Wikileaks to soon release massive new cache of military documents

Discuss

25 Responses to “Wikileaks to soon release massive new cache of military documents”

  1. ChipH says:

    Big Brother was born in 1984 with the invention of the ‘personal’ computer, right on cue, as mankind willingly sat down and stared into the flickering screen of self-death. Babies danced briefly in 1995 with the birth of the ‘personal’ internet, and for just a brief nanosecond in the eons of time, like the blue flame of a pilot light on a frosty frozen morning, we all were bathed in the eery warm glow of a global i-Kegger … until the Gestapo arrived at the Millenium, and Ministry of Truth took power. All heil! But as long as there is Boing, there’s a chance. Let’s hope the Department of Demons and Warlocks doesn’t buy out Tucows!

  2. EH says:

    Seems to me to be logical that if the government is going to overclassify, that whistleblowing is going to over-release. In a society where knowledge of its government’s activities on their behalf is controlled and restricted to the degree that it is in America today, it’s simply not possible to know in advance what is more or less relevant. As for redactions, it isn’t going to stop unnamed and random civilians from being butchered and having their fingers hang off some cracker’s neck.

  3. Whiskybreath says:

    How many lives will be lost as a result of the incontinent flow of highly sensitive information to the irresponsible? Military and Intelligence information isn’t ‘classified’ for fun. It is invariably information which could, in the wrong hands, cause grave damage to life and property.
    In many cases, it is information which has been provided by agents whose identities is obviously secret; in others it is information which would expose vulnerabilities and in possibly the worst case, it is information which exposes current operational methods and intentions. This is not information which should be in the hands of the irresponsible, however they may feel – or claim they feel – about American or European foreign policy.

    • Ugly Canuck says:

      “invariably”?
      That’s a bit rich….

    • Ugly Canuck says:

      Your use of the word “irresponsible”is also troublesome…The word “irresponsible” means “not liable to be called to account”.
      It seems to me that secrecy in and of itself renders some people “irresponsible” for their conduct: in that their actions will never be known….so how could they then be ever “held responsible”, or called to account for their (unknown and secret) activities?

      And in a democracy, the leaders are “responsible” to the voters: how can we accurately judge of the merit of their actions, if they may keep them secret from us?

    • Anonymous says:

      How many lives will be lost as a result of the incontinent flow of highly sensitive information to the irresponsible?

      In the short run, possibly more. In the long run, probably fewer, because it will reduce the ability of governments to do whatever they want and then hide it if it wasn’t what they should be doing.

  4. mdh says:

    If you haven’t got anything to hide, why worry? right?

    • Niklas says:

      Yeah, why don’t you begin telling us your full name, social status, social security number, every detail about your sex life, your passport number and your medical and criminal record.

      Face it, some information has no real need to be released. I sincerely hope Wikileaks releases anything that indicates wrongdoings and at the same time retracts identities on those who might risk their life because of a leak like this.

      • querent says:

        “and at the same time retracts identities on those who might risk their life because of a leak like this.”

        But not those who are outed as guilty of war crimes.

        mdh doesn’t owe us anything, but these people are our EMPLOYEES. I want to know what they’re up to when they’re on the clock.

        • Niklas says:

          I was referring more to the civilians who choose to cooperate, than I did GI:s.

          “mdh doesn’t owe us anything”

          How would you know? He or she could be planning a terrorist plot or could be part of the CIA trying to blackmail Assange for all we know. The truth deserves to be told, no matter the cost, that is what Wikileaks teaches and what we (me included) repeat!

      • mdh says:

        Because none of those things have a single thing to do with the issue at hand, and I’m boring.

        So long as we have nothing to hide, we have nothing to worry about. That was the refrain from the right back when our wires were first tapped. Uppance has come.

      • Anonymous says:

        Socratic Irony.

      • Anonymous says:

        I think I may have detected a hint of sarcasm in mdh’s post… You know, since that’s the usual response by the government and many right-wingers to massive civilian privacy breeches.

        Anyways, seriously, I believe that OUR GOVERNMENT should have nothing to hide, and their actions committed on our behalf should be transparent and well documented. Sure, it may not be wise to publish “Ahmad Sahib of 123 Tehran Rd was a US spy who infiltrated the taliban on February 12th and told us their precise whereabouts”, but I’ll be damned if they don’t at least publish “Spent 4 million dollars on counterintelligence missions, which provided us with information that led to the success of operation 123.”

        The government is a direct extension of the populace. Everything they do is on our behalf. We pay them to do what they do. They wholly supported by our votes and our taxes. Ostensibly, they work for us, and should have to provide us, their employers, with information detailing everything they do. They should at least be somewhat accountable for the largest expenditure ever in the history of the country. These ongoing useless bullshit wars have cost the country more than anything else, ever. We could have paid for a hundred years of free medical care for everyone, we could have solved world hunger, or we could have partially colonized the moon by now, but instead people acting on our behalf spent all our money on some vague nebulous concept of a perceived threat, throughout which we’ve been lied to, had secrets kept from us, and in every way it’s been a nonstop shitfest of wasteful expenditures and lies. Even if wikileaks fails to properly sanitize these documents, they’re providing a service to the citizens that our own government has consistently failed to uphold.

        • Niklas says:

          Anyways, seriously, I believe that OUR GOVERNMENT should have nothing to hide, and their actions committed on our behalf should be transparent and well documented. Sure, it may not be wise to publish “Ahmad Sahib of 123 Tehran Rd was a US spy who infiltrated the taliban on February 12th and told us their precise whereabouts”, but I’ll be damned if they don’t at least publish “Spent 4 million dollars on counterintelligence missions, which provided us with information that led to the success of operation 123.”

          This is precisely my point. This, in my point of view, is the base standard all military operations should do: http://www.nato.int/kosovo/all-frce.htm (in fact, I would rather not have any military operations at all…)

          Ostensibly, they work for us, and should have to provide us, their employers, with information detailing everything they do.

          I kind of agree, but at the same time I am a bit fed up with all this “the government did it, therefore we should know everything about it.”

          Fact is the government did it, they produced my social security number, they produced my passport number, they hold information on my social status, they wield control over the use my criminal and medical record, they gave me my family name.

          So, I ask (not necessarily directed at you, Anon) again, should every little piece of information that the government produces in its course of action be released to the general public or is it acceptable that only that information that is relevant be released? Is it possible that some information can be anonymized while the core of the information remains intact?

          Let us say more than a few high ranking FDA agents, some medical workers and some medical corporate people were to misuse a large nation-wide bank of medical records. Would you argue that because our medical records were part of their illegal activities every medical record from that bank should be released?

          I say that those who choose to make documents like these have some (not all) responsibility to at least give a good effort to make sure no one gets outed unnecessarily.

          But in the end, this would have been of little news and quite redundant had only the armed forces given a steady stream of factual information to begin with.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ok… So, it seem as though we agree with one another… Now what? That doesn’t normally happen on the internet.

            So basically, we’re saying the same thing, only you came off as someone who doesn’t want accountability, and I came off as someone who doesn’t want protection for the innocent.. At least that’s what I gather.

            I think we’d both be happy if the Army itself published every single stupid little document, with details redacted.. Like, “13:00 June 12th 2009, Lt Cmdr Joe Smith interacts with < > at < > to discuss infiltrating < >. Admiral John Doe approved transfer of $15 million USD to < > for purchase of tanks and munitions from contractor American Arms Dealer Corporation LTD.”, or something like “Commander David Jones oversaw his troops James Davidson, Dave Jamison, and Jave Donvison, rape < >, < >, and < > with a broomstick before brutally beating them to a mushy pulp for not stopping at a checkpoint.”

            For the time being though, it appears wikileaks has taken every measure possible to redact sensitive information, they’ve even asked the US military themselves to help sanitize their afghani leaks before publishing them. They’ve given the military every warning possible, and given them plenty of time to get their shit together and disclose their damning documents themselves, properly redacted, but they refuse to do so, instead saying over and over “if the people knew we raped, tortured, and murdered innocent civilians while wasting trillions of their dollars, it would piss people off, so we won’t tell them.”

          • Ugly Canuck says:

            What bothers me about secrecy in Government is that future historians ( and thus all of posterity) may not be able to accurately describe what has actually happened…we may be involving ourselves in darkness to a degree which future generations (never mind our own) will find impossible to penetrate…I say this because we have lost so much our history over the centuries, nay millennia, due to the simple neglect of the preservation of accounts and records, or indeed the simple failure of anybody to write down or keep any records, of what’s been going on.
            But secrecy (induced ignorance) has also played a great role in this cumulative loss of collective memory: for the fewer the number of people who know of he details of some transaction of States and Statesmen, the more likely it is that the accurate knowledge of what is occurring, or what has occurred, will be lost forever to the rest of humankind. (As an aside, secrecy becomes criminals, more than it does Statesmen – what Statesman would desire that his deeds and accomplishments remain forever unknown and hidden from mankind?)
            And lost along with that would be any instruction or benefit or even simple amusement which the contemplation of a truthful and accurate history of such past human events – that is, our present – would provide to our descendants.

            My fear is that secrets may be kept too well, or for so long, so that the information they contain is lost forever to the use of mankind: perhaps only to assuage the vanity, or to dispel the baseless fears, of some transient politician or official.

            That all being said, proper archives and Official histories compiled and published after such secrecy is no longer required go a long way to dispel such fears.
            For example, the secret that the US had cracked the German and Japanese codes during WW 2 was kept, IIRC, until 1960. That Navajo code-talkers were used by US Armed Forces in that conflict was also kept secret until 1968. But those secrets eventually did come out – and that is the most important thing.
            To repeat, the crucial thing is that the archive of secrets kept by Governments be eventually, yet in a timely manner, fully opened. And the sooner the better, after the need for secrecy has been dispelled.

            Unlike some, I do think there are times and situations which require that the Government keep secrets closely – but this is at best a necessary EVIL, and as such ought to be kept to the absolute minimum required – and even so, the secrecy ought to be dispelled and the secret revealed, as quickly as possible.

  5. Anonymous says:

    The USA has always been at war with terrorism, and will always be at war with terrorism.

    Terrorism cannot be fought with conventional means, or according to published law.

    Persons opposing the war on terrorism, or the conduct of the war on terrorism, or the decisions of the leadership of the war on terrorism, are disloyal.

    Disloyalty is terrorism.

  6. Teller says:

    No wonder they called off the Koran burning. Can’t compete with that.

  7. Rayonic says:

    Not when we’re still reeling from the Afghanistan documents!

    Sorry, couldn’t resist the urge to be snarky. I am wondering how they’ll compare, though. Guess we’ll see.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Military and Intelligence information isn’t ‘classified’ for fun. It is invariably information which could, in the wrong hands, cause grave damage to life and property.

    If you’ve seen military information that has been declassified or leaked, you’ll know that’s not invariably so at all.

  9. Ugly Canuck says:

    I only wish to note here that it was the US Army itself which, just within the last day, announced the details of charges against a number of US Servicemen for allegedly committing heinous crimes against the Afghan populace – charges which did not arise from or as a result of anything which Wikileaks has published about that conflict.

    That said, the need for secrecy in Government operations has ever been a claim of those exercising power: but history has shown that such is often been un-necessary; and it has sometimes been revealed, in the light of evidence revealed mush later, to have been used much more for the benefit of the Rulers (or to avoid their embarrassment by incompetence exposed), rather than for any benefit whatsoever to the ruled – indeed, sometimes it has been used to the very great detriment of the latter.

    For those who seriously wish to peruse and rummage the Afghan docs which Wikileaks has released:

    http://www.diarydig.org/

    Thanx to Mr J.Young and Cryptome for the link.
    And as ever, Cryptome itself is of interest in such matters:

    http://www.cryptome.org/

  10. Ugly Canuck says:

    Oh hey – this is a bit OT – but does anybody know if the US Armed Forces still publishes Official Histories of their operations, after the conflict ends? IIRC, I once read some such as to WW1, and WW2….are there Official US Military Histories available for the Korean and/or Vietnamese conflicts?

    The Wikileaks docs released so far are precisely the general type of raw materials any such history would require, it seems to me.

    As Santayana said, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Perhaps even more aptly, he also said that fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim.

  11. ChipH says:

    What Shaffer is finding, and 9,000 (only) prints attest, is that nobody is interested in Afghanistan,

    especially since odds are 99:1 that Shaffer is a shill for Defense propaganda, ahead of the news

    last week with Albright and Holbrooke that America will remain in Central Asia for ten more years.

    It’s the economy, stupid! Where is the ‘intelligence’ expose on the 46,000,000 Americans who are

    jobless, upside down, homeless, working part-time or on-call with no benefits and no healthcare?

    The absolute best thing would be to boycott this book, and it’s blacked out pages! Why the hell

    would any American taxpayer family now on the hook for $320,000 for the Mil.Gov’s $13 TRILLION

    unfunded deficits, growing at $1,430 BILLION a year, that’s $5 BILLION A DAY for this Irq-Afg-Pak

    SNAFUBAR, why the hell would any American patriot pay good money for redacted propaganda??

    There are DOZENS of war journalism exposes of this unspeakable corruption which never get to

    a senior editor’s desk, some low-level copy editor flunky for Mil.Gov tells the author to kick rocks,

    and there are DOZENS more pulled by Defense drone watchdogs at every publishing house, as

    the book business becomes more and more consolidated, all Defense has to do is post guards.

    ‘All your publishers are belong to US’. Google ‘Marc Herold’ or ‘Peter Torbay’, for example. Here:

    http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/33086321/Diminution-and-Development-by-Peter-Torbay

    Both long-ago redacted by Mil.Gov moles among the book agents, editors and publishers minions,

    and NOT ONE WORD, which tells me all this media blitz on Shaffer means that he is indeed a shill.

Leave a Reply