Slashdot Mirror

First off, I'd like to ask if you believe that the Taliban could just go off and kill someone in village X and say that "THE LEAKED DOCUMENTS TOLD US OF AN INFORMER HERE" with no basis in reality. If you believe they can, then the Taliban could do a twofold fear based strategy here. Both A: It makes the people of Afghanistan less likely to trust the Americans due to fear that they'll be ousted in leaked reports (even if they really weren't) and B: The American people will hold the gubbermints or possibly Assange as the ones at fault for causing this to happen, making an unpopular war even more unpopular.

Now, let me glimpse through the documents.

USSF FINDS CACHE IN VILLAGE OF WALU TANGAY: USSF CONDUCTED A MEET AND GREET IN THE VILLAGE OF WALU TANGAY. USSF MEMBERS WERE APPROACHED BY A LOCAL BOY WHO SPOKE OF A CACHE IN A CAVE ON A NEARBY HILL. USSF MEMBERS INVESTIGATED AND FOUND A CACHE CONSISTING OF THIRTEEN 82MM MORTAR ROUNDS, SIXTY RPG ROUNDS, FIFTEEN BOXES 12.7X108MM AMMO (85 ROUNDS PER BOX), FIVE BOXES NON-DISINTEGRATING 12.7X108MM LINK, AND ONE DSHK BARREL LOCATED IN A CAVE AT 350107.26N 0705513.00E. USSF CONFISCATED THE AMMO. THE REST WAS BLOWN IN PLACE.

Time to kill the boys of Walu Tangay. ...digging through the website is a pain. Time to check the csv.

IED COMPONENTS SEIZED IN KOWGIANI: USSF WERE ON A PATROL IVO KOWGIANI VILLAGE. THEY WERE ABLE TO MEET WITH THE BORDER POLICE WHO ADVISED USSF THAT THEY HAD INFORMATION ON A SUBJECT CURRENTLY IN POSSESSION OF IEDS. THE BORDER POLICE AND MRF WENT TO THE COMPOUND IVO 42SXD10490032 AND SECURED THE COMPOUND. AFTER THE COMPOUND WAS SECURED THE USSF ASSISTED IN THE SEARCH. ONE SUBJECT WAS DETAINED FOR FURTHER QUESTIONING. ONE RADIO CONTROLLED IED (TWO ICOM RADIOS, ONE MODIFIED AND WATERPROOFED), ONE CASIO WATCH/CIRCUIT BOARD IED, BLASTING CAPS, BATTERIES, AND WHAT IS BELIEVED TO BE SOVIET TNT WERE SEIZED. THE BORDER AND LOCAL POLICE FORCES ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR ONE ADDITIONAL SUSPECT.

Time to terrorize border police in Ivo Kowigani.

Also if these generalized witch hunt type things aren't enough, a short search of the docs for "informant" found me this gem.

** DELAYED REPORTING - REPORT DERIVED FROM CEXC REPORT 09/CEXC-A/2353 **

HCT was notified by local informant (Sardon Mohammad) of IED parts buried in a walled orchard. Orchard belonged to Mohammad Sediq, but he was not currently living in area. Sardon Mohammad has provided information on IEDs/UXOs at least 2-3 times in the past. C-IED notified of IED components buried in grape field. Informant lead C-IED and security team to location and uncovered components. Informant handled metal pressure plates (externally) when he dug them out of the ground. EOD team destroyed HME on-site and CEXC collected items. Teams return back to FOB. DNA, picture and slap prints were taken of informant and provided with evidence.

I'd sure hate to be Sardon Mohammad! And remember, this is me using a search for a simple term to look for this. Digging through the entire thing with painstaking time might be quite a bit more productive in getting informant's names.

If you so much as casually browsed the documents you would be hard pressed to not see a 10dig. Why should one make so much effort for you when you obviously make so little for yourself? Ok it's just because I'm grumpy... here ya go. http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/afg/event/2004/06/AFG20040602n14.html

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010

Merrill said he was forced to lie when asked about John Doe or simply refused to answer.

It is moraly corrupt to put someone into the position of having to lie. It does seem to be accepted however — that is why wikileaks is such a great idea.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Israel
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia

There's far less there than the hundreds of entries for the UK or the thousands for the US but wikileaks leaks whatever it gets and if more US citizens are interested in that kind of activism then more US material will end up on there.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Israel
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia

There's far less there than the hundreds of entries for the UK or the thousands for the US but wikileaks leaks whatever it gets and if more US citizens are interested in that kind of activism then more US material will end up on there.

Took me less than 5 minutes to find a name in the Affiliation -> Friend category.
http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/afg/event/2004/01/AFG20040119n2.html
I have to give credit to WL for some nice info organization despite the incompetent redaction.

My condolences to the Gorbez tribe for whatever violence that may (or may already have) come their way from the Taliban. While I doubt it was their intention to aid the US special forces in any way -- probably wanted to be left alone by all sides and were just cooperating to avoid any trouble and to get the strangers with guns to leave asap -- the fact that they communicated peacefully with US forces is likely enough justification for retribution in the eyes of the Taliban.

Also, you should spend at least 5 minutes searching before resorting to an argumentum ad ignorantiam (well actually you should never resort to it). It's sad you should be modded so highly for merely professing ignorance.

I haven't found any.

But I've found this:
"During the lead up to the 2003 Iraq war, the United States famously accused Iraq of possessing portable mobile chemical and biological laboratories. Post invasion no such facilities were found. Ironically Iraq now has at least five portable mobile chemical and biological stations — held by the United States Army. The portables are valued at US$622,051 a piece and used for defensive purposes. [15]"
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/US_Military_Equipment_in_Iraq_(2007)#Chemical_weapons

Other fun facts:

1,International Weapons Inspections Team Refused Access to U.S. Army Biological Weapons Site

2, During the lead up to the 2003 Iraq war, the United States famously accused Iraq of possessing portable mobile chemical and biological laboratories. Post invasion no such facilities were found. Ironically Iraq now has at least five portable mobile chemical and biological stations — held by the United States Army. The portables are valued at US$622,051 a piece and used for defensive purposes. [15] link

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RS21922
"
the Supreme Court declared the Baha’i faith to be a form of blasphemy in May 2007. In October 2007, Afghanistan
resumed enforcing the death penalty after a four-year moratorium, executing 15 criminals. One
major case incurring international criticism has been the January 2008 death sentence, imposed in
a quick trial, against 23 year old journalist Sayed Kambaksh for allegedly distributing material
critical of Islam. On October 21, 2008, a Kabul appeals court changed his sentence to 20 years in
prison;"

Are you sure it's Assenge's fault if the war drags on?
Seriously, the US put extremists in power in Afghanistan? I thought they were the enemy. Sorry, but I'm a bit confused.

From AFG20070316n610: "This is the third time that Shabib has reported to US Forces at the COP, as covered in the intel section, enemy forces had been planning some type of attack possibly on the 14th of March but were deterred by aircraft observed overhead, according to him there were as many as 400 men staged for an attack in the Margah area, Shabib said they were staged in the Habib Mulla village. He also said that because their attack was spoiled they were planning another attack but he did not know the target of date. Shabib is motivated to report on enemy activities because he believes that the Taliban are not interested in education, and he feels very strongly about educating young people." Other documents mentioning his name:

• afg/event/2007/03/AFG20070316n610.html
• afg/event/2007/03/AFG20070323n548.html
• afg/event/2007/05/AFG20070501n693.html

According to AFG20061119n463.htm Ashraf seems to be tribal elder Ashraf from Gonopol who supported the coalition forces. These documents mention his name:

• afg/event/2006/10/AFG20061004n395.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061119n463.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061122n481.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061128n476.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061201n484.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061204n474.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061205n482.html
• afg/event/2007/02/AFG20070213n633.html
• afg/event/2007/09/AFG20070912n909.html
• afg/event/2007/09/AFG20070929n904.html
• afg/event/2007/11/AFG20071109n1087.html
• afg/event/2007/12/AFG20071228n1140.html
• afg/event/2008/01/AFG20080130n1102.html
• afg/event/2008/01/AFG20080131n690.html
• afg/event/2008/04/AFG20080401n1255.html
• afg/sort/affiliation/neutral_164.html
• afg/sort/affiliation/neutral_34.html
• afg/sort/category/meeting_23.html
• afg/sort/category/meeting_3.html
• afg/sort/date/2006_11_16.html
• afg/sort/date/2007_12_10.html
• afg/sort/region/rc_east_165.html
• afg/sort/region/rc_east_406.html
• afg/sort/severity/high_282.html
• afg/sort/severity/high_673.html
• afg/sort/severity/low_282.html
• afg/sort/severity/low_673.html
• afg/sort/type/non_combat_event_123.html
• afg/sort/type/non_combat_event_23.html

From AFG20070316n610: "This is the third time that Shabib has reported to US Forces at the COP, as covered in the intel section, enemy forces had been planning some type of attack possibly on the 14th of March but were deterred by aircraft observed overhead, according to him there were as many as 400 men staged for an attack in the Margah area, Shabib said they were staged in the Habib Mulla village. He also said that because their attack was spoiled they were planning another attack but he did not know the target of date. Shabib is motivated to report on enemy activities because he believes that the Taliban are not interested in education, and he feels very strongly about educating young people." Other documents mentioning his name:

• afg/event/2007/03/AFG20070316n610.html
• afg/event/2007/03/AFG20070323n548.html
• afg/event/2007/05/AFG20070501n693.html

According to AFG20061119n463.htm Ashraf seems to be tribal elder Ashraf from Gonopol who supported the coalition forces. These documents mention his name:

• afg/event/2006/10/AFG20061004n395.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061119n463.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061122n481.html
• afg/event/2006/11/AFG20061128n476.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061201n484.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061204n474.html
• afg/event/2006/12/AFG20061205n482.html
• afg/event/2007/02/AFG20070213n633.html
• afg/event/2007/09/AFG20070912n909.html
• afg/event/2007/09/AFG20070929n904.html
• afg/event/2007/11/AFG20071109n1087.html
• afg/event/2007/12/AFG20071228n1140.html
• afg/event/2008/01/AFG20080130n1102.html
• afg/event/2008/01/AFG20080131n690.html
• afg/event/2008/04/AFG20080401n1255.html
• afg/sort/affiliation/neutral_164.html
• afg/sort/affiliation/neutral_34.html
• afg/sort/category/meeting_23.html
• afg/sort/category/meeting_3.html
• afg/sort/date/2006_11_16.html
• afg/sort/date/2007_12_10.html
• afg/sort/region/rc_east_165.html
• afg/sort/region/rc_east_406.html
• afg/sort/severity/high_282.html
• afg/sort/severity/high_673.html
• afg/sort/severity/low_282.html
• afg/sort/severity/low_673.html
• afg/sort/type/non_combat_event_123.html
• afg/sort/type/non_combat_event_23.html

What a coincidence that subsequent to U.S. Intelligence plotting to discredit Wikileaks, we have a number of concerned people and organizations popping up to do just that - discredit Wikileaks.

U.S. Intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks

Slashdot Article

Unless you are US military - of course!

Wikileaks relies on stuff people send them. If you have classified information from the North Korea government/military, I'm sure they'll be happy to post it online.

And they do have some reports about North Korea, including about when WMD were traded between NK and Pakistan, but they come from the US, which is where they can get that info.

EU already has a simular technology in place.

You can get the analysis at wikileaks: EU social network spy system brief, INDECT Work Package 4

"The aim of work package 4 (WP4) is the development of key technologies that facilitate the building of an intelligence gathering system by combining and extending the current state-of-the-art methods in Natural Language Processing (NLP). One of the goals of WP4 is to propose NLP and machine learning methods that learn relationships between people and organizations through websites and social networks. Key requirements for the development of such methods are: (1) the identification of entities, their relationships and the events in which they participate, and (2) the labelling of the entities, relationships and events in a corpus that will be used as a means both for developing the methods."

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009
Also gives them friends, friends of friends.
Use the wrong phrase, words, have a friend of a friend who did ...
If your a freedom fighter, the effort to compartmentalise may not save you.
Best to just have a bland online life of mainstream sport, music and safe news.
Face to face for the rest :)

There are the people who just believe what the government says, and they cause problems for the rest of us thanks to their letting the government do all the thinking for them. Some of those people wise up to the idea that the government is happy to lie to them, but gain no real wisdom and let the loudest anti-government media think for them. That leads to a lot of people reading Wikileaks in all of its anti-government glory and think that's the whole story. These unthinking people remain just as much of a problem for us, despite Wikileaks having a great opportunity to educate.

Properly used as one of many sources, Wikileaks is a great site, but they like to emphasize the most damaging details of leaks as opposed to seeking the truth. Their press releases can be some of the most biased writing I have ever seen (given it doesn't actually lie). The site is a great idea, and a good place to leak information is a vital resource for democracy, but I hate Wikileaks due to how they ruin a lot of the integrity that such a site could have; they abuse their influence to push an agenda just as much as the people they are trying to fight. I am sure Assange is the reason behind most of what I hate about Wikileaks- so no I don't agree with your premise at all.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Countries
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Cuba
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Venezuela

Wow, you really did your homework on that one. I mean, I've never even visited Wikileaks before today, and I found these links in less than 30 seconds. The only people "locked in on the US" here are the US media, who have another circus when new US government documents are posted in Wikileaks. So basically you blame this guy for the US media's reaction to some US whistle-blower publishing something on his web site, which strikes me as more than a little sheep-ish.

If there really are fewer documents from these countries, it's because being a whistle-blower in one of those countries is a good way to commit suicide. Actually, it may be an excruciatingly painful way to do it, but I think you get the picture.

I don't think the guy in charge of Wikileaks is a journalist, either. I think he's in it for the fame, and for the money that generally comes with it. But that doesn't make your statements any less ridiculous.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Countries
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Cuba
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Venezuela

Wow, you really did your homework on that one. I mean, I've never even visited Wikileaks before today, and I found these links in less than 30 seconds. The only people "locked in on the US" here are the US media, who have another circus when new US government documents are posted in Wikileaks. So basically you blame this guy for the US media's reaction to some US whistle-blower publishing something on his web site, which strikes me as more than a little sheep-ish.

If there really are fewer documents from these countries, it's because being a whistle-blower in one of those countries is a good way to commit suicide. Actually, it may be an excruciatingly painful way to do it, but I think you get the picture.

I don't think the guy in charge of Wikileaks is a journalist, either. I think he's in it for the fame, and for the money that generally comes with it. But that doesn't make your statements any less ridiculous.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Countries
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Cuba
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Venezuela

Wow, you really did your homework on that one. I mean, I've never even visited Wikileaks before today, and I found these links in less than 30 seconds. The only people "locked in on the US" here are the US media, who have another circus when new US government documents are posted in Wikileaks. So basically you blame this guy for the US media's reaction to some US whistle-blower publishing something on his web site, which strikes me as more than a little sheep-ish.

If there really are fewer documents from these countries, it's because being a whistle-blower in one of those countries is a good way to commit suicide. Actually, it may be an excruciatingly painful way to do it, but I think you get the picture.

I don't think the guy in charge of Wikileaks is a journalist, either. I think he's in it for the fame, and for the money that generally comes with it. But that doesn't make your statements any less ridiculous.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Countries
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Cuba
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Venezuela

Wow, you really did your homework on that one. I mean, I've never even visited Wikileaks before today, and I found these links in less than 30 seconds. The only people "locked in on the US" here are the US media, who have another circus when new US government documents are posted in Wikileaks. So basically you blame this guy for the US media's reaction to some US whistle-blower publishing something on his web site, which strikes me as more than a little sheep-ish.

If there really are fewer documents from these countries, it's because being a whistle-blower in one of those countries is a good way to commit suicide. Actually, it may be an excruciatingly painful way to do it, but I think you get the picture.

I don't think the guy in charge of Wikileaks is a journalist, either. I think he's in it for the fame, and for the money that generally comes with it. But that doesn't make your statements any less ridiculous.

If you visit the site, within half a second you'll find this link:

http://leakmirror.wikileaks.org/file/straw-glass-and-bottle/afg-war-diary.html.7z

I find it suspicious that you post a lie. The leaked documents are as recent as December of last year: http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/afg/sort/date/2009_12_0.html

Last line of http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/:
"We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually, in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits."

So this archive isnt complete, come back later for more...

The web filters are mandated by Australian law IIRC. There was a list published a while ago on wikileaks of all of the websites that were being blocked... some were not offensive at all.

Examine the rumors: H, and The Register.

Examine the facts: Digitask was contracted to provide the technology.

how is that any easier than the supposedly secret list?

Read this and then post it prominently on a popular Australian website.

Reporters Sans Frontiers/Reporters Without Borders are primarily funded by the US government [zcommunications.org] through the National Endowment for Democracy which was founded during the Reagan administration to channel funds to organizations abroad that would support US foreign policy. Sometimes this funding is direct [ned.org], sometimes it is conducted through the international arms of the US Democratic Party or Republican Party [counterpunch.org].

I'm sure that the US government would much prefer that whistleblowers send any leaked video of massacres by US troops or State Department cables to this new site rather than Wikileaks [wikileaks.org]. The only way it would be easier for them to discover the identity of the whistleblower would be if the leak went directly to the CIA with a return address.

It appears to me that this new Reporters Sans Frontiers project is a honeypot intended to catch would-be whistleblowers.

According to Wikileaks, this is a load of bunk.
There is a headline on the main page at http://www.wikileaks.org/ which is titled "wired's war on wikileaks continues" and links to the source article for this page. He also claims briefly that they are in the process of "updating."
Just goes to show, ALWAYS check your sources, you never know if there is something strange going on.

Kinda like this: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Support

?

Yo Grark

Reporters Without Borders are primarily funded by the US government through the National Endowment for Democracy which was founded during the Reagan administration to channel funds to organizations abroad that would support US foreign policy. Sometimes this funding is direct, sometimes it is conducted through the international arms of the US Democratic Party or Republican Party.

I'm sure that the US government would much prefer that whistleblowers send any leaked video of massacres by US troops or State Department cables to this new site rather than Wikileaks. The only way it would be easier for them to discover the identity of the whistleblower would be if the leak went directly to the CIA with a return address.

They probably are, seeing as MS doesn't log conversations nor allow law enforcement to monitor conversations on MSN Messenger... Hotmail/MSN Mail is another story. Have a read of the instruction book for law enforcement that MS set up. It's freely available via Wikileaks.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Cryptome.org_takedown:_Microsoft_Global_Criminal_Compliance_Handbook,_24_Feb_2010

Um, isn't this one of them?

Now they hope for better than world lists like:
NADIS, NMI, SEIDM, BNC, CNCIS, STEEPLEBUSH, RG, BSS, DDIS
They have software like:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009
They want your friends and friends of friends too ;)

Now they hope for better than world lists like:
NADIS, NMI, SEIDM, BNC, CNCIS, STEEPLEBUSH, RG, BSS, DDIS
They have software like:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009
They want your friends and friends of friends too ;)

So this will pump out the cubicle critters to run systems like
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009 and
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System
The only question is why do they need to make such bold public push for future workers? Hard to tap the shoulder of an entire graduating class for a private chat?
Fusion centres a growth sector in the USA?
NSA shifts to e-mail, Web, data-mining dragnet
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9890761-38.html

Yes with ideas like http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009 and http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System getting to the state and federal task forces expect to see more.
Now we have a lower end of data collecting too.
People seeking work are tracked and searched for.
Time to flood the system with junk/bait and 'out' the automated databases?

Yes with ideas like http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009 and http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System getting to the state and federal task forces expect to see more.
Now we have a lower end of data collecting too.
People seeking work are tracked and searched for.
Time to flood the system with junk/bait and 'out' the automated databases?

Yes with ideas like http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009 [wikileaks.org]
and http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System [wikileaks.org]
getting to the state and federal task forces expect to see more.

Yes with ideas like http://wikileaks.org/wiki/EU_social_network_spy_system_brief,_INDECT_Work_Package_4,_2009 [wikileaks.org]
and http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Tweets:_The_CIA_Social_Networking_Surveillance_System [wikileaks.org]
getting to the state and federal task forces expect to see more.

How to know you're doing real journalism: when the powers that be are this pissed off.

The shiny-assed poltroons of the New York Times and the Murdoch press can just fuck off. Really. Whining shits that people aren't giving them free money for rewritten press releases any more. Useless fucks.

Boycott the shitty, shitty press. Tell them why. Give money to Wikileaks.

And nearly all "hard core" child porn is committed by family members or close family friends. Making possession illegal will do nothing except put a bunch of innocent people in jail for no reason without actually addressing the real problem. Hell, most of what you may see isn't even recent but left over postings from Usenet posts from the late 70's early 80s.:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn

Microsoft Global Compliance Handbook from wikileaks - http://file.wikileaks.org/file/microsoft-spy.pdf Any agency can issue a subpoeana and Microsoft will comply for an account over 180days old. Under that a court order is required. Verizon has basically the same policies without any account age restriction http://www22.verizon.com/about/privacy/policy/#info

For the most part what I have seen of Wikileaks they are the Nation Enquirer of the internet. They present the data in the most inflammatory way possible and it is often incorrect, incomplete, and biased. They do not just present the data but comment on and embellish.

Look at wikileaks.org. The most recently leaked documents are reproduced in their entirety, with (usually) only one single paragraph to describe the document. The descriptions are descriptive and accurate (if you don't believe me - read them for yourself - stuff like "Quote for a US$85 million line of credit from FirstCaribbean to the government of the Turks & Caicos Islands."). How is a release of original source material along with one single descriptive paragraph "incorrect, incomplete, and biased.. commenting on and embellishing"?

they don't care anymore about being unbiased or responsible than Fox news does.

This is a ridiculous comparison. Fox News pushes opinion pieces as real news. It reproduces none - zero, nada, zilch - of its original sources. Wikileaks reproduces its sources in their entirety. They even released the original, unedited Apache video. If they did not care about being biased, then why would they released the original, unedited video? Has Fox News ever released the original source material of any contentious report? Ever? Probably not. And yet Wikileaks does this every single time as standard policy. There is a huge difference.

Interesting that you should choose a website that's been mostly offline for the past 5 months because they can't meet their budget. That's the problem with "free" (as in beer) press -- it still costs money to run. I'd urge you (and anyone else interested in preserving Wikileaks) to donate. Information can be found on their front (only) page: http://wikileaks.org/

Overpaid geeks reading this: GIVE WIKILEAKS MONEY.

I know Julian Assange slightly. He used to be the sysadmin at Suburbia.net. That's where my critic of Scientology website lives. He and Mark Dorset of Suburbia have assiduously defended that site against baseless legal threats from Scientology for the past fifteen years. The guy's got balls of titanium.

The newspapers whine about "who's going to do journalism without us around?" The answer is the same as who'll do it with them around, i.e. someone else. So far it's Wikileaks.

I gave 'em GBP50 (~US$100) last pay and will again this pay. So should you.

Overpaid geeks reading this: GIVE WIKILEAKS MONEY.

Thank you.

Overpaid geeks reading this: GIVE WIKILEAKS MONEY.

I know Julian Assange slightly. He used to be the sysadmin at Suburbia.net. That's where my critic of Scientology website lives. He and Mark Dorset of Suburbia have assiduously defended that site against baseless legal threats from Scientology for the past fifteen years. The guy's got balls of titanium.

The newspapers whine about "who's going to do journalism without us around?" The answer is the same as who'll do it with them around, i.e. someone else. So far it's Wikileaks.

I gave 'em GBP50 (~US$100) last pay and will again this pay. So should you.

Overpaid geeks reading this: GIVE WIKILEAKS MONEY.

Thank you.

First let me say that I have great respect for the men and women who have been sent into very difficult circumstances in Iraq and Afghanistan by our governments; I realise that it is easy for us to make judgements sitting at home in safety; if we were out there with our lives on the lines we would see things differently. Nevertheless, it sees to me that the helicopter crews involved in this incident have not followed the rules of engagement shown here: http://file.wikileaks.org/file/rules_of_engagement_appendix1.pdf - which as far as I can see were the rules in force when this happened. Violations would appear to be: * "Positive identification is required prior to engagement" - the chopper crew were clearly too fast to ID cameras as AK-47s * "Always minimize incidental injury, loss of life and collateral damage" - the chopper crew execute the entire group of men, even though most do not appear to be carrying anything * "Use graduated measures of force" - the chopper crew simply execute everyone in the group on the basis of their faulty identification * "Do not target or strike anyone who is... out of combat...due to wounds" - the chopper crew execute the wounded man as he is being evacuated * Again, "Always minimize incidental injury, loss of life and collateral damage" - the chopper crew execute the people in the van who appear to merely be trying to save the wounded man As I say, I'm sitting here safe and warm - but still, military rules of engagement are not optional, they are rules. And it's hard to avoid the conclusion that they have been seriously broken here.