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.

 

Wikileaks discussed on State Department Press Briefing

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Wikileaks discussed on State Department Press Briefing


www.state.gov

QUESTION: I take you to a subject you, I think, last commented on Monday, which is the WikiLeaks investigation, the release of or compromising of State Department documents. Is the State Department doing a damage assessment?


MR. CROWLEY: Well, we are doing a damage assessment. I think also today, Diplomatic Security is assisting in forensic analysis of the hard drives that – to just determine, to verify that, in fact, the leak took place, and also to see if we can identify which documents within the network were potentially compromised.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   
The "260.00 cable" case, being discussed at briefing.. However they havent contacted Wikileaks directly, and are instead going after the leaker/hero.
More from source:
QUESTION: Is that a hard drive of Manning?


QUESTION: Which hard drives?


QUESTION: Yeah.


QUESTION: More than one?


MR. CROWLEY: Yeah.


QUESTION: In Baghdad?


MR. CROWLEY: They’ve been brought here.


QUESTION: They’ve been brought here to Washington?


MR. CROWLEY: Yeah, taken to Washington.


QUESTION: And it is more than one?


MR. CROWLEY: I want to say it’s more than one, yeah.


QUESTION: I had another question on the same subject. On Monday, it was a little hard to tell from your response to various questions just how grave a concern there is about release of this information. Is it of the nature of extremely sensitive information? Is it more along the lines of diplomatic awkwardness that this information would get out?


MR. CROWLEY: Well, Bob, at the time, and I’ll certainly repeat, that we are talking about classified cables. Classifications involve both the substance of cables and also sources and methods that can be revealed through the release, the unauthorized release of classified material. We take this seriously. Any release of classified material to those who are not entitled to have it is a serious breach of our security and can cause potential damage to our national security interests.


There’s been a – kind of a report of a very large number of documents or pages. We’re obviously trying to verify exactly what might have exchanged hands here. And we are doing a damage assessment to verify the disclosure or the leak and to identify what documents of the State Department may have been potentially compromised.


If you’re taking that large a number, it’s going to probably capture a wide range of different documents. We do cables that provide our analysis of ongoing events in the region, but obviously of greatest concern is sources and methods which we rely on when providing insight to decision makers on what’s happening around the world.


www.state.gov
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
To sum it up:

- the cables have information that details

    - informant names
    - the location of bugs and listening devices
    - holes in other diplomatic areas that are exploited by the US
    - the identity of US intelligence operatives



- the cables contain information that would be very embarassing for not just individuals, but the entire State Department enterprise, likely predating this current administration as well.

- the cables discuss what are likely somewhat classified, yet not Top Secret strategies and technologies in relation to future planning or post mortem analysis.

Is there anything else missing?

BTW, the whole idea of "National Security" has become a fearsome hydra. We must find a way to kill it and replace it with at least a dragon, with only 1 head.



[edit on 14-6-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I don't like how this discussion has become all about exposing national security secrets and how Manning was such an awful person for doing it. I mean most of the things that are there don't really look like they would really harm our national security. What do we have to hide? Are the diplomatic communications that Manning had really that embarrassing? I think that these kinds of things should be open to the public for a review of how the administration has been handling foreign affairs- and we should know what they do- rather than constantly guess all the time about these things.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Also- it is said that the guy that turned Mannings in worked for wikileaks (if I'm not mistaken). Could Wikileaks be a front for the CIA or some government agency? Wikileak's purpose is to expose government secrets- in this case it could have kept all of them and not even bothered to turn the guy in at all. I really don't see why Wikileaks did it. I'm starting to doubt their legitimacy as an agency. Is anyone else?



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Yes there is.... This DOES include Top Secret information... And I'll tell you why...


In the wired article chat logs of manning and lamo... Manning said he had access to both SIPRNET .... AND JWICS!!!!!!



In other words, the JWICS is the DoD’s Top Secret version of the Internet together with its Secret counterpart, SIPRNet.



[edit on 14-6-2010 by HunkaHunka]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Also- it is said that the guy that turned Mannings in worked for wikileaks (if I'm not mistaken). Could Wikileaks be a front for the CIA or some government agency? Wikileak's purpose is to expose government secrets- in this case it could have kept all of them and not even bothered to turn the guy in at all. I really don't see why Wikileaks did it. I'm starting to doubt their legitimacy as an agency. Is anyone else?


No frank.
Adrian Lamo does not work for wikileaks.
look it up.
doh!

I posted a link to a documentary (unreleased until now, made in 2003)
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That talks to Adrian lamo allot, [half of it is about him] he is the guy who turned in Manning~
and he has nothing to do with wikileaks.

so, you are mistaken.


[edit on 14-6-2010 by Ahmose]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Yes there is.... This DOES include Top Secret information... And I'll tell you why...


In the wired article chat logs of manning and lamo... Manning said he had access to both SIPRNET .... AND JWICS!!!!!!



In other words, the JWICS is the DoD’s Top Secret version of the Internet together with its Secret counterpart, SIPRNet.



[edit on 14-6-2010 by HunkaHunka]


I get that. I totally get that. And i sure don't want to have Putin driving a tank onto the North Lawn anymore than anyone else.

But it seems to be that we have a lot of manufactured threats. By "manufactured' i refer not only to the phony false flags that keeps us all having puckered buttholes. I also refer to the interactions we have had with the rest of the world, and the basic reason for their ire (Google the phrase "North African Cotton Subsidies" to get an idea, if you don't already know).

I would be willing to bet that if we were able to manage our government properly, we could reduce the number of "threats" to our "national security" by a power of 100.

I would also like to point out that the term "Top Secret" and "National Security" have become catch all phrases used to hide doings, be they right or wrong, by our "handlers".

BTW, what i meant when i said "Top Secret", i refer to the stuff that is hidden in places like LANL. Weapons tech, etc. I apologize for mistating.




top topics



 
3

log in

join