Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks Releases Sensitive Guantanamo Manual
James Hardine writes "Wired is reporting that a never-before-seen military manual detailing the day-to-day operations of the U.S. military's Guantánamo Bay detention facility has been leaked to the web, via the whistle-blowing site Wikileaks.org, affording a rare inside glimpse into the institution where the United States has imprisoned hundreds of suspected terrorists since 2002. The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. The disclosure highlights the internet's usefulness to whistle-blowers in anonymously propagating documents the government and others would rather conceal. The Pentagon has been resisting — since October 2003 — a Freedom of Information Act request from the American Civil Liberties Union seeking the very same document. Anonymous open-government activists created Wikileaks in January, hoping to turn it into a clearinghouse for such disclosures. The site uses a Wikipedia-like system to enlist the public in authenticating and analyzing the documents it publishes. The Camp Delta document includes schematics of the camp, detailed checklists of what "comfort items" such as extra toilet paper can be given to detainees as rewards, six pages of instructions on how to process new detainees, instructions on how to psychologically manipulate prisoners, and rules for dealing with hunger strikes."
Related article on the leak: "US violates chemical weapons convention"
This is the problem inherent in the wiki-mindset...then again, who's to say anything released by any corporate news agency is any better (maybe even worse)? Fact-checking and verification is a pretty complex problem that, in the end, will always break down to faith in one party or another.
Quiz: True or False -- On a scale of 1 to 10, what is your middle name?
The easiest way to hide a fact is misdirection. Before releasing the actual fact, release tons of extravagant misinformation, slanted to views of the various extremes. Then, when the fact is released, everyone overlooks it, or assumes it too is a fake.
Most of what you know is wrong. We live in a misinformation soup. Sorting one fact from another is not only hard, it's damned near impossible. From corporations to politicians, the truth is hidden in billions of falsehoods.
That's why I live in a fantasy world.
The internet.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Why do morons like this get the time of day. People love propagating fantasy conspiracies because they so desperately wish they were true or just the thought of them might help their political cause. Really, how many "vast" conspiracies were ever really proven? I sure can't think of any. In the end the truth is nowhere near as exciting or incriminating to the other side, but who cares, by then the loons are on to the next vast conspiracy by the evil US government. It's amazing that people have such contempt for the US and it's traditional values. If the US ever crumbles, the world will closely follow. I'm so glad the hippie freaks who protest...everything...are merely an irritant and not the norm in America.
... will be the Next Big Thing.
Given:
1. Effective DRM is impossible.
2. By definition, there is no such thing as DRM against printed documents.
I reckon the next big thing will be some sort of software which puts the fear of God into those who may wish to leak documents - by making the leaker identifiable. Specifically, watermarking them. Where two spellings of a word are equally acceptable, use one in the version sent to person A and another in the version sent to person B. Change the spacing slightly. Tweak letter shapes here and there.
Of course, then you get anti-anti-leak. Rather than publish the original document, you publish an OCR'd version.... but DeCSS hasn't stopped DVDs being shipped with CSS encryption, and it hasn't dissuaded the likes of Macrovision.
Perhaps you meant to say, "But there have been no more terrorist attacks on the US during that time because we have moved the theater of war to Iraq.
Who's more credible -- random anonymous internet posters or the Bush administration?
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Define win.
For the people of Iraq, a win would be to see the Americans and their allies leave - they're doing nothing but creating instability and turning sympathy into hatred by propping up corrupt dictators throughout the region (Pakistan, Saudi-Arabia, and in Iraq Chalibi and now Nouri al-Maliki). The US lost the peace when it installed a puppet government and disbanded the army.
For the US, the only way to 'win' now is not to play. The alternative is drawn-out civil war and eventual withdrawal when the political/economic cost becomes too high. It's too late now to flood the country with troops, and the US doesn't have the troops or money to do it in any case without a draft and austerity measures.
It's the same problem with ANY 'leak' - the source and its motivation must be considered, and if unknown, then that inherently devalues the information. It's a tactic that both Lee Atwater and Karl Rove perfected to an art form - the leak which counterintuitively debases the opponent's position, generally because they are incautious about how they use the information. The intellectual equivalent of a 'screen pass' in football, where the quarterback uses the overaggressiveness of a defensive line against them.
Granted, as you perceptively point out, that doesn't stop rabid fanbois of EITHER faction from waving it around slobbering that they finally have THE PROOF (which somehow always manages to justify their original preconceptions).
-Styopa
There were eight years between the first World Trade Center bombing and 9/11. How many years has it been since 9/11/2001? Oh, right, just over six. We might actually have some evidence that the current policies are working if we were to go, say, 1.5 times as long between al-Qaeda terrorist incidents on U.S. soil, to allow for statistical variation.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
It doesn't seem that sensitive. I've not looked right through it but it seems to show the camp in quite a good light, see for example this;
f. Do not use the left hand to give a detainee food.
Muslims use their left hand to clean themselves and it
is culturally inappropriate to offer food with the left
hand.
g. Do not relate terrorism to Islam. It is
inappropriate to equate any religion to such heinous
activity.
h. Do not point a finger at detainees as it is
considered very disrespectful and derogatory.
i. Avoid using foul language as it displays a lack of
composure.
These all seem to be fairly positive things, from the point of view of respecting the ways of the people who are detained. This is far less a smoking gun from what I've read and more a guide on how to make people feel as secure and happy as possible when in the camp (which I know won't be a bed of roses for them...). I really wouldn't be amazed if this was "leaked" by a supporter of the guantanamo bay compound. But maybe that's just my cynical nature, it is possible that a lot of the people in the military really do just want to make the situation as good as possible for the people who they happen to have there
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
yes but the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights only applies to US soil.. which is argued that while it is a US military base it is not on US Soil....
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
A lie of omission -- ie, by deliberately censoring and leaving out intelligence that contradicts your interpretation -- is still a lie.
If scientists had several studies showing that there was a strong possibility of particles smaller than atoms, and deliberately coverd up those studies and experiments so that they could say the atom was the smallest particle as they fervently believe, then yes, it would be a lie.
What you seem to be confused about is whether a lie has to be intentional. It may well be that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc all fervently believed that their interpretation was correct and that contrary information was not reliable. They may have sincerely believed they were "eliminating confusion", but ultimately they and their delegates made the decision to only tell one side of the story, and deny that a different interpretation even existed. That's a lie, that's conscious, purposeful deception so that you can get what you want.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Citing iraqbodycount.org, antiwar.com, and wikipedia is about as solid as quoting WorldNetDaily.
Advice: on VPS providers
The first siege of Fallujah was lifted when a mix of Sunni and Shia civilians drove a convoy through American lines to relieve the Sunni fighters. The civil war which broke out shortly after is the only reason America is still able to remain in Iraq.
Play Command HQ online
Hold your horses. 'Barbaric in the extreme'? It sounds like you're mad at the false imprisonment more than the actual OP's odd suggestions. I'm not saying that I agree with the OP, but which part is extreme barbarism? What I consider extreme barbarism is cutting people's heads off to make a point. Ratchet down your hyperbole because it doesn't help your case. The OP never said that Gitmo prisoners (why do we call them detainees like Bush wants--they're in prison, legally or not) shouldn't be allowed to pray or read the Koran, just that Gitmo should schedule Baywatch to run during prayer times, so if the detainees want to catch the thrilling end they'd have to skip prayers. And that they'd get a paperback or xeroxed copy of the Koran. You'll have to help me understand why any of that would be barbaric in the extreme. I'm not a particularly religious person, so use small words.
I have to say, your extreme reaction to the OP's post either shows that I'm pretty ignorant of Islam, or that you're reading something into the OP's post that isn't there. I am open to discovering that I am more ignorant of Islam than I thought, but that kind of hate you're displaying isn't helping me understand Islam any better, quite the opposite: if you're a normal moderate muslim and you get this mad then I'd suggest that normal moderate muslims need to lighten up a wee bit and quit taking their dogma so seriously. Then again, I think that about all religions so don't think I'm singling you out.
steampunk web design
Well, it doesn't look like anything OVERLY bad is happening there.. except for this little tidbit:
Appendix G
Camp Echo
This annex is classified and available to those individuals that have a requirement to have it. All requests for copies of this annex are to be submitted to JDOG Operations.
So, camp echo is where the bad things happen, I imagine. Maybe that document is next?
-- MrMud