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.

 

The wikileaks release timetable

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
A major story broke here in Australia with wikileaks recent cablegate.



New embassy cables, released by WikiLeaks to Fairfax newspapers today, reveal the influential right-wing Labor MP has been one of the embassy's best ALP informants, along with former frontbencher Bob McMullan and current MP Michael Danby. The documents say the Minister for Sport had been secretly offering details of Labor's inner workings even before his election to the Senate in 2007, dating back to his time as general secretary of the party's NSW branch from 2004. Senator Arbib was one of the "faceless men" who was instrumental in the decision to oust Kevin Rudd and install Julia Gillard as Prime Minister in June.


Full story www.theaustralian.com.au...

The thing is, after extensive searching I have not been able to find the cables that detail these events. I am aware that 4 major newspapers around the world got a copy of the cables to help in there checking and distribution. I am just trying to do my due diligence and something does not seam quite right. Did Fairfax jump the gun with the releases trying to build public support for wikileaks? Are any other newspapers printing stories of yet to be released cables? Is their a bigger coordinated plan in play for the UFO and other cables? or am I just too paranoid and lousy at cablegate searches? Any other ideas?




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
There have been some fake cables created and passed around which wikileaks have stepped up to mention they are not true wiki cables.

If you cant find it on wikileaks website its fake...end.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


OK cool, but where is the release timetable you speak of in thread title? cheers



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by phatpackage
 


That is the question...



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by misfitofscience
 





If you cant find it on wikileaks website its fake...end.


The thing is, this is not fake. The Ministers involved have admitted to the relationship all over the tv. No Denials.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Firstly, I did click on this thread because I have been looking for a timetable of releases, even just when the next one is due, so where is it like the title says ??

That said, I think this Arbib union thug needs to be put in front of a judge. I have NO problem with our alliance with the US, BUT, I do not think (as you say, he has admitted to on All TV here) he should be spilling our national secrets to ANYONE.

This union thug needs to be brought up on charges of being a traitor, something, anything for giving away national secrets. It was a horrific idea to vote in Labor with all its union ties, & now the minister for SPORT is giving the USA all our goverment secrets. For F*#@ sake, the US knew we were having a PM change before the public did !!!

Union thugs should be kicked out of parliament, out of all public positions. I dont care, they have proven themselves to be thugs & this treason is just 50000 steps too far.

There cant be any doubt that labor will be kicked out of office at the soonest possible chance. Whitlam got sacked (the only one before these union thugs got into power) because he questioned what the CIA Pine Gap base was all about, why cant we sack the lowly sports minister for treason ??? I say we sack the entire labor govt & go to the polls again. I can live with another election if it means we get rid of these treasonous union thugs.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by kwakakev
 


OK cool, but where is the release timetable you speak of in thread title? cheers


Go here and see the list of releases :- 213.251.145.96...
or you can search :-cablesearch.org...
The search website is in beta mode.
edit on 16-12-2010 by 1Starman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by phatpackage
 


That is the question...


If you are going to pose a heading as a question try using a question mark, you know one of these "?"

So you do not deceive people with fake headlines & wasting peoples' time.

It makes your thread come across as a very pathetically researched thread simply by leaving out that very simple symbol.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:42 AM
link   
I can see how the heading can be a bit misleading, this was not my intention but it is difficult to get the point across with just a few words. I apologizes to all the people who think that I have the answers, I don't and is why I posted this thread to help find them. Some people on this site have demonstrated very astute thinking and resounding resourcefulness in sorting out the facts from the fiction.

With the strong repercussions these leaks are having it is very important that it is all above board and handled with integrity. I have spent many hours reading and searching through this and would not have made this post unless I was at a dead end. There is a lot of debate going on as to legitimacy, source and motivation of these leaks with a lot a stake. I find concerning that a major newspaper has referenced cable documents before the public has had access to them. This is point I have been trying to make and encourage discussion about.

So what I know so far, wikileaks got about 250 000 cable documents from somewhere. Wikileaks has then passed these documents on to 4 major newspapers around the world. It is reasonable to assume that this is all the raw data received due the time it would take to process and remove sources and other very sensitive bits. There appears to be some collaboration between wikileaks and the newspapers in processing and releasing these documents, however this relationship has not been made very clear. Any information on this would be appreciated.

In the end it may turn out to be nothing really sinister, however after the lessons from 9/11 it is important to not let those little inconsistencies quickly go.



edit on 16-12-2010 by kwakakev because: changed 'I consider' to 'it is'



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
One paper that goes into it a bit more news.yahoo.com...



Unlike earlier disclosures by WikiLeaks of tens of thousands of secret government records, the group is releasing only a trickle of documents at a time from a trove of a quarter-million, and only after considering advice from five news organizations with which it chose to share all of the material.




The media outlets agreed to work together, with about 120 journalists in total working on the project, at times debating which names of people cited in the documents could be published.


From another source cablesearch.org...



It seems that some documents are pulled back, then redacted, and come back in a different form.


It does look like there is a lot of peer review and debate going on from the media with wikileaks making the final decision as to what they release, subject to change. With about 2 weeks into this saga and not even 1% of cables released this is going to be a long road ahead. While Fairfax media has not been directly identified as a media collaborator with cablegate, it looks like wikileaks is suffering from it own leaks as some in the industry find it just too juicy to wait through this extensive peer review process. This is further enforced by more media reports here in Australia today about cablegate and our boarder policy, while these cables are yet to be released by wikileaks.

It is refreshing to see the media here taking a proactive role.




top topics



 
0

log in

join