Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks Vows Release '7x the Size' of Iraq Leak
CWmike writes "WikiLeaks has promised to release a load of information seven times bigger than the Iraq War Logs, which raised the Internet group's profile around the world and caused some nations to take notice of the issue of leaks of top-secret documents online. In a note on Twitter, WikiLeaks said, 'Next release is 7x the size of the Iraq War Logs. Intense pressure over it for months,' and asked supporters to continue donating to the cause. WikiLeaks did not say what the new release of information would be about."
WikiLeaks did not say what the new release of information would be about."
Oh no!
Not my top secret award winning BBQ Ribs recipe!
They're releasing more (7x more?), but have all the earlier pages been read, cataloged, etc? Do these people think we're just going to be sitting around during the holidays reading about US military mistakes?
So with my admittedly meager research (reading Slashdot and other sites), I can't figure out if the Wikileaks people are good guys or bad guys. Which is it?
Wikileaks accepts donations by mail. If you're paranoid, and you should be, buy a postal money order with cash and drop it in a mailbox. No return address!
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
If so, I suspect this will be very interesting....
The summary is inconsistent on the size. It says "7x the size" and also "seven times bigger". Which is it?
I will release eleventy billion pages if you...
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Maybe this time we'll get some real dirt, not just more 'War is destructive and violent and they try to pretty it up for us.' We all already knew that.
How does it feel to be a liar with pants constantly on fire?
Judy Collins, "Marat/Sade". I sense parallels between Wikileaks and the fugitive newsman from the French Revolution. Sometimes you just have to put your shoulder to something bigger than yourself.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
I'm not sure I'd want to show up for an International arrest warrant if a government official that still retains a fair bit of clout was calling for my treatment as an enemy combatant. I'm sure that a trip to Guantanamo Bay would be completely off the table, right?
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
7x, that's pretty big. Not without a condom though!
If he releases something like that hes just going to take his situation from bad to worse.
which raised the Internet group's profile around the world and caused some nations to take notice of the issue of leaks of top-secret documents online
Have any of the documents leaked been Top Secret? According the reports I've read, the highest level of classification in these leaks has been Secret.
...and leave it at that.
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
Or they could cut to the chase and follow one of those penis enlargement cream spam emails.
Honestly, releasing statements like this does Wikileaks no credit. Its hard to appreciate the foundation with such a narcissist doing the PR.
They leak, and they have size issues. Sounds like the spam I'm used to.
Release Julian Assange's rape video?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Excellent kool aid chugging contest victory, sir.
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
...but I'd ACTUALLY like to know. Who killed JFK? Can we get a leak on this yet?
(And please don't spam me with your ludicrous notions about Oswald. He was CLEARLY a patsy, and not involved in any meaningful way).
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
I can't recall anything interesting coming out of the last release. I don't follow this closely at all, but I would think if there was anything really interesting it would have been picked up by enough mainstream media outlets that it would have been difficult to avoid.
So I suppose they could say that they are releasing 100 or 1000 times the amount of interesting information this time because any number multiplied by zero is...
Com on, there's got to be more data than stuff related to the US. Do something on the PRC, or Russia, or the UK, or almost anything. You've proved your point - the US is far from perfect. Now can you point your crosshairs at some other country for a change?
I heard (interview) from Pat Tillman's brother (I forget his name - but an intensely likeable man) that quoted over 50% of casualties in Iraq/Afghanistan were from friendly fire. That needs to be announced and addressed. We're killing more of our troops then they are.
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
Perhaps part of the problem making such a determination is the asymmetric nature of their leaks....It's more a function of the people involved in the leaks
No - it is more a function of how best to release the information to stop the organization. If you worked for the Taliban et al and were disgusted at their behaviour your best bet to stop that behaviour would be to secretly leak information to western governments who will then act to stop attacks. If you released it via Wikileaks your own organization would know that the information has been released and switch the attack to somewhere else and after an attack the information is public anyway.
Compare that to someone disgusted with the behaviour of a western government. The only people to whom these governments are somewhat accountable is their electorate. Hence, to stop the behaviour you are unhappy with the only choice you have is to leak the data publicly so that their electorate get to see it and demand an explanation and changes. So I would argue that the leaks might well be symmetric but that the terrorist leaks are more effective when kept secret and western government leaks more effective when made public.
Wikileaksleaks has just announced that they are preparing to release new leaked information about when the Wikileaks leaked information will be leaked and what the Wikileaks leaked information is actually about. Right now they are working quickly to do so before their leaked leaked information can be leaked by notorious Wikileaksleaksleaks.
here's what I want released, while we're in a release anything kinda mood... How about someone release the documents we captured from saddams oval office? They were referred to as the harmony docs, and were being translated by the FMSO. Remember the october surprise in the 2004 NYTimes: "bush leaks saddam's nuke primer on web"? I saw many of those docs... WMD specs, bio/chem training manuals, evading un inspectors. How 'bout releasing those?
...Wikileaks leaks you!
Releasing information that was kept secret by a corrupt government makes someone a "douchebag"? Wasn't that Wikileaks' purpose in the first place?
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
heya,
Well, let's see...their last release was a big fat wad of....boring? Seriously *sigh*. Basically, the spark notes version was:
1. War is ugly, war involves killing people
2. Occasionally we will accidentally hit our own people
3. Some people do not cope well with the stress, and get desensitised.
I'm fairly sure all of the above are things that we've managed to learn in the...oh....10,000 odd years that humans have been waging war on each other?
Oh right, and we learned that the Taliban has no qualams about using human shields or killing civilians to make it's point and scare the populace. Gee, whoop de do. Everybody talks about how the US caused a few tragedies (because they still are tragedies), and completely ignores the fact that the opposition is basically committing free-scale genocide...*shakes head*.
That is why I have lost respect for Wikileaks - they've basically turned into a anti-US drone, with a one-track agenda.
Cheers,
Victor
Careful, it is important to discriminate the Aljazeeras on the internet.
There is "english.aljazeera.net", which is a more or less factual, reliable news source from an arab perspective (think arab CNN). This is the "real" Aljazeera with the global TV channel.
Then there is "aljazeera.com", which is a trashy islamist/extremist propaganda website disguised as a news outlet (think FoxNews).
It's easy to pick on democracies. I'd love to see them blow the lid on countries like Iran, Syria and North Korea. They are consistently targeting the wrong guys.
... I'm so-o-o tired of hearing about leaked documents about Iraq or Afghanistan.
What would be much more interesting would be for something really juicy.... like complete email collections from the large banks that nearly killed the world economy and all their partners in crime.
Hey... Christmas is coming and a guy can dream, can't he?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Stop. Just stop now.
I'm sick and tired of rape jokes. Rape is not funny. Just don't.
The other day I overheard a 12 year old repeat a rape joke from family guy. It takes a lot to appall me but that did.
vi(m) vs. emacs on slashdot? Seriously? People have lost limbs for less than that around here.
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
This is wrong. What Wikileaks does is not asymmetrical because al Qaeda and the Taliban are nothing like the US government. First of all, the Taliban and al Qaeda are organizationally immune to Wikileaks for a variety of reasons. The Taliban are a repressive dictatorship of stone-cold killers whose power derives from the fear generated by their evil deeds, and they are operate in a low-tech if not no-tech country that has virtually no access to information, much less the kind of information storage employed by a trillion-dollar bureaucracy. As for al Qaeda, they aren't a government, they aren't a bureaucracy, they represent no one, they aren't even a decentralized network of cells. Most of these "cells" are utterly independent. al Qaeda is just a name, one that any ragtag band of angry young men who wish to attack the United States adopts, or one that the United States applies to anyone who they perceive as their new enemy in the Muslim world. That wasn't necessarily the case before 9/11 but it certainly is now.
The benefactors of Wikileaks' are not al Qaeda or the Taliban. There is no evidence that anyone has been killed as a result of Wikileaks' leaks. Even if there were, how many innocents has the US killed? No one who defends the wars has the moral standing to argue that Wikileaks is endangering innocents or people on our side. Wikileaks doesn't release troop movements or anything that could benefit the enemy. And if it damages the US government's image or makes the US look bad, whose fault is that? Do we not have a right to know when our government lies to us, commits crimes, and is involved in cover-ups? And how else are we to find out when the government classifies information so liberally merely to hide their own bad behavior? The benefactors are us, who have a right to know when our government commits crimes or objectionable acts, and whose only channel for finding out is Wikileaks.
I thought Wikileaks dealt in all sorts of leaks, corporate memos, etc. I just hit the web site and it only talks about the Afghan and Iraq war documents. So, have they changed to just this one focus? it seems short-sighted. They have already arrested the Specialist (how does someone that low rank have free reign to view and copy 400k - 2800k documents?) for leaking them. Does Assange have other sources? Do more military folks risk life in prison for him?
It'll be like 911 * 7.
> Practically no one ever considers themselves "the bad guy" even guys like saddam hussein, idi amin and the khmer rouge all rationalized their actions as somehow being for the greater good.
We all rationalize many of our actions. But I'd say a lot of people also do consider themselves "the bad guy." Some people shrug off their crimes; but Othello killed himself because he couldn't, and countless tens of thousands suffer every day thinking themselves bad. Sometimes its the angst of having hurt a loved one; sometimes it's the knowledge of having caved to a position you don't believe in and fought against one's principles, or more likely having not lived up to them; sometimes it's suffering through domestic violence or modern-day slavery, convinced by an abusing "husband" or a "girlfriend" or a pimp that you're not worth anything.
The people who consider themselves the bad guys aren't the ones I'm afraid of: they're the ones who need help, after all. We don't see many bad guys on the world stage, because being a bad guy is a very private thing, and a thing rarely fits with being both effective and power-hungry. We do see a lot of "Bottom-dwellers" to quote one of the former UN war crime prosecutors. Warlords.
For them, yes, they rationalize--when they bother to do anything. More likely they send someone to give lip-service to rationalization according to international norms, while they threaten to cut off the fingers of any election observers who dare to try to monitor the elections in Darfur.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
That's gotta be it. I mean, 7x the volume of previous leaks? You'd need the hoover dam to hold back that much bullshit.
Try the cock meat sandwich.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Only drone targeting the US?
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Wikileaks has leaked plenty about other governments, as well as corporations local and foreign. Heck it used to be the case that the majority was non-US. I've not looked in a while, but that could still be the case.
The problem is that its the US leaks that get all the Attention in the US news (not to mention that much of what they have on other governments just is not as "juicy" as some of the US leaks).
If you have have a copy of the Taliban's membership roster, or North Koera's nuclear plans, or something similar, Wikileaks would be more than happy to publish that.
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
Some secrets, I think the government has a duty to keep. For example the government has a detailed record of a lot of my finances via my taxes. I think they absolutely should keep all that secret, I don't want to see it published for the world to know. Other secrets, I think the government has an overall good reason to keep. Things like nuclear weapons designs. You can argue if the government should have the weapons themselves, but they already do have the knowledge. That shouldn't be given out freely. Still other things I can see reasons to keep secret like just normal internal communications. We don't publish all our e-mail and conversations at work, we expect that some privacy will be maintained. I can respect the government's want to do that.
That isn't to say the government should be allowed to keep EVERYTHING secret, but saying they should have no right to secrets is silly. As a practical matter they have the right under the law.
Now in terms of people revealing those secrets, I think it needs to be an ethical consideration. You have to weigh the act of betraying your oath and harm that might be caused against the public's need to know the information. That is a hard call. However that would pretty much mean NOT just dumping out mass amounts of information without any filtering or consideration.
I never metioned your "argument" one way or another, just the lack of ability in spelling for someone who has a masters degree.
It is to say the least disappointing, and rather damning of modern education.
Congratulations on spelling colour correctly though.
You can be certain that they'd give warnings long before that would happen. So I'm sure Julian Assange knows this better than anyone.
No the CIA or KGB would not have to kill Assange. They both have sneaky mechanisms to neutralize people they don't like.
It was done for only three purposes....
Whether or not those were the justifications the one undeniable good thing that came from dropping it was that the utter horror of a full scale nuclear war was made extremely clear to everyone including the politicians. While it is probably impossible to prove it seems to me that this was almost certainly a major factor in ensuring that the cold war stayed cold.
true enough; it does. I'm just saying that it's a tiny bit mysterious that Assange gets accused of rape shortly after wikileaks makes it big. Trust neither side is the prudent decision here.
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
The higher the classification, the more that is done to protect the data. For example Confidential data, which is a level of classification, basically just means "Don't show this to anyone k?" You don't have to have a security clearance to see it. Secret requires a clearance, however it isn't as hard to get as higher level ones. There are also technical safeguards taken for the data, but not as much as some others. At Top Secret is starts to get pretty serious. The background check is much more intense, as are the restrictions on what you can personally do. The technical safeguards are also higher. While Secret data has its own network (SIPRNET) Ts data has its own network again, more secure.
Also a lot of TS data is actually TS/SCI (Sensitive Compartmentalized Information). More or less what this means is that not only do you have to be cleared Top Secret, but you have to get cleared in to the specific compartment. So just having TS clearance and a need to know the information isn't good enough, you have to be cleared in to that particular compartment and clearance for one isn't the same as clearance for another.
Now none of that means it is impervious, of course, but the more classified something is, the harder it'll be for someone to get their hands on it. The cables that were leaked were more or less classified Secret just because they were via the embassy and that stuff is considered sensitive be default. None of it was particularly special, they didn't take any extra precautions in terms of its transmission and so on.
To give you a simple sort of example:
That the NSA is headquartered inside Fort Meade is public.
That someone works there is probably Confidential.
That they work as a code breaker is probably Secret.
The results of their work is probably Top Secret.
The methods use to get the data for them is probably TS/SCI.
It's the actual release date of Duke Nukem Forever. This news will be huge... earth-shattering even.
It essentially boils down to whether you believe in the War on Terror or not.
In other words, it essentially boils down to whether you're an indoctrinated drone or not. All that the government has proved lately is that terrorism works. The people lose many of their freedoms in exchange for a false sense of security, and they just accept it.
Maybe it's because I agree, but this sure seems more like a strong opinion than a troll. Can someone explain why this is modded troll?
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
... Conversely when they name informants/defectors within the enemy forces they would generally be viewed as bad.
Sometimes secrecy is necessary and other times it is not, it seems both sides want to for an absolute on this though.
The US government accused them of naming informants after refusing to help redact the documents. Wikileaks made a best effort to redact the documents and beyond pronouncements from the US government I have heard no evidence that they failed at it. So I'd say Wikileaks is being more balanced than the US government in this matter.
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
Are we going to know the executors of Politkovskaya or Litvinienko, the cause of April 10th airplane crash at Smolensk, the secrets behind Beslan bombing?
I served in Iraq twice and found many of the documents I wrote on Wikileaks, just check for Haditha from August 2006 to April 2007 or Karmah from Jan 2008 to August 2008. I wrote most of those. The funny thing is that all of these documents already actually available in unclassified form from the Marine Corps Historical Society in Quantico Virginia. The unclassified version from the Historical Society have the names, places, and weapons capabilities redacted. Which are the exact same redactions made by Wikileaks. So my question to the media is why haven't you been taking advantage of these documents from the archive? Why is this news when Wikileaks releases them? I think most journalists simply are too lazy to go through archives and just latch on to a story when it has some entertainment value. For all of the low-level documents Mr. Assange released, he has broken very little new ground. That is probably because most of it was already available from the military.
What is...a cock meat sandwich?
- Harold
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It essentially boils down to whether you believe in the War on Terror or not.
In other words, it essentially boils down to whether you're an indoctrinated drone or not. All that the government has proved lately is that terrorism works. The people lose many of their freedoms in exchange for a false sense of security, and they just accept it.
Maybe it's because I agree, but this sure seems more like a strong opinion than a troll. Can someone explain why this is modded troll?
I think the military-industrial complex has decided that slashdot is in need of some tough love.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
As I see it, ANY information may (and will) lead to jury pool contamination, therefore, everything should be kept secret. This is one of the main reasons I have sworn to never join Facebook.
http://www.thelocal.se/19376/20090511/
Discussions of rape nowadays use examples of women who are asleep, or have taken drugs or drunk too much alcohol, in order to argue that they cannot properly consent to sex. If they feel taken advantage of the next day, they may call what happened rape. The Daphne project’s Sweden researchers propose that those accused of rape ought to have to ‘prove consent’, but attempts to legislate and document seduction and desire are unlikely to succeed.
I'm sure someone who speaks the language can provide some case law, but I'm sure you'd demand to see the original documents.
PS Obama was born in Hawaii. True story.
If you have have a copy of the Taliban's membership roster, or North Koera's nuclear plans, or something similar, Wikileaks would be more than happy to publish that.
Interestingly, I bet the US government would be even less happy about that than the Iraq war stuff.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
...Julian Assange's coordinates.
Then the US government came and said to them, "CIA, if Julian releases more documents, how many times more women should we accuse him of raping? As many as seven times?" The CIA said to them, "Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times.”
The better we are at protecting soldiers from hostile fire, the larger the percentage of the deaths that are going to be caused by friendly fire. The fact that the friendly fire percentage is large doesn't mean anything unless the number is large.
Really, flamebait? Do people not understand sarcasm? Do people on slashdot ACTUALLY believe he commited those rapes in Sweden? or do we have dense mods again this week?
Idiots. (this is flamebait, you fucking morons)
It sounds like you are well on you way to understanding why private companies are more efficient.