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 Iraq Cache More Than Three Times As Big

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   

WikiLeaks Iraq Cache More Than Three Times As Big


www.newsweek.com

The cache of classified U.S. military reports on the Iraq War as yet unreleased by WikiLeaks may be more than three times as large as the set of roughly 76,000 similar reports on the war in Afghanistan made public

According to one of the sources, the Iraq material portrays U.S. forces being involved in a "bloodbath," but some of the most disturbing material relates to the abusive treatment of detainees not by Americans but by Iraqi security forces

WikiLeaks is said to have an additional 15
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I think that what Assange is doing is important, I also find it interesting that some of the details is bad conduct by Iraqi Officials. I think that alone will help curb the "Assange should be charged on Treason" despite him not being an american.

But anyhow I will say that something is weird here, if he's not releasing anything damning then why put himself in the epicenter of the radar of tptb?
Why not wait until something big is to be released?

Makes no sense!

And watch this


How the hell is MSNBC on it?
They are giving Wikileaks props?

MSNBC is the fox news of the left with a dem in power.
Not that that makes a difference but you know what i mean.

www.newsweek.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


If you want to maintain the illusion of a free press, you have to jump on the bandwagons with everyone else. And, it already seems to me that Obama's administration is trying to turn the leaks into proof we need to escalate our commitment. (which he has been hinting at anyway)

Whats being overlooked by everyone is the "war crimes" aspect that seemed important to both Manning and Assange.

deoxy.org...


Article 51: Protection of the Civilian Population

1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.
2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
1. those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
2. those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
3. those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
1. an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and
2. an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
6. Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited.
7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
8. Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57.


Here in the US we are used to being able to do really anything we want, against anyone we want. But, its really just not in line with protocol to be killing 90 people 60 of whom are children because we think a target is in the area, using weaponry that cannot target that individual at the exclusion of nearly 100 civilians. Not according to the above, anyway, if these mean anything.

I dont think many people know or care what rules of combat people agreed to years ago, nor does our press regularly bring them up, when we are violating them. But we wouldnt say "war is hell" like some do, if the people we are bombing suddenly started killing our children indiscriminately. Its easy to flip off comments like "its a war..........thats what happens." When it isnt happening to you.

I think Manning must have really felt that the civilian deaths would move people. And, clearly, he was wrong.

Assange is sort of honor bound to release the leaks. Manning sacrificed a lot to leak them. And while I do think Assange also assumed people would be horrified at the recklessness with which innocent life is being taken, I think he is an idealist. I think he must believe that somehow evil people have taken charge of good people, and I dont.

I think, unfortunately, that the leaders we have do represent the wishes of many people here in the US. Not that what is being done is to our benefit, in any way, but in that many of the people here would be more than willing to act just as ruthlessly and viciously to promote their own self interest as our leaders do.

So that even though our leaders are not acting in our best interests, they are acting like most of us would, in their position. Which is a shame, to me. I wanted to believe that we were tricked by evil geniuses too, but the evidence seems to contradict that theory.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Perhaps because American media outlets are realizing that the days of good night and good luck are coming back. For nearly a decade, the military have tried to control the media reports coming from Iraq and Afghanistan. Independent journalism from these war zones hasn't existed. It has been based on embedded journalists and filtered reports form the military. This strategy has been very successful, but to the detriment of good journalism.

In one sense, Wikileaks has been a beacon for bringing to light the news stories other papers and tv stations have been afraid to. It is alleged that the Washington Post had access to the Apache helicopter video long before Wikileaks and a reporter their made mention to that event in a book written and published before the leak.

And for the idea Assange should be tried for treason, well that one made me laugh. Utter tosh!



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   
when asked in an interview earlier how he was funded Assange said regular people donating and journalists. i think theirs allot of journo's out there that are happy with what he's doing I'm sure allot of them would love to be able to report this stuff but there restricted to what they can put out. in my opinion this could be the beginning of the end for our occupation. there wasn't much support for the war is it was but this could be the nail in the coffin that gets the people of our country's demanding we pull out. i wonder what the troops think of this and it may even spur a few more on to talk about whats really going on over there.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Oh goody, more material for the Obama administration to use for political gain.

Hurry up will ya wikileaks, the elections will be soon.




posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Will be particularly interesting if these Iraqi officials still have positions in power in the current Iraq Government.

I think that the release of the whole Aghanistan document was a bad move, they should have been in a few parts to make it more managable for the media, and the public. People including me have no attention span these days. It would have gained attention if it had been released in relation to severity. This would serialise nicely for most people.

It would have been good to keep the focus on Afghanistan over a period of months not weeks. Now that it is all out at once it will be out of the limelight in a couple weeks or even days. Then there will be a new flavour of the month. Perhaps there is so much more to come that wikileaks couldn't delay the release.


[edit on 27-7-2010 by Big Raging Loner]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Big Raging Loner
 


i know what you mean like the way they releasd the mp's expenses. put out a little bit more every day!



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
NOW that would be a damn interesting read.

Fallujah, bombing of the UN building, abductions, Blackwater....

No doubt, this guy is the Ellsberg of our times.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Oh goody, more material for the Obama administration to use for political gain.

Hurry up will ya wikileaks, the elections will be soon.


How does this in any way help Obama?
The reports go all the way to december of 09.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Oh goody, more material for the Obama administration to use for political gain.

Hurry up will ya wikileaks, the elections will be soon.


How does this in any way help Obama?
The reports go all the way to december of 09.


Oh I don't know, maybe something like this...


Barack Obama today said the disclosures about the mishandling of the Afghanistan war contained in leaked US military documents justified his decision to embark on a new strategy.

But he went on to say that the material, which catalogues a series of blunders, revealed the challenges that led him to announce late last year a change in strategy that involved sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.
www.guardian.co.uk...


And maybe this...


In a statement, the White House said the chaotic picture painted by the logs was the result of "under-resourcing" under Obama's predecessor, saying: "It is important to note that the time period reflected in the documents is January 2004 to December 2009."


Just maybe, eh?




posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Oh goody, more material for the Obama administration to use for political gain.

Hurry up will ya wikileaks, the elections will be soon.


How does this in any way help Obama?
The reports go all the way to december of 09.


Oh I don't know, maybe something like this...


Barack Obama today said the disclosures about the mishandling of the Afghanistan war contained in leaked US military documents justified his decision to embark on a new strategy.

But he went on to say that the material, which catalogues a series of blunders, revealed the challenges that led him to announce late last year a change in strategy that involved sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.
www.guardian.co.uk...


And maybe this...


In a statement, the White House said the chaotic picture painted by the logs was the result of "under-resourcing" under Obama's predecessor, saying: "It is important to note that the time period reflected in the documents is January 2004 to December 2009."


Just maybe, eh?


To me that looks like the white house trying to do damage control of over 5 years of abuse treatment.

Or sure, wikileaks is somehow a government arm that's trying to make people like obama by showing the U.S military to be the thugs they are.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


The current regime has found it beneficial to constantly blame everything on the former, it helped them win support in winning the election, and it may help them now. Obama was opposed to war and warned that when he was president he would see that any and all war crimes would be prosecuted, but apparently it is better to build a convenient case in the news media via controlled leaks to wikileaks.

It is simply a controlled leak to wikileaks intended as a political ploy for the Obama administration, and for an overall antiwar agenda.

Recent high profile leaks are clearly intended to be anti-USA anti-war, and portray the former administration as war criminals.

I would bet you that the ultimate sources are within the current Obama administration. Impossible to prove, but I believe it to be true.

wikileaks and Assange could either be co-operating with an agenda, or a part of it. Hard to say for sure either way.

I know what wikileaks isn't and that could be dangerous to anyone who attempts to leak sensitive materials to them.

In my opinion, of course.


[edit on 27-7-2010 by Fractured.Facade]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


The current regime has found it beneficial to constantly blame everything on the former, it helped them win support in winning the election, and it may help them now. Obama was opposed to war and warned that when he was president he would see that any and all war crimes would be prosecuted, but apparently it is better to build a convenient case in the news media via controlled leaks to wikileaks.

It is simply a controlled leak to wikileaks intended as a political ploy for the Obama administration, and for an overall antiwar agenda.

Recent high profile leaks are clearly intended to be anti-USA anti-war, and portray the former administration as war criminals.

I would bet you that the ultimate sources are within the current Obama administration. Impossible to prove, but I believe it to be true.

wikileaks and Assange could either be co-operating with an agenda, or a part of it. Hard to say for sure either way.

I know what wikileaks isn't and that could be dangerous to anyone who attempts to leak sensitive materials to them.

In my opinion, of course.


[edit on 27-7-2010 by Fractured.Facade]

I agree, the current administration blames alot on the former, it's a classic move.

What I don't agree with, is how you assume this is a controlled release, do you have any actual evidence?

I don't think the leaks are meant to be anti-war, but just happened to show how disgusting war is. Are you telling me we should be pro-war? The former administration WERE war criminals. I don't know what's with the sudden love of the fromer administration it seems. Both Obama AND Bush are pawns of a much larger game.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


You know while I enjoy your writing and thorough explanation of your opinions. Your opions always seem to speak to acceptance of the fascist controlled entity we have become.

Yet despite all the illusory propaganda a great deal of us still exist, what you so hastily dismiss as "idealists". People that will not do others harm in order to advance our agenda. The true heart of society. Perhaps you think all Americans have lost their heart but I am here to tell you that isn't true.

The vast majority of those thar know about this do care yet have no ability to impose a civil code on their rulers, nor can they enforce the laws in the face of special interests.

The majority does not rule, a select class of classic psychopaths rule. This 10% ruling class, yes democracy is a farce so I will continue using the term, this ruling class is devoid of empathy and a sense of fairness. These people perpetuate this sickness until the average person catches the greed disease. They buy into a fascist dreamstate.

Yet even those soulless shells feel for the innocent dying, if, and this is the important part, if its packaged and promoted right.

This is packaged and promoted to further the rulers agenda. So of course the sheeple go bah.

But those in the know are disgusted and sickened, and would NEVER accept illegal acts being perpetuated in our name. I stand amongst them, awake,alert,alive an pissed the snip off!




[edit on 27-7-2010 by ISHAMAGI]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Keep 'em coming man. The best solution to a state gone rouge is a mirror.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
This really is looking more and more like this the modern day equivalent of the Pentagon Papers. This is all aimed at changing public opinion. Its a good theory that the CFR base is probably behind it to undermine the neocon/zionist base.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   
I would rather they leak information on TOP SECRET medical research, possible disease cures, unlimited free energy, or high technology black projects from around the world. Things that may actually change humanity for the better.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join