BS: Wikileaks - how embarrassing

Subject: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:12 PM

Listening to the news tonight, we are now finding out about all the things we knew about our untrusted governments.

I bet there are a few people fuming under the collar tonight!

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:19 PM

Some highlights:

*Arab leaders - including Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah - urging the US to attack Iran and end its nuclear weapons programme.

*the security of Pakistani nuclear material that could be used to make an atomic weapon.

*The widespread use of computer hacking by China's government is also reported.

* Iran attempting to adapt North Korean rockets for use as long-range missiles

* Corruption within the Afghan government, with concerns heightened when a senior official was found to be carrying more than $50m in cash on a foreign trip

* Bargaining to empty the Guantanamo Bay prison camp - including Slovenian diplomats being told to take in a freed prisoner if they wanted to secure a meeting with President Barack Obama

* Germany being warned in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for US Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in an operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was abducted and held in Afghanistan

* US officials being instructed to spy on the UN's leadership by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

* The very close relationship between Russian PM Vladimir Putin and his Italian counterpart Silvio Berlusconi

* Alleged links between the Russian government and organised crime

* Yemen's president talking to then US Mid-East commander General David Petraeus about attacks on Yemeni al-Qaeda bases and saying: "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours"

* Faltering US attempts to prevent Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:21 PM

More:

    • Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear program to be stopped by any means, including military.

    • Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".

    • Robert Gates, the US defense secretary, warned in February that if diplomatic efforts failed, "we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both".

    • Major General Amos Yadlin, Israeli's military intelligence chief, warned last year: "Israel is not in a position to underestimate Iran and be surprised like the US was on 11 September 2001."

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: gnu
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:23 PM

Tip of the iceberg... but it will all be shoved to the back burner with the distraction of the Korean crisis... spin doctors... hopefully, they won't spin out of control.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:26 PM

Yet more:

Pakistan forcing Taliban militants to keep fighting, Karzai says in leaked cable

Afghan President Hamid Karzai told a US envoy this year that the Pakistani government is forcing Taliban fighters to keep fighting coalition forces, according to a State Department cable released by WikiLeaks.

If true, the allegation would add evidence to claims Pakistan is intentionally prolonging the war effort to ensure that any future peace settlement results in an Afghan "satellite state" of Pakistan.

Discussing the arrest of de facto Taliban leader Mullah Baradar earlier this year, Karzai said Pakistan detained Baradar because he was willing to negotiate peace with coalition forces -- something Pakistan doesn't want to see, according to Karzai.

The cable, published Sunday by the New York Times, is marked "secret" and dated February of this year. It describes a conversation between Karzai and Frank Ruggiero, a deputy of US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke.

"Senior Taliban fighters in Pakistan may be prepared to reintegrate, [Karzai] said, but are forced by the Pakistan Government to continue to fight," the cable reports.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:32 PM

Unbeleivable

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:42 PM

Unsurprising

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: gnu
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:47 PM

Indeed, John... sad innit?

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 05:56 PM

Canada is appearing sporadically throughout the information released so far.

A 2009 cable dealing with Afghan president Hamid Karzai's brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, speaks of the powerful local leader and reputed drug trafficker in Khandahar province lobbying Canada for contracts to go to his friends.

"AWK is understood to have a stake in private security contracting, and has aggressively lobbied the Canadians to have his security services retained for the Dahla Dam refurbishment. Both he and the governor have tried to exert control over how contracts are awarded in the province all of which could be a significant conflict of interest in the province," the cable reads.

One cable from the American embassy in Tripoli, Libya, makes reference to "Libyan Leader Muammar al-Qadhafi" and his planned trip to the United Nations. Gadhafi had planned to stop in Newfoundland on his return trip prior to the stopover being cancelled by Ottawa. According to the cable, Qadhafi has a fear of flying over water and cannot fly for more than eight hours.

There are also references in several cables to American efforts to have other countries take prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay military detention site. American diplomats tried to get Belgium to take prisoners by promising that the move would help raise the country's stature within Europe while the tiny Pacific island nation of Kiribati was offered money, reported to be millions of dollars, to take Chinese Muslim prisoners known as Uyghurs.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST, Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 06:10 PM

And which Royal doing what that was "inappropriate" - I have no broadband or otherwise no doubt I could find out (like the last great "royal leak" about Prince Charles being buggered by a footman)

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 06:14 PM

There's no information about that one yet, Richard. I googled it along with about six million others. The mind will have to gleefully boggle for a little longer. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 06:17 PM

BBC understatement- some cables showing surprising 'candor'.

Also heard on the BBC- the Guardian is cleaning up some statements containing 'unflattering' remarks about some leaders.

I doubt that there will be a lot that hasn't already been guessed at by sharper newshawks.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 09:16 PM

"* US officials being instructed to spy on the UN's leadership by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton"

Haha - from the day the UN building opened that was happening - no news here.... move on citizen, nothing to see here... and I remember the Russians presenting a gianT US seal which was discovered to have a microphone in it.... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: andrew e
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 09:52 PM

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/comidwiki.php

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 28 Nov 10 - 11:03 PM

andrew e, that's a slightly funny spoof site but the problem with those kinds of sites is that there is a small number of people who don't realize that they are being duped and think that what they are reading is true. I know that's hard to believe but hey, the dumbing down of America has realized some successes.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 02:08 AM

Bobad: "*Arab leaders - including Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah - urging the US to attack Iran and end its nuclear weapons programme."

Bobad: "• Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".

Bobad:"• Robert Gates, the US defense secretary, warned in February that if diplomatic efforts failed, "we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both".

Bobad:" • Major General Amos Yadlin, Israeli's military intelligence chief, warned last year: "Israel is not in a position to underestimate Iran and be surprised like the US was on 11 September 2001."

These, I have posted references to, as early as last year. The one about Saudi Arabia pointing us who to engage, in the middle east, as late as within the last two weeks!....and...without the help of Wikileaks!

You think that's bad, too bad you don't know the details of Iran/Contra, and 'guns'(read weapons, and systems) for hostages!..and the hokey front that was put up, as to why...versus the truth.
the first time I heard about it with very fine details, I cried for my country..(true story).

Nonetheless, though I think Wikileaks, is doing a disservice to our country's efforts...BUT, so is the corruption....but, nobody wants to hear it....it may offend their partisan sensibilities...(maybe that should be discussed in the 'Delusion Thread!')

ANYBODY HOME, YET??

...rolls eyes upward, and whistles a light tune.....



GfS

P.S. Surely there are bigger and wider things to write and compose about, than bullshit, worn out 40 year old topics, and regurgitated, processed political 'news' headlines.....
...gee, I wonder if this Dm will go with the Lindsey Lohan song??
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 03:24 AM

No I am not surprised about leaked secrets, we in the UK are used to all that aren't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 03:48 AM

Ok, in terms of exposing hypocrisy and in confirming / denying the rumour mill as it presently exists.

Just one small thing; I like 99% of the planet's population would like to see issues resolved rather than perpetuate. For this, ideas need to be discussed, diplomatic points gained and conceded.

A bit difficult if you are concerned that if you speak your mind, it will be all over the media at some future point?

I don't condone any of the less savoury attitudes or instructions recently published, but I do worry that like in business, negotiations require a modicum of Chatham House Rules. Otherwise, discussions are strangled due to tight lips. If we work on the idea that most diplomatic discussions are in order to resolve situations, then these embarrassing leaks may make for new rules on speech. Churchill once said "Jaw jaw, not war war."

Of course, there are other tittle tattle bits and if M'unlearned friend can't wait for the latest revelations about the Royal family, may I suggest he purchases a copy of Heat magazine? If you link it to a client, you can always claim it as a tax write off....

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,cs
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:02 AM

The funniest thing is the US going to all that trouble spying on the UN: getting fingerprints, email addresses, faxes, iris scans, DNA data, telephone numbers and all the rest of this personal data ..and then failing to cover their own tracks!

Reminds me of this Peeping Tom. He liked to watch (while, ahem.. you know) the busty blonde in her garden next door from behind his net curtain. One day she was looking up at his window with a grumpy face. He got his brother to stand in the window while he looked up from the garden, and discovered his silhouette (plus hand movements) was clearly visible to her...

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:03 AM

Steamin' Willie: "if M'unlearned friend can't wait for the latest revelations about the Royal family, may I suggest he purchases a copy of Heat magazine?"

Oh man cool!!..Where can you get me one!!!???!!

GfS
P.S. Now tell me, I just gotta know.......Did you get your name from reading heat magazine, or the other way around???

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:13 AM

Oh, I forgot. I suppose they don't sell it in Sanity or surrounding areas. They might sell it in my local newsagent I suppose. Ask Richard III, he seems to need his fix on Royal gossip, hence my wee dig at the shallowness of his enquiry.

(Sometimes, you just have spell it out just in case....)

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Lox
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:36 AM

There is, and never has been, any such thing as an accidental leak.

I think this whole thing is a massive deliberate propaganda tool masquerading as "the real truth uncovered".

I don't believe it for a second.

We love to thik we're on the inside - like we've "blown their cover"

Bullshit!


This was engineered.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Lox
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:44 AM

.


Funny how Israel and Saudi Arabia are both allegedly sending secret messages concerning Iranian terrorism.

Funny how they are talking about preventing another 9/11.


Duh - so therefore - Iran must be Bad ... Duh ...


only - if I remember right, the official line was that the pilots of the planes that hit WTC were Saudi Arabians.

And if I remember right, the two men arrrested by the new Jersay police department after running away from a van filled with high explosives on 9-11, who later, on Israeli TV, said that they were there "as observers" of the atrocity, were Israeli ...



Oh - and did I mention that these "leaks" are BULLSHIT?





They are nothing more than cheap, weak, intellligence insulting propaganda.



.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:52 AM

Why are you all so outraged, and surprised.
None of it is in the least bit unusual, surely you don't think that the Russkis are the only ones using hidden listening devices, or using their businessmen to collect info, when in another country.
Remember the old definition af an ambassador,
'An honest man, sent abroad to lie for his country'

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 06:58 AM

>Reminds me of this Peeping Tom. He liked to watch (while, ahem.. you know) the busty blonde in her garden next door from behind his net curtain. One day she was looking up at his window with a grumpy face. He got his brother to stand in the window while he looked up from the garden, and discovered his silhouette (plus hand movements) was clearly visible to her... <

Sounds like an ex-husband........

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,cs
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 07:12 AM

"Sounds like an ex-husband........"

Eew!

"Why are you all so outraged, and surprised."

Where?

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 08:34 AM

This is a tough one because we are not only dealing with the r4ightness or wrongness of someone going public with classified information but the secondary message relates to "whistle blowers" in general... Seems that over the last several years the "whistle blower" has been demonized... That, in general, is not a good thing... There are some very messed up things out there that need to come out...

I just hope that in an attempt to bust the folks who do put out classified information that shouldn't have been put out that we don't make the laws so restrictive as to also bust the guy who knows the rivets that are being used at his plant making F-17s are defective, tries to remedy it within the plant and told to "shut up" and goes public...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 08:40 AM

Openess in EVERYTHING is long overdue...

Sure would make people think twice, be more honest...possibly, maybe..

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 08:43 AM

...the US going to all that trouble spying on the UN...and then failing to cover their own tracks!

Yeah, that's the C.I.A and the Department of Hopeless Stupidity in a nutshell.

Sure am glad they're out there protecting me - I feel so safe & secure I could just shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 10:45 AM

No response from Downing St, but there will be when Wiki release what the American Government really think of Posh Dave,

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Gervase
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 11:24 AM

Reading the coverage of the cables I'm left with a growing admiration for US diplomats. Previously I'd imagine them to be box-headed paperclip pushers with no imagination or world view, but the cables show them to be remarkably astute when it comes to guaging what's afoot.
As for the outrage at spookery - what's the surprise? With the redactions made, the only outcome I can see is a few red faces and a little less posturing by various politicos about the 'speshul relationship'.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 11:30 AM

BTW, when did editing/censoring, become redacting?
The boys in the trenches whose letters arrived home with thick blue pencil lines through words that might give the enemy clues, didn't say bloody redactors! Or did they?

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 02:53 PM

While I find it refreshing that other mideast nations view Iranian nuclear development as a sword of damocles held over the region and the world, the disclosure that the Saudis urged agressive action is damaging to all of those who would work to limit the threat.

Surely even our most starry eyed believers in transparency of government must understand that all nations conduct covert surveillance of enemies AND friends, and that many of those involved in covert intelligence could be fatally compromised by such disclosures. To say that such secret information is proof of sneaky behavior is like saying war is proof of violent behavior.

The disclosure of this information should be considered treason, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 03:08 PM

Exactly, LEJ. And the US/UK/etc. should issue warranties for same and ask for extradition.

But I can't be surprised, having recently seen far, far too many such telegrams and documents (now unclassified) that date back to the middle '60s. Peek at some of the stuff at this site to see what I mean. And this documentation is from 1968-69!

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,cs
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 03:11 PM

"all nations conduct covert surveillance of enemies AND friends"

I thought Hilary Clinton initiated the US programme of spying on the UN leaders in 2009? A pretty recent development for US espionage. I do hope the rest of the world are better at spying on the US, than the US is at spying on the rest of the world - as it would certainly seem to be prudent considering supposed discussions about starting WWIII.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 03:40 PM

Lox: "There is, and never has been, any such thing as an accidental leak."

I tend to agree with Lox on this one. It would seem that if this was done without 'authorization' and things were tapped, or hacked, you'd think there would be charges brought up, like espionage.
Then on the other hand, we DID get promised 'transparency'....you think this is what he had in mind?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: andrew e
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:23 PM

More info here:

http://whatreallyhappened.com/

Scroll down

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:37 PM

Another batch of stuff from WikiLeaks that amounts to absolutely nothing. Are they selling this crap to the likes of the Washington Post, Der Spiegel or the Guianard? Were I Editor of any of them I'd call Assange and ask for my money back.

What a complete and utter non-event.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 04:46 PM

What?
Something terribly wrong here-
For once, I agree with Teribus!

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Lox
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 05:06 PM

Wierd ...

Q agreeing with Teribus ... GfS agreeing with me ...

And people think the leaks are a surprise!

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 05:35 PM

Forty years from now, when the REAL dope comes out, you'll be surprised. I'll be damned near 106 years old probably won't really give a rat's patootie.

(In passing, there has never been a time when countries didn't spy on both their friends and their enemies. The UK, the US, France, Canada...everyone spies on everyone else all the time.)

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: olddude
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 06:49 PM

What movie was it that Jack Nickelson playing a Marine Commander said
"truth, you can't handle the truth"

biggest question for me and one more troublesome, How the hell did a pfc get access to this. All communications is supposed to be encrypted double key pairs? so how the hell is he able to print this right off the system? That someone needs to answer for it is far more important then what is contained in the leaks. These are embassy transmissions. Somebody really dropped the ball as this is not the 1950's where someone manually decodes , prints then runs to the intended addressee with a piece of paper. Transmissions are in key pairs, private and public keys. The decryption is done by a private key known only to the addressee.

Major breach

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: bobad
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 07:04 PM

This about the purported leaker Bradley Manning:

"Manning had access to two classified networks from two separate secured laptops: SIPRNET, the Secret-level network used by the Department of Defense and the State Department, and the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System which serves both agencies at the Top Secret/SCI level.

The networks, he said, were both "air gapped" from unclassified networks, but the environment at the base made it easy to smuggle data out.

"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."

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: olddude
Date: 29 Nov 10 - 08:01 PM

Amazing because my clients have secure networks also, but even if someone was able to connect and was an employee or agent they would never be able to access anything because the intended delivery of such material is encrypted for the eyes of the addressee only. Only they could decrypt the message. Unless someone wanted to spend 1000 years of computing to try and brute force it. So what this tells me is the network is secure from outside forces but everything on the network is open to those with access privilege... good grief.

What company does any one of us work for that you can read your bosses emails and documents openly from another PC Good grief

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: freda underhill
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 02:48 AM

A Sydney paper had an article saying that several documents show that the US had in turn been providing assistance to Turkey's Kurdish separatist movement, the PKK.

Founded in the 1970s, the PKK is listed as a terrorist organisation in Turkey, the US, the European Union and Australia.

A report in Israel's Jerusalem Post said the US military documents refer to the PKK as ''warriors for freedom and Turkish citizens'' and say that the US had set free arrested PKK members in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 04:09 AM

I am waiting for the rest of the Wiki data dump of a quarter million documents.

The more we know the more we can see how ignorant we are on a collective level. Afterall each interpretation and comment we read, courtesy of Wikileaks, the more realize that the goverment State Dept is much like a social networking site operating under assigned policy rules.

How smart could we be when political appointees from the sphere of Wall St. and Military Arms sales are promoted over people who have devoted their lifetime to an education of foreign affairs, history and social/psychological sciences.

The Wiki leaks associated with Mudcat PMs should be most revealing.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 05:18 AM

BTW
Wikileaks was blocked from a 'direct' mass data dump on the internet by a US cyber operative who used similar tactics against Islamic sites. According to hi he did it uilaterally.

As a result the data dump was delayed by a week and went out to various news sources in the form of a snail mailed memory stick.



FOX news devotees are crying out for indictments of traitorous espionage and treason which is hilarious considering the fact that those laws do not apply to non citizens or for information that is not classified. Even if classified the Suprerem Court decided after the Pentagon papers that such information is allowable to be diseminated under law.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 06:12 AM

WOO HOOO The next Wiki dump will expose GOldman Sachs!

OMG Do you realize that Goldman Sachs is the essence of the villianous enterprises that James Bond fantasies only hinted at.

This is the begining of the age of the neo renaisance.

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 06:44 AM

BIG US BANK LEAKS

Subject: RE: BS: Wikileaks - how embarrasing
From: olddude
Date: 30 Nov 10 - 08:26 AM

Goldman has recently agreed a 550 million dollar settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission to settle fraud charges

Wow, from what I read they and all of their subsidiaries got 100's of billions from the taxpayer ...What a deal huh ... I bet they are crying. Someone may have to give up one of their private yachts. No villain in any movie could match them in real life.