ally Pakistan's intelligence service was actually aiding the Afghan insurgency. According to the Times, the documents suggest Pakistan “allows representatives of its spy service to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize networks of militant groups that fight against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders”. The Guardian, however, interpreted the documents differently, saying they “fail to provide a convincing smoking gun” for complicity between the Pakistan intelligence services and the Taliban. The Guardian report focuses instead on documents that it said reveal “how a secret 'black' unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for kill or capture without trial” and “how the US covered up evidence that the Taliban has acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles”. Der Spiegel, meanwhile, reported that the records show Afghan security officers as helpless victims of Taliban attacks. The magazine said the documents show a growing threat in the north, where German troops are stationed. It says the reports are clearer than what the German government tells parliament, describing the security situation in the north as continuously getting worse and including concrete warnings about imminent attacks. One US official said earlier the Obama administration was aware of the impending document release and had already told Pakistani and Afghan officials what to expect, in order to head off some of the more embarrassing revelations. The White House later denounced the leak as irresponsible. |
| Posted by: tipper 2010-07-26 00:08 |