"Wikileaks" to unveil it's "biggest leak yet"

#1
Volunteer_Kirby

Volunteer_Kirby

Its not what you think...
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
16,236
Likes
11,865
#1
The international organization Wikileaks has announced that it will be releasing it's largest leak yet, possibly today or this weekend. According to CNN the documents could contain "diplomatic cables", which "could contain highly sensitive information that reveals U.S. negotiating positions and sensitive intelligence as well as confidential views, analyses, instructions and strategy."

Keep in mind any information about the content of the leak that has not been released by Wikileaks is speculative

What are "diplomatic cables"?: communications of the State Department and its embassies, consulates and missions.

According to wikileaks Twitter, the next release is seven times the size of the Afgan War Diary.

The United States has reportedly gone into "damage control mode", so far briefing Congress, Norway, Denmark, Canada, Israel, Australia, Turkey, Iraq, Sweden, Russia, Iceland, Afghanistan, China, Italy, Germany, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Britain, and France about the impending leak.

Founder of Wikileaks Julian Assagne now has a new warrant out for his arrest in Sweden where he has been accused of surprise sex, sexual molestation, and unlawful coercion of two women.

Wikileaks Tweet November 22, 2010: "The coming months will see a new world, where global history is redefined. Keep us strong"

UK Government has issued a "D-notice" warning to all UK news editors, asking to be briefed on upcoming WikiLeaks stories. In Britain, a Defence Advisory Notice or DA-Notice (called a Defence Notice or D-Notice until 1993) is an official request to news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specified subjects for reasons of national security.
The D-notice is a type 1 (Military Operations, Plans & Capabilities) and type 5 (United Kingdom Security & Intelligence Special Services).

11/26 -- “Obviously, the Government has been briefed by US officials, by the US ambassador, as to the likely content of these leaks. I don't want to speculate about precisely what is going to be leaked before it is leaked.” - The Telegraph

11/26 -- "The British government is so worried that last night it issued a D-Notice, warning that publishing the secrets could compromise national security." - The Daily Mail

11/26 -- dawn.com has said WikiLeaks is expected to put 94 documents about Pakistan on its website this weekend. Also, The Washington Post is expected to publish some details from the leaked papers on Sunday.

11/26 -- Founder of Wikileaks quoted from the Daily Izvestia; "We have [compromising materials] about Russia, about your government and businessmen, but not as much as we'd like... We will publish these materials soon."

11/26 -- "A source at Wikileaks said that the website was "proceeding with caution, as always" with regard to the details it would put into the public domain, suggesting that some form of redaction would be used." -The Independent




Sure sounds like they have caught something big. They hint at what seems to be large scale political corruption. Perhaps it may compromise our national security and many may claim to resent the leak because of it, but if is bringing to light major political corruption then surely a leak of this (potential) magnitude deserves much respect, attention, and careful questioning. This is all speculation on my part, mind you. But to be completely honest I hope this is as big as they make it out to be. I mean, really, aside from political elections I haven't been apart of any mass stand-together in our country in my life. Even if the case of elections it's split. I want to see people stand up, put their foot down, and raise all hell. Riots in the streets! Whose with me!!!??? :loco: :)
 
#2
#2
11/27 -- Government of Iceland has been contacted by US officials over Embassy leaks according to MBL. (source pending)
 
#7
#7
Hm. Looks like we are going to need a Wiki,WikiLeaks to leak WikiLeaks redacted holdings.

Gosh, that's just like big websites to cover up and oppose the free exchange of information.
 
#9
#9
fl0at said:
Hm. Looks like we are going to need a Wiki,WikiLeaks to leak WikiLeaks redacted holdings.

Gosh, that's just like big websites to cover up and oppose the free exchange of information.
Click to expand...


The leak allegedly contains over 1,000,000 documents. It's not as though they said they have the documents but are waiting for the most advantageous to release the documents. No, if you have over a million documents that are set to be released to the public then it's best to release them at once, rather than sporadically as you go through them.
 
#10
#10
How often does Wikileaks release information that is embarrassing or compromises: China, N. Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, the Taliban, Iran, etc. etc. The dude clearly has an agenda is not simply about free flow of information. It is a dangerous game.
 
#11
#11
I've read that some of these leaks involve Turkey helping Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the US helping the Kurds. Really though I hope every government involved brings a world of hurt on these guys.
 
#15
#15
volinbham said:
How often does Wikileaks release information that is embarrassing or compromises: China, N. Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, the Taliban, Iran, etc. etc. The dude clearly has an agenda is not simply about free flow of information. It is a dangerous game.
Click to expand...
An agenda towards the U.S. govt? I did not post this thread to discuss wether or not Wikileaks has a hidden agenda nor to discuss the character of the founder of Wikileaks. I did, however, post the recent allegations that were made against the founder of Wikileaks because it was kind of a big deal. I have no side that I am with. I post this thread because interesting claims are made. If you think Wikileaks is a joke, then I insist you look into more of their findings (most notably the recent 'leaked' video of a US air crew murdering innocent civilians). Accusations against Russia and the Taliban have been reported from this recent leak. We will know more when it is all finally released.

Furthermore I think we have a different understanding of how Wikileaks works. My understanding is that the purpose of Wikileaks is to serve as a publisher for secret or classified documents which are sent to them by persons who wish to ananymously release the information to the public. If it seems like Wikileaks has an agenda towards the US or any specific country, then it is because someone, presumably working closely with that country, got ahold of dirty laundry and then sent it to Wikileaks to sift all through and publish the findings.
 
#16
#16
Volunteer_Kirby said:
An agenda towards the U.S. govt? I did not post this thread to discuss wether or not Wikileaks has a hidden agenda nor to discuss the character of the founder of Wikileaks. I did, however, post the recent allegations that were made against the founder of Wikileaks because it was kind of a big deal. I have no side that I am with. I post this thread because interesting claims are made. If you think Wikileaks is a joke, then I insist you look into more of their findings (most notably the recent 'leaked' video of a US air crew murdering innocent civilians). Accusations against Russia and the Taliban have been reported from this recent leak. We will know more when it is all finally released.

Furthermore I think we have a different understanding of how Wikileaks works. My understanding is that the purpose of Wikileaks is to serve as a publisher for secret or classified documents which are sent to them by persons who wish to ananymously release the information to the public. If it seems like Wikileaks has an agenda towards the US or any specific country, then it is because someone, presumably working closely with that country, got ahold of dirty laundry and then sent it to Wikileaks to sift all through and publish the findings.
Click to expand...

The leak of the "murder" is a prime example. If we are talking about the same thing, WL only released a portion of the tape and labeled it "collateral murder". The full tape showed more justification for the attack and the headline takes a specific (and negative position). It was a crafted story by WL.

WL is not simply passing along classified info; it is selectively passing along certain info to create a narrative against the "powerful" of the world.
 
#17
#17
fl0at said:
I don't think you know what redacted means. Or irony.

Using both those new definitions, re-read my post.
Click to expand...

Well pardon me for misconstruing the meaning of your post! I do appreciate the clarification here. Hmmm, now onto those definitions... "I-run-ee"... Ahh, yes. Here it is! Mmhmmm... Never heard of this one before. Thanks for that, fl0at! :thumbsup:
 
#18
#18
volinbham said:
The leak of the "murder" is a prime example. If we are talking about the same thing, WL only released a portion of the tape and labeled it "collateral murder". The full tape showed more justification for the attack and the headline takes a specific (and negative position). It was a crafted story by WL.

WL is not simply passing along classified info; it is selectively passing along certain info to create a narrative against the "powerful" of the world.
Click to expand...
Perhaps there was more justification. I do not know proper military protocol is those situations. However it did seem to most people like an unjust thing to do. But hey, if anything, that brought more attention to what's really going on down there. Misleading to some and enlightening to others.

I fully understand that they are being selective. They have to. So I don't think we are at a misunderstanding here. People bring documentation to Wikileaks and Wikileaks sifts through it and publishes what they choose. If there is an agenda behind that then who is to know, really? Take it for what it's worth. If something is exposed then perhaps it is for the best, despite whomever the source is !
 
#19
#19
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Thanks for that, fl0at! :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Any time, man.

Replace website with government, and you actually have Wikileak's ideology; that information should be made public.

Yet they redact and cover up things themselves.

I thought it was quite clear; guess I was wrong.
 
#20
#20
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Perhaps there was more justification. I do not know proper military protocol is those situations. However it did seem to most people like an unjust thing to do. But hey, if anything, that brought more attention to what's really going on down there. Misleading to some and enlightening to others.

I fully understand that they are being selective. They have to. So I don't think we are at a misunderstanding here. People bring documentation to Wikileaks and Wikileaks sifts through it and publishes what they choose. If there is an agenda behind that then who is to know, really? Take it for what it's worth. If something is exposed then perhaps it is for the best, despite whomever the source is !
Click to expand...

I disagree with this last statement both in the WL example and philosophically.

Sources and methods are definitely compromised by many of the "leaks". The Afghan stuff could have resulted in many lost lives since it pointed the Taliban directly to likely sources of information.

Philosophically, I disagree with the notion that full exposure of classified information is for the best. Clearly our courts do as well since the notion of classified information is well formed within our legal structure.

At a minimum, Assange is convinced his mission is to "out" certain practices/activities/strategies. I'm always suspicious of anyone with such a singular mission. I doubt he has the right perspective to be the arbiter of whether releasing information does more harm or more good. Given that the vast majority of what he releases is negative about Western power I also question his motivation for "truth".
 
Last edited:
#21
#21
fl0at said:
Any time, man.

Replace website with government, and you actually have Wikileak's ideology; that information sould be made public.

Yet they redact and cover up things themselves.

I thought it was quite clear; guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it's just me but I find it hard to fully understand certain points of view of people on the internet from just one or two sentences, if ya know what I mean. I mean obviously you can't do so all the time. But face to face or word of mouth it's no problem, in fact people tend to be more different with what they say. But on the internet people tend to be subtle in their meaning and aggresive with their stance. Just sayin'!
 
#22
#22
If this dude was an American he would be walking a fine line with treason.

Clearly has an anti-American agenda.
 
#23
#23
volinbham said:
I disagree with this last statement both in the WL example and philosophically.

Sources and methods are definitely compromised by many of the "leaks". The Afghan stuff could have resulted in many lost lives since it pointed the Taliban directly to likely sources of information.

Philosophically, I disagree with the notion that full exposure of classified information is for the best. Clearly our courts do as well since the notion of classified information is well formed within our legal structure.

At a minimum, Assange is convinced his mission is to "out" certain practices/activities/strategies. I'm always suspicious of anyone with such a singular mission. I doubt he has the right perspective to be the arbiter of whether releasing information does more harm or more good. Given that the vast majority of what he releases is negative about Western power I also question his motivation for "truth".
Click to expand...

Oy vey! I should have been more clear for your sake. Save your breath man!

Let me re-phrase that last sentence for ya ; if it uncovers criminal politics or illegal operations then I care not for the source. So long as the information is legitimate and can be proven true, then I focus little on the carrier.
 
#24
#24
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Perhaps it's just me but I find it hard to fully understand certain points of view of people on the internet from just one or two sentences, if ya know what I mean. I mean obviously you can't do so all the time. But face to face or word of mouth it's no problem, in fact people tend to be more different with what they say. But on the internet people tend to be subtle in their meaning and aggressive with their stance. Just sayin'!
Click to expand...

Valid points, my bad.
 
#25
#25
Anyone ever get on the website? I try sometimes and never able to get on. I'm going to wikileaks.org is this correct?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top