It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A quote from the DoD report published on the 15th that deserves particular emphasis:

page: 1
123
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+78 more 
posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:03 PM
link   
THIS IS FROM THE DOD REPORT ON THE 15TH
"The identification, exposure, termination of employment, criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistlblowers could potentially damage, or destroy this center of gravity and deter others considering similar actions from using the Wikileaks.org Web site."


This is a prime example of our own government ruining the lives of brave people who do what they know is right to hide their heinous misdeeds and keep people in fear of speaking out, even anonomously, when they know they should. This outright disgusts me.




posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
trueslant.com...

Here is the link



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


This is probably the most important story on the board right now. We should all be following these events very closely.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Great find for sure!! I agree, this thread needs to be flagged up there for all to see. Thanks for posting it. S & F



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


This is probably the most important story on the board right now. We should all be following these events very closely.


Agreed. This is one of the most important topics of this year.

Any government suggesting things like this should immediately be called into question before the communities it puports to "govern".



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by dampnickers
 


The aggressive persecution of individuals who speak out against injustice would never be in the interest of any government for the people. Especially one who is supposed to provide "liberty and justice for all". Only a proponent of injustice would benefit from using tactics like these.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by devildogUSMC
THIS IS FROM THE DOD REPORT ON THE 15TH
"The identification, exposure, termination of employment, criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders...


Not to downplay the issue or anything, but these actions are probably stated very clearly in the nondisclosure/topsecret clearance forms that these people had to sign to get these "insider" jobs. I'm not saying that I agree with it, but that's the breaks.

There will always be whistleblowers who stick their neck out when they feel the information is worth more than their job. And if I was a federal prosecutor, I would overlook breaking a contract if they could provide concrete evidence of serious wrong-doings.

Anyway, bottom line: Not surprised.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Who can forget this 'gem' from J. Edgar Hoover regarding Martin Luther King:

"He may be a real contender for this position should he
abandon his supposed obediance to white liberal doctrine
of non-violence...and embrace black nationalism'
'Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to
pinpoint potential trouble-makers... and neutralize them."
whatreallyhappened.com...

[edit on 3/25/2010 by this_is_who_we_are]

[edit on 3/25/2010 by this_is_who_we_are]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Most prosecutors do look the other way if the operson can prove their story/case/issue/complaint, however its those employers like the DoD, and others both civilian & military that will do whatever to keep this from these folks from ever going public. I remember many years ago a man who worked at Groom Lake filed a lawsuit due to hazardous conditions. He was sick a lot and someone got injured or killed or something like that. Anyway, he had to become a whistleblower to get his lawsuit heard in a courtroom because a Judge in Vegas kept throwing it out per the request of the Fed citing "top secret" concerns. He did win too.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   
They take out who they want, when they want. And there's pretty much nothing we can do about it. To paraphrase Dennis Leary: "They have the bombs."



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Great find OP! Mods, can we get this on the front page?



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is here, the DOD of course would be concerned about leaked documents and the like.

I think the conclusion sums it up much better than what I can write:


It must be presumed that Wikileaks.org has or will receive sensitive or classified DoD documents in the future. This information will be published and analyzed over time by a variety of personnel and organizations with the goal of influencing US policy. In addition, it must also be presumed that foreign adversaries will review and assess any DoD sensitive or classified information posted to the Wikileaks.org Web site. Web sites similar to Wikileaks.org will continue to proliferate and will continue to represent a potential force protection, counterintelligence, OPSEC, and INFOSEC threat to the US Army for the foreseeable future.

Sensitive or classified information posted to Wikileaks.org could potentially reveal the capabilities and vulnerabilities of US forces, whether stationed in CONUS or deployed overseas.

The proliferation of access to Internet, computer, and information technology technical skills, software, tools, and databases will allow the rapid development, merging, integration, and manipulation of diverse documents, spreadsheets, multiple databases, and other publicly available or leaked information. Possible enhancements could increase the risk to US forces and could potentially provide potential attackers with sufficient information to plan conventional or terrorist attacks in locations such as Iraq or Afghanistan.


Emphasis by me.

file....__._/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
I'm sorry I couldn't resist posting this as it is how I feel about this issue and just might lighten the mood around here.




posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


Most people seem to forget that simple truth. Just look at the conspiracy theorists that have died under strange circumstances. Don't forget Kennedy. They even take out their own if they feel the need. You don't have to look any further than Sam Giancana or Barry Seal to see that.

Joe Wilson was spared but look at what they did to his wife. Valerie Plame will never be able to live free of fear again.

I agree that trying to destroy Wikileaks seems a bit tyrannical. However, how do we balance the need for soldier safety against the idea of full disclosure? Would Wikileaks avoid publishing something that would threaten national security or troop safety?


Edit
I ran it through word for a clean up.

[edit on 25-3-2010 by MikeNice81]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
I thought the reason Wikileaks is being targeted was because they have info on the government shooting journalists:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


Wikileaks does not just obtain and release any classified or secret document it can get it's hands on just for the sake of doing so. Most whistleblowers or leakers are taking a tremendous personal risk and are almost always in a worse situation after they do it; they aren't giving away troop positions, or leaking anything about legal actions. These people are standing up to injustice and Wikileaks is a place for them to make their stand and have it actually reach people and achieve something.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyinthemiddle
 


I would venture a guess that anytime that a law is broken, the NDA is not binding. I could be wrong, and judges are known to side with the government when it comes to trampling the rule of law by intelligence orgs.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


I am pretty sure your "gem" is from J. Edgar Hoover who was head of the FBI. Not former president Herbert Hoover.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


I am pretty sure your "gem" is from J. Edgar Hoover who was head of the FBI. Not former president Herbert Hoover.


Thank you Emery, now back to the game...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   
The document is from 2008.
also, I don't see what is wrong with the U.S. trying to protect its people against sensitive military information being leaked out by some Euro trash in Iceland and the damm terrorizers getting it.



new topics

top topics



 
123
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join