Slashdot Mirror
How Did Wikileaks Do It?
grassy_knoll writes "Related to the Wikileaks video recently released and discussed here, the NY Times reports: 'Somehow — it will not say how — WikiLeaks found the necessary computer time to decrypt a graphic video, released Monday, of a United States Army assault in Baghdad in 2007 that left 12 people dead, including two employees of the news agency Reuters. The video has been viewed more than two million times on YouTube, and has been replayed hundreds of times in television news reports.'
The article is light on details; what encryption algorithm was used? Was this a brute force attack? Did someone pass the decryption keys to Wikileaks along with the video? Something else?"
http://goatse.fr/
such as, the FACT that the "civilians" were actually enemy combatants. For more details:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201878.php
Better question is why where these people killed when they were unarmed?
That all goes out the window when you selectively edit the video to gloss over the fact that the "innocent civilians" were packing RPGs
You have no idea why it was classified. Wikileaks edited out 17 minutes of the video, didn't show what happened before the video was shot, and put our men and women at risk.
They will find the perpetrator and lock him up -- as is perfectly appropriate.
Military is all about killing other people. Are you saying that isn't bad?
While it is atrocious, it is also one of the things that is required of a soldier. To be able to follow an order to attack, a soldier has to be able to think it isn't bad.
Yes, in general, however we do not want soldiers following criminally treasonous orders like "go to Iraq" under any circumstances.
We want brave, honorable, patriots like Lieutenant Watada not cowardly treasonous dishonored scum like every American soldier in Iraq. Like these murdering scum in particular.
So, we're not talking about soldiers following legitimate orders. We're talking bottom of the barrel scum who committed treason to even be there in the first place.
I agree and support the idea of wikileaks very strongly. But making a website called collateralmurder immediately makes me cringe. I would be more far inclined to support them if they adhered to policy of being unbiased. Present the story to me and let me form my own opinion. By donating to any biased site, I am using my money to support their opinion as well as their actions. That I do not want to do, for ANY opinion on the left, right, up, or down. I believe that a lack of bias is essential for journalistic integrity.
No matter what the story or what the source is, I will always wonder what filter it passed through before being posted. Sensationalist names weaken the persuasiveness of their postings to those of us that believe in real journalism. It seems that all forms of journalism feel the need to be more and more biased these days. I guess the public gets what they want. Not searching for truth, searching for someone to tell us what we already believe. I mourn the death of real journalism everyday.
Now before people start flaming me for being some conservative nutjob, let me say that in no way do I condone the actions of the soldiers, the subsequent attempt at a coverup, or the intimidate tactics used against the wikileaks staff.
Exactly, dehumanizing the enemy is a necessary part of war if your soldiers aren't sociopaths (and the US military is fairly good at weeding those out).
Mo, the US military has almost nothing else. How, the fuck do you think they keep managing to find scum to send all around the world fucking America in the ass?
Keep in mind, the US military hasn't been used for anything except fucking the world for the sake of a few very rich sociopaths since world war 2. So given that, your assertion that the members of the US military are anything but sociopathic traitors is batshit insane. If they had a scrap of integrity they would have killed themselves long before obeying criminal, treasonous orders to fuck their country.
Seriously, try thinking not just spouting the idiotic militaristic propaganda you've been spoonfed.
do you know what you're talking about? Let me help you. Answer is no, you don't.
If a helicopter is high enough, you're not going to hear it. Typical weather helicopters fly much lower and don't need to be designed to generate less noise. Do you assume they were just some 50 feet above the ground? This is an attack copter. They were probably more than a half mile away from the targets they fired upon.
Meanwhile, you're only seeing one video, not the whole picture? The guy on the ground certainly looked like he had something from the video, do you think you'd know what an improvised RPG might look like or something?
fucking armchair videofolk.
I'm liberal, it just seems wikileaks is going out of it's way to make the military look bad and then play itself up.
"Look bad?" Have you SEEN the video? The US Military specifically committed war crimes, atrocities we've had other regimes "changed" for doing.
This is not just some kind of military PR Disaster! This is a major international incident and crime against humanity, and if it were any other country, especially those with brown people in them, every pundit and politician would be running around demanding blood.
Competent analysis of the video here:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201878.php
Right, keep telling yourself 'PTSD and chronic drug abuse are not a problem. Our soldiers are FINE and don't need special care,' if that helps you sleep at night.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
What war crime? Define war crime.
A ground unit, Hotel 26, was fired on from this area. A gunship came in and destroyed a group of armed men. The cameramen were embedded in that enemy unit. Reporters who want to live to be great grandfathers don't generally become part of an armed unit.
Those reporters who are embedded in the US military's various units face the very same risks that the reporter in the video faced. They can get just as dead, just as easily.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Did the van have a recognizable sign that it was an ambulance, something like a red cross, or a red crescent? No? Then, the occupants were aiding and abetting an enemy. No laws broken.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Come on -- these "brave", and I say that with the most acid sarcasm, soldiers aren't man enough to kill innocents up close and personal. They have to do all their killing of innocents from miles away and based on grainy photos. Bunch of scumbags, poor or not. I mean, do we forgive the liquor store stickup artist for being poor? No. Should I forgive immoral behavior merely because Colonel Tampon ordered someone to do it? No. I have deep respect for all personnel who have refused to go to Iraq -- all those that went are totally and utterly despicable.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Personally, I hope they all die in painful single car auto accidents in which no passengers are injured. In any event, next thing is to ID the voices and make sure these pansies (notice how they can't do their killing of innocents in person but have to do it from miles away like real "heros"?) never ever get a job beyond min wage. Seriously, anything short of prison or death is too good for them.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
I've watched the video and I'm sorry but I thought those were weapons in their hands as well.
You're either a liar or an idiot.