WikiLeaks readying the ‘biggest leak of military intelligence ever’

[unhappycamper]

WikiLeaks readying the ‘biggest leak of military intelligence ever’
By Agence France-Presse
Sunday, September 12th, 2010 -- 6:44 pm

Whistleblower website WikiLeaks is teaming up with news outlets to release a "massive cache" of classified US military field reports on the conflict in Iraq, Newsweek magazine reported recently.

Newsweek quoted Iain Overton, editor of The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a London-based journalism nonprofit, as saying the material constitutes the "biggest leak of military intelligence" ever.

Newsweek said the stash of Iraq documents held by WikiLeaks is believed to be about three times as large as the number of US military field reports on Afghanistan released earlier this year by WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks, in collaboration with The New York Times, Britain's Guardian and Der Spiegel of Germany, published 77,000 Afghan war documents in July and has said it will release another 15,000 related documents soon.

Overton told Newsweek that his organization was working with WikiLeaks and television and print media in several countries on stories and programs based on the Iraq documents.

[Lint Head]

1. GOOD!

[stray cat]

2. We're in Afghanistan!

What a shock! Anything of real interest that is actually new info? I guess by calling it a leak some people will actually read it and learn something because it's called a leak

[Panaconda]

4. Only time will tell

With over 90,000 documents it will take months before we know. Full transparency is in order don't you agree?

Of course nothing will be of great surprise to those of us who know already of the many war crimes committed in Haditha and Fallujah and...

[Raster]

3. Good. Keep it up. Keep releasing. And hopefully there contained in these releases will be the

...clues to the real purpose(s) of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which could lead to the real truth about the run-up to the war. Iraq is a festering mass of lies. Shine the light, expose the truth. And punish the perpetrators.

[Cal33]

5. Don't we already know the truth? Just look at which companies

were profiting from the invasion.

[harun]

16. We know but knowing isn't evidence. Hopefully this can be used to

bring some justice.

[NJmaverick]

6. Wonder how many more innocents will die this time

[Luminous Animal]

8. How many died last time?

[NJmaverick]

10. Undetermined, due to the attempts to limit the damage

[Luminous Animal]

12. Actually, that would be no evidence that anyone has been harmed.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-12/pentagons-wikileaks-war-room-readies-for-new-document-dump/2/

"Lapan said that, so far, the Pentagon has no evidence to suggest that any Afghan civilians have been harmed by the Taliban as a result of the release of the 76,000 logs this summer—a bit of good news that, he suggested, might be attributed to the efforts of Carr’s team and Central Command to try to protect them."

And notice the weasel words, "suggested" and "might".

[Bragi]

11. I think the number you're looking for is: zero

The idea that the most heavily-armed and menacing army in human history is suddenly in danger because documents are released showing what was going on several years ago is ridiculous. It's just way too Bushian for me.

And if anyone really wants to keep the troops safe, I think we know how to do that, don't we?

[NJmaverick]

27. Right the Taliban is known for their restraint and respect for human life

I am sure they did the right thing and ignored all the helpful information provided by WikiLeaks

[Orsino]

44. Well, Americans in general seem to be ignoring it.

I'm more concerned with what we decide to do with the new information. Will it finally give us the courage to demand an end to war?

War, by the way, has actually been proven to endanger our troops.

[whatchamacallit]

15. How many innocents have died in our bullshit illegal wars?

Go wikileaks!

[glitch]

17. Well over a million according to the Lancet. But you never hear about them, do you?

edit: but if they can tie even one death to wikileaks you better believe it'll be trumpeted all over the corporate media.

[NJmaverick]

18. 2 wrongs don't make a right

so stop cheering for innocents getting killed.

[whatchamacallit]

19. I'm cheering for sunlight. What are you cheering for mavericky one?

:think:

[NJmaverick]

22. Unlike you, I don't find anything in war that is worth cheering about

least of all the innocents killed by Wikileaks

[Luminous Animal]

24. Again. What innocents? Do you know something the Pentagon doesn't?

[NJmaverick]

25. The Pentagon knows that the names of informants should not be released

as Wikileaks has done. All that does is serve to make the informants and their families dead. So I don't know something the Pentagon doesn't, I know what the every reasoned person knows.

[Luminous Animal]

29. The Pentagon admits that they have no evidence that anyone has been killed due to the leaks.

You keep asserting otherwise. Apparently, you are privy to facts that the Pentagon does not have.

[NJmaverick]

35. Word games, not having evidence does not mean something hasn't happened

and you didn't answer my question.

[Forkboy]

42. LOL

:crazy:

[EOTE]

57. Yes sir, you've got that right. Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

Hmmmm, where have I heard those words before? You are quite the font of unintentional hilarity.

[USArmyParatrooper]

46. Link?

[druidity33]

49. wikileaks asked the Pentagon

to help redact the names before the documents were released. Guess what? The Pentagon REFUSED to do it. Who's fault is it then that informants were outed? Also, there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that anyone has been harmed based on the most recent Afghan documents.

I'd send you the FDL link for this, but i know you won't read it...

:)

[sabrina 1]

53. The Pentagon did NOT care about those names because the

Pentagon was asked to remove any names that might be harmed if they were exposed.

The Pentagon refused.

Did you not follow the story?

Everyone knows that the Pentagon refused to remove any names.

Everyone following the story also knows that the Pentagon said, AFTER the release, that there was nothing to worry about regarding any of those names.

Then they decided it would be a good propaganda tool to pretend that people would get killed because of Wikileaks.

But they forgot that Wikileaks already told the World that the Pentagon didn't care about those people they are now pretending to care about because if they did, they would accepted the request to remove names from the papers.

The blood is on the hands of the Pentagon if anyone dies as a result of those documents. But the Pentagon says no one has died. They have to say that because they know that THEY will be blamed if anyone does die.

So, where were YOU when all this was going on?

You are repeating, inadvertently I'm sure, rightwing talking points.

[whatchamacallit]

30. Bullshit

I've seen your posts defending civilian deaths (murders) at the hands of the US military. I cheer nothing about war, especially illegal, hegemonic-resource, wars.

[NJmaverick]

34. I don't defend murder, while you are more than willing to falsely

accuse our soldiers of such a heinous crime. Another difference

[bertman]

51. Anyone who doesn't know that our soldiers MURDER civilians is an idiot

who has never been an infantryman in a war.

"falsely accuse our soldiers of such a heinous crime". Really. Are you familiar with Winter Soldier, NJmaverick?

[d_b]

52. shit gimmick is shit

how is this twat still around?

[Hawkowl]

38. He defends all sorts of right wing policies

Don't take it personally. He's shilling for the radical right wing of the Democratic Party. At least that is the kindest way to put it.

[Swamp Rat]

39. Yes, most DUers know this by now.

Take anything that poster says for granted.

[Luminous Animal]

21. Still no evidence that any innocents were killed.

[NJmaverick]

26. Are you suggesting the Taliban had too much respect for human live

so they didn't kill any of the informants or their families once WikiLeaks pointed them out?

[Luminous Animal]

32. Are you suggesting that the Pentagon is lying?

[NJmaverick]

33. You're playing word games. Not having evidence is not the same as

something not happening.

[Luminous Animal]

37. Not having evidence is not the same as something happening.

You affirm, with zero evidence, that innocents have been killed. I though liberals rejected truthiness.

[Forkboy]

43. For someone who claims to love FACTS, he has yet to present any.

[Luminous Animal]

47. Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts!

It is that performance art Fox News line between truth and truthiness.

[Cid_B]

31. Way to cheer for coalition and civilian deaths...

Bravo... really... yeah.. whatever...

[NJmaverick]

36. I am condemning the deaths of innocents

you should stop cheering and condemn them as well.

[elias7]

7. I wouldn't mind seeing some of that 9/11 stuff leaked

I bet eyes would be opened...

[HughMoran]

9. Where were they during Bushco?

Oh that's right, Bush would have had him killed.

[Luminous Animal]

13. When did Wikileaks receive these documents?

[SugarShack]

41. Good question...

[Joanne98]

14. Where's the state department memos?

[L0oniX]

20. Doesn't matter. The prosecution of war criminals is not going to happen.

Only regular criminals get prosecuted.

[Codeine]

23. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. nt

[USArmyParatrooper]

48. I see, and what did the last 92,000 documents "disinfect"

It's a lovely platitude, though.

[SkyDaddy7]

28. DOES ANYONE KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION...

First, This is good news and I am glad he is working with multiple media sources around the world...Hopefully any innocent names will be blocked from going public.

OK...Does anyone know if all this information is from that one kid who is currently in a military prison or is all this info from multiple leaks??

I honestly hope this info is coming from multiple leaks within the US Military...Any thoughts, opinions or creditable answers with sources?

[USArmyParatrooper]

50. hopefully...

Hopefully any innocent names and anything that can be used against Coalition forces will be redacted and....

Hopefully monkeys are going to fly out of my ass.

"I honestly hope this info is coming from multiple leaks within the US Military"

Yes, because having asshats in our ranks working against the troops is a good thing.

[SkyDaddy7]

55. First, I am a VERY PROUD Disabled Vet!

What I am very sick of is being lied to over and over! At some point there needs to be light shed on what is going on! I said I hoped that the proper precautions are taken to protect the innocent & troop safety.

Don't try and say I hate the troops or do not care about them...We the People have a right to know exactly where we stand in this on going war!

If you are in fact what your screen name says then I thank you for your service...But do not make the mistake that our commanders are always right & are being honest with we the people! Or have the troops up most safety in mind!

Leaks are not 100% bad or against the troops! Just saying that shows you do not know what history says about leaks! Leaks can be what saves the lives of our brave young men & women on the ground in a long drawn out war with no true objective in mind!

[USArmyParatrooper]

56. You have to look at what we're really talking about

We're not talking about specific leaks about specific, ground breaking incidences. There is no deep throat scenario here. We're talking about the carte blanche release of ALL classified documents they can get their hands on. Everyone here is cheering "woohoo! more documents" without knowing or even caring about what they contain.

And yes, I hope Private Manning spends the rest of his life living in a concrete box with a metal toilet.

[femrap]

40. Great....since

our Press is benign.

[jimlup]

45. Interesting

[pipoman]

54. Hmmm, I wonder where all those Oh so concerned DUers

are who were so afraid of reprisals on US citizens abroad when 1 nut case in rednecksville was threatening to burn a Koran??