CIA Launches WTF To Investigate Wikileaks
krou writes "In an effort to investigate the impact of the leaked diplomatic cables, the CIA have launched the Wikileaks Task Force, commonly referred to at CIA headquarters as 'WTF.' 'The Washington Post said the panel was being led by the CIA's counter-intelligence centre, although it has drawn in two dozen members from departments across the agency.' Although the agency has not seen much of its own information leaked in the cables, some revelations (such as spying at the UN) originated from direct requests by the CIA. The Guardian notes that, 'WTF is more commonly associated with the Facebook and Twitter profiles of teenagers than secret agency committees. Given that its expanded version is usually an expression of extreme disbelief, perhaps the term is apt for the CIA's investigation.'"
But seriously, this sounds like a much more sensible approach than many other US responses we've seen so far.
First they give 3 million people access to this information and then they complain at a guy that has nothing to do with it. Given the way the US threats people I am sure that the poor soldier who has been in isolation for months has gotten 'an offer he can't refuse' to sign a fake testimony against Assange. The weirdest part about this all is that half the population seems to believe the threat of terrorism is coming from some Muslims living in the desert. Totally blind for the real terrorism we face everyday, put in place by the so called government. Don't believe? Start a blog, become a journalist or try to get on an airplane without having some dick take a look at your dick, or even worse, your 5-y/o dick. Terrorism from Muslims can be a threat, however, the only terrorism I actually witness everyday is from white guys in suits.
Not surprised, but did they aid in obtaining them? I got the impression they aided in publishing, but that Manning obtained them all on his own.
meep
Just what would that "reason to believe" be? I have seen absolutely no evidence supporting your claim, and I've been following this whole thing very closely.
Given that its expanded version is usually an expression of extreme disbelief, perhaps the term is apt for the CIA's investigation.
This really shouldn't surprise anybody. An organization aids a person in obtaining classified documents and the CIA investigates? Preposterous!
So, the primary question should still be: Is wikileaks considered the leak itself, or is Wikileaks considered journalism which doesn't fit in the standard state propaganda (but should still be legal under the freedom of speech laws).
I thought that the leak was in the US army, not outside hackers... Anyway, they might as well broaden the investigation to all media?
CIA launches MTF, Media Task Force, to investigate the impact of a well-informed population.
The only organization that aided Bradley Manning in obtaining classified documents was U.S. army intelligence. He was sitting in Bagdad browsing diplomatic cables from every embassy in the world, none of which had anything to do with the type of intelligence he was supposed to be gathering. There was no hacking involved.
Bradley Manning:
“I would come in with music on a CD-RW labeled with something like ‘Lady Gaga,’ erase the music then write a compressed split file,” he wrote. “No one suspected a thing and, odds are, they never will.” “I listened and lip-synced to Lady Gaga’s ‘Telephone’ while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history,” he added later. ”Weak servers, weak logging, weak physical security, weak counter-intelligence, inattentive signal analysis … a perfect storm.”
The US military basically left a $100 bill laying on the bar while they went to the bathroom and some lowly PFC found it and did what anyone would have in his situation. Now they are trying to pretend like this worldwide network of thieves dropped in like ninjas and snatched it from their 3ft thick titanium safe.
Think for a second on what Mr. Mannings goal was... informing the public. Now think of how easily it would be for a foreign security agency or even a terrorist sympathizer to achieve the same level of clearance. Their goals would be far less noble, and far less public. They'd most likely never get caught. Bradley Manning has probably done more to help secure the US Militarys network than any idiot at the CIA that doesn't even know what the acronym WTF stands for.
then you say
Which are contradictory. You also said
which clearly isn't true. The law here is very murky, and "aiding in submitting documents" probably isn't a crime. If there was a clear crime comitted here, we'd have heard specifically what it is by now.
"It doesn't take a rocket scientist" -I guess I should leave then
He is trying to restate, the official excuse for why wikileaks is considered to have engaged in criminal activities, as his own opinion.
What you think of people who for some reason needs to pretend to think for themselves when they verbatime restate official statements, I will let you decide.
before the American people hit the reset button on the country? The government is obviously completely out of control. We have the TSA fondling children and strip-searching innocent citizens who simply want to travel from point A to point B. We have a Congress and Whitehouse who simply can't be bothered to do anything to help the Middle Class, preferring instead to concentrate even more wealth and power in the hands of the ultra-rich, ultra-connected, unaccountable, and demonstrably incompetent (eg. tax breaks for the wealthy and net neutrality). And thanks to Wikileaks the illusion that the government knows what it's doing has been shattered.
It's almost like those in power are betting each other they can screw the American people indefinitely, unapologetically, right in front of them and no one will do anything. And amazingly, the most heavily armed populace in the world is letting them get away with it.
Is there no steel left in the American soul?
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
It beggars belief that any intel officer could do the equivalent to "select * from reports" and nobody batted an eyelid. If he had to search a database, he should be required to enter search criteria. Results should be limited. His search should be logged. Unusual or suspicious searches should flagged for immediate attention. Even the text of the reports could even tagged in obvious and less obvious ways so if they did leak that the culprit could be forensically identified.
So while we can debate about the ethics of what wikileaks is doing, the reality is that the fault for all the leaks lays fairly and squarely at the feet of the US governments sloppy security. If Bradly Manning was doing it then who else was? I wonder if China, Russia, Iran etc. have had to feign surprise at these leaks. Perhaps they've long owned their own copies.
I don't think it is so much that we 'slashtards', as you so lovingly refer to such a wide group of people whom you'll probably never even meet, simply disagree. Rather, I think it is that you're without a point. You say:
Assange provided Manning with locations and instructions on how to submit the documents...
This is only a crime if using Wikileaks is a crime. As far as I know, it is not. Until they had the documents, there was no legal reason to believe that they were in fact classified. Manning could have been deceiving them, etc. Wikileaks is designed to receive files, so aiding someone in that task is within the scope of helping someone use their website. This is a thought crime, at best.
...to Wikileaks instead of submitting them like everyone else and waiting for Wikileaks to sift through the submissions, and the timeline from when Manning had the documents to when Wikileaks released them supports this claim.
And giving him special treatment is what sort of crime, exactly?
Maybe, maybe, maybe if Assange and Wikileaks were under the jurisdiction of American law then MAYBE you'd have a nitpicky point. As they're not, you don't. There's no international consensus that helping someone use a website and giving someone priority status are crimes. These points alone are no more or less significant than the entire overall process of receiving the documents and publishing them.
Molehill, meet mirror. Mountain is over there.
Yes I understand that our government has to be transparent. There are however, methods to get information in the properway. Using the law, one can subpena the governemet, private industry, and individuals. Using legal ways information can be forced to be released.
Except that this isn't actually true because there's no one to enforce these rules and laws. There's zero oversight. Consider the cases of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman. In the former case they attempted to make a young woman a war hero against her will. They fabricated a 'Rambo from West Virginia' story out of whole cloth, and tried to force her to go along with it. In the latter case they assassinated a dissenter before his scheduled visit with Noam Chomsky, falsified the coroner's report, burned his uniform and his diary, then lied to the family. In these two cases we had people on the inside telling us the truth and STILL the military lied about it. What of the myriad other situations where there's nobody brave enough to tell the truth?
Maybe Wikileaks is not the answer, but someone needs to do something, so at least in this way I support them. Stop the lies, end the secrets. Let's move together into a new era of being decent human beings.
It's "funny" how there's all this FCC internet regulation, WTF investigation, and renewed vigor with "net neutrality" crap now that wikileaks has dropped the massive turd on the white house front door.
Before it was really just whining about lack of sales tax on internet sales, and spam, but now that the dirty laundry is embarrassing powers that be, they are flexing their muscles and lashing out at "the internet".
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
This isn't I Can Haz Cheezburger. Stop posting like that. You make Slashdot shittier.