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.

 

Pentagon to Troops: Taliban Can Read WikiLeaks, You Can't

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Pentagon to Troops: Taliban Can Read WikiLeaks, You Can't


www.wired.com

Any citizen, any foreign spy, any member of the Taliban, and any terrorist can go to the WikiLeaks web site, and download detailed information about how the U.S. military waged the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2009. Members of that same military, however, are now banned from looking at those internal military documents. “Doing so would introduce potentially classified information on unclassified networks,” according to one directive issued by the armed forces.

That cry you hear? It’s commo
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   


UPDATE: “Take ‘wikileaks’ out of your headlines,” one Army contractor e-mails Danger Room. The web filter “has been updated to block anything with wikileaks in the URL.”

“So, yeah, common sense out the window,” the contractor adds.


First to go......Last to know!

It seems that troops are starting to be looked at as mere machines, people with less and less connection to the outside world.

It doesn't make any sense to have your "alleged" enemies know more than your own army.

The troops can still somehow get this information anyhow, so all this does is make the Pentagon look really stupid.

I just find this really dumb!

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



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
This is routine and it isn't about keeping things from the very people who created it.

Anyone with a clearence isn't allowed to devulge any classified information, even if it had been leaked to the public. This is something a lot of people with clearences have a tough time remembering.

This is standard OpSec and InfoSec for just about any military organization.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
The definition of classified: available only to authorized persons; confidential, secret

Because the information is now in the public domain, it has essentially been 'declassified' whether the military wants to admit it or not. Unless they want to re-define the word "classified" the information that was leaked no longer qualifies by the current definition to be categorized as "classified information."



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
This is now Public Domain surely?

Just shows how ill-thought out Opsec and Infosec really is.

Dumber than a bag of hammers.

Besides it doesn't take a genius to know the Taliban have a state/states funding them, look at how much it costs for bullets and rpg's.

I seem to recollect that the head of Pakistani ISI has to be approved by the US as well, which is also public knowledge.

Just what is need to know, who's need to know what? the selected people at the top of intelligence would like to keep everyone in the dark like a good mushroom, but then some-one opens the door a crack and the light shines onto the ugly truth.

Compartmentalization and need to know is more about protecting the puppet masters than any secret operational info or tech.
Any Taliban with a pair of binoculars can deduce troop sizes,weapons etc etc.
This is just TPTB abusing secrecy for profits made from a phony war.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Sorry... have I missed something? What are the US troops fighting for again? Freedom? How ironic!

IRM



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by new_here
The definition of classified: available only to authorized persons; confidential, secret

Because the information is now in the public domain, it has essentially been 'declassified' whether the military wants to admit it or not. Unless they want to re-define the word "classified" the information that was leaked no longer qualifies by the current definition to be categorized as "classified information."

They have redefined it according to their operational needs. So it does in-fact make the information classified in regards to military personnel as that is the only relevence to this topic: military personnel aren't allowed to view wikileaks by the military.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 
Current logistics information is always classified. Current specific intel on what we know about our enemies are almost always classified.

Surely you can see how this promotes a tactical advantage.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaxxon
Current logistics information is always classified. Current specific intel on what we know about our enemies are almost always classified.

Surely you can see how this promotes a tactical advantage.


Dude, right now the entire planet has access to these files.

Surely you can see how allowing the enemy to have this knowledge but not your own troops might promote a tactical advantage to the enemy?

These files are far from classified, they are so declassified that it couldn't be more declassified.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by Zaxxon
Current logistics information is always classified. Current specific intel on what we know about our enemies are almost always classified.

Surely you can see how this promotes a tactical advantage.


Dude, right now the entire planet has access to these files.

Surely you can see how allowing the enemy to have this knowledge but not your own troops might promote a tactical advantage to the enemy?

These files are far from classified, they are so declassified that it couldn't be more declassified.

What tactical advantage does it provide to a troop in the field? It doesn't.
And it isn't the military's or the government's definition of declassified. Its an exercise of procedure. Basically, because some intel slipped out that is still classified by the military per the government's definition of classification but is released into the wild does not mean that troops should see it, possibly elaborate further on details or even think that stuff that is still not leaked is not classified as it was relevant to the leaked material.

Obviously the Pentagon is trying to ensure no further knowledge is revealed.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaxxon
 


Yeah i know what your saying but i refer to my previous post...

Any Taliban with a pair of binoculars can understand troop movements and weapons deployed.

And sometimes letting your enemies know what you know can be very useful if you are able to watch the reactions.

It is my opinion that this info was "allowed" to leak so the rats can be tracked back to their nest's.

I expect the "traffic" to be "white hot" right now and the preplanned implosion to be underway.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 
I won't argue that point. You could very well be right.

Just as far as banning troops from wikileaks, I find it a reasonable and predictable. I doubt you'll hear any troops speaking out against this action even after they leave.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   
The information is like so open like "Hit the monkey" ads and its banned to the troops ?
LOL and another LOL

Pentagon now sounds more like China, filtering the net.

Obviously there are "something" in that leaked info that would change the troop. Its like hiding an aeroplane in the sky ...and in the middle of desert.

I wonder what and why Pentagon so scared that it need to hide from the troop.
I hope the cat also bite the bait.

[edit on 6-8-2010 by RainCloud]



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
When I was in the military, posted on the wall of the barracks was a notice that said:

No personnel allowed to go to these addresses in town. We will be inspecting these facilities to make certain no military personnel are there on these dates...

These were of course the local "message parlors" and oddly enough no one was ever caught going there.

I think by "forbidding" these topics they have ensured that people that normally wouldn't even read a paper will be seeking this special information out.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaxxon
Obviously the Pentagon is trying to ensure no further knowledge is revealed.


I guess I might could believe this, were it not that the New York Times got permission from the White House before publishing what was leaked, further getting it out into circulation (in case someone who doesn't have Internet missed it the first time!)

I really don't mean to be sarcastic, but I just feel so incredulous about this whole thing, the way its been handled. It just stinks to highheavens. Please don't think my exasperation is for you. I think your post honors a deep trust in their intentions. I am sad that I do feel that. Keep the faith, for both of us, Zax!

[edit on 8/7/2010 by new_here]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nicenico
I think by "forbidding" these topics they have ensured that people that normally wouldn't even read a paper will be seeking this special information out.


Wow, talk about 'Insider Information,' Nicenico, I just never even considered that! You just turned my brain on end...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


This story made me wonder really what the heck is going on. We want to silence a legal website that is attempting to tell the truth. Then we have entire media stations promoting islamic jihad getting reports directly from the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Yet we do not shut those down do we?




top topics



 
8

log in

join