WikiLeaks Releases Cache of 400,000 Iraq War Documents 676
Caelesto writes "Today around 21:00 GMT, WikiLeaks declared an end to their media embargo of over 400,000 Iraq War documents after Al Jazeera released their story 30 minutes ahead of schedule. These documents, which have been kept under wraps by WikiLeaks for months, may reveal tortures and murders ignored by coalition forces during the fighting and occupation in Iraq. The Pentagon maintained that releasing these documents represented a danger to US troops, but already dozens of news outlets are scrambling to report on what could be a devastating blow to the US Armed Forces' already tattered image." Reader Entropy98 points to the BBC's coverage, as well. If you care to download the collection of files, it's available as a torrent.
I've never given money to a web site before (Score:5, Interesting)
But I just donated 50 EUR to WikiLeaks.
Do two wrongs make a right? (Score:5, Interesting)
Posting these may be wrong but it does bring to like some abuses by all the groups involved which have either never been discussed or their existence never known before. Personally bringing abuses to light which were previously hidden makes this partially right.
Good Direct Link (Score:3, Interesting)
It is still getting WorldDotted at the moment though.
Tattered Image (Score:5, Interesting)
"scrambling to report on what could be a devastating blow to the US Armed Forces' already tattered image."
Am I the only who didn't think the first release left the US Armed Forces with a tattered image? These are huge volumes of reports from the US Armed forces about the actions of the US Armed Forces (good, bad, etc) the fact that all actions of the armed forces are so carefully logged leads me to believe that despite issues and anecdotes the US Armed Forces are actually pretty damn professional... Top level officials not wanting these documents publicly released is unfortunate but the fact that these documents even exist is a testament to professionalism on the part of the Armed Forces.
Just us, or ... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm curious why we've not seen any releases of Russian actions in Chechnya, by these folks.
Re:the US and Israel butchers assassins torturers (Score:3, Interesting)
The US around the world (and its mini me Israel) stand for only injustice, pain, suffering, oppression, torture, murder, evil.
Same could be said for a dozen other countries. China. North Korea. Iran. Somalia. Uganda. Etc
Americans are complicit in all their government does since they do not stop it.
That is vague. Americans in general are not for the above statements. It is the global interest and reigning plutocracy that has led us to the state of New Rome. Because of the wealth gap, money buys power, and the wealth distribution controls what really happens in America. I am not talking about middle upper class folks, I am talking about the old money families with hundreds of millions. New money not so much, but old money, they do what ever they can to really maintain the status-quo and expand their empire, and they do it through lobbyist and all the classical 'morally corrupt' things you can think of.
You may argue that my counter is vague as well, in response I provide my citation, read The Trillion-Dollar Conspiracy [amazon.com]. It summarizes our situation (the world as well) and sites hundreds of legitimate references.
Elections are coming up... if you vote for a Democrat or Republican you are guilty of all the crimes revealed in these documents (and more). Stop voting for the single party rule which just equals more of the same. If you want your vote to count, vote Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, Green, independent, etc.
I agree. Now why couldn't you be as civil in your first paragraph? The immediate soapbox flaming is a good way to get modded into oblivion.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
I like to think of it as the release of secret information has an obvious anti-american bias.
Facebook Censoring Torrent Link (Score:3, Interesting)
I just tried to post the link to the torrent on my facebook, and got this:
This message contains blocked content that has previously been flagged as abusive or spammy. Let us know if you think this is an error.
Hmmmm... the link hasn't even been up that long, has it? Me thinks Zuckerberg and company are staying on Uncle Sam's friendly side...
Re:Facebook Censoring Torrent Link (Score:3, Interesting)
Are you sure it's Facebook-the-company doing this, and not Facebook-the-social-community-site with plenty of people who disagree with WikiLeaks' publishing of these documents who can hit a "flag this message as ..." button?
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
You should never Slashdot after a few pints
I think some people on Slashdot really need a pint quite badly.
Jerking off probably isnt the best example of a fact
Jerking off, in the context all of men and women, is probably one of the best examples of a fact. I would say that one could argue it is a law. I am reminded of a study done by Johnson & Johnson that concluded that 99% of all people masturbated. The other 1% lied about it.
Which brings me to another question, what have you got against string theory?
what goes around, comes around (Score:5, Interesting)
many of us think this is a key point in history where freedom is clashing with government invasion of privacy. we see escalating levels of snooping on the part of 'the officials' and the people are forced to endure this treatment under the guise of 'making us safer'. we know its not for that purpose but we are told we have to give up our privacy to the government.
well, wikileaks is giving them a taste of their own medicine. not for that reason primarily, I don't think, but its in there to some extent.
its a statement of: if you are going to dish it out, you BETTER be ready to take it.
the governments (all over the world) are trying to limit free speech (the internet) and seem to have fallen in love with keeping detailed data on all its citizens. they want a one-sided arrangement.
its not fair but there was nothing the little guy can do, no matter which country you are in. (name one that is really 'free' these days. please.)
wiki is sort of a dose of 'fuck you right back'. again, even if not fully intended, it kind of comes off that way.
sort of like a big bully getting a dose of medicine.
Re:Just us, or ... (Score:1, Interesting)
You forgot a reason:
The Russian people know exactly what would happen to anyone foolish enough to leak a massive quantity of secret documents.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
We have bias on two sides: Wikileaks, and the US forces who wrote the reports.
The facts in them, though, should be fairly accurate.
If the reports aren't factual, I think it is far more likely that they were falsified by those who wrote them in the first place than by Wikileaks.
You can make a different interpretation of them if you think the reports are too biased (by either side).
How to reduce unwanted wars (Score:5, Interesting)
But you can still have leaders lead the frontline in spirit.
Basically, if leaders are going to send troops on an _offensive_ war/battle (not defensive war) there must be a referendum on the war.
If there are not enough votes for the war, those leaders get put on death-row.
At a convenient time later, a referendum is held to redeem each leader. Leaders that do not get enough votes get executed. For example if too many people stay at home and don't bother voting - the leaders get executed.
If it turns out later that the war was justified, a fancy ceremony is held, and the executed leaders are awarded a purple heart or equivalent, and you have people say nice things about them, cry and that sort of thing.
If it turns out later that the leaders tricked the voters, a referendum can be held (need to get enough signatures to start such a referendum, just to prevent nutters from wasting everyone elses time).
This proposal has many advantages:
1) Even leaders who don't really care about those "young soldiers on the battlefield" will not consider starting a war lightly.
2) The soldiers will know that the leaders want a war enough to risk their own lives for it.
3) The soldiers will know that X% of the population want the war.
4) Those being attacked will know that X% of the attackers believe in the war - so they want a war, they get a war - for sufficiently high X, collateral damage becomes insignificant. They might even be justified in using WMD and other otherwise dubious tactics. If > 90% of the country attacking you want to kill you and your families, what is so wrong about you using WMD as long as it does not affect neighbouring countries?
Horrible csv file handling (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Horrible csv file handling (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The Pentagon would say mass (Score:3, Interesting)
Go back and read that article. They didn't counter the statement that there is a risk. What they did state was that no intelligence sources or methods were uncovered. And an un-named NATO official noted that there are no cases of an Afghan needing protection or relocation.
That does take some of the fire out of the made-for-Fox-News bite "they have blood on their hands." But it doesn't eliminate the issue of providing enemy forces with intelligence.
Re:the US and Israel butchers assassins torturers (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, the 40 million or so people who voted for Dubya had nothing whatsoever to do with his win.
But could you explain to me again how it is Ralph Nader's fault that the Democrats have the White House, the House of Representatives and a super-majority in the Senate and still can't get much of anything worthwhile done?
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
Weird. The country with the world-record in political assassination is the US. Explain to me why I should be more scared of the shitty remains of the USSR than of your chacals?
Was it worth it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Disgusting (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I've never given money to a web site before (Score:3, Interesting)
Leaks like this remove the guesswork and mean Blackwater tarnishes their own reputation and not the reputation of whatever military unit found the bodies.
Exactly, that is what I am trying to say as well (Score:3, Interesting)
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1835400&cid=33995054
By making the horrors of war itself unacceptable, the pentagon feels forced to hide them but WITH that hiding they can hide far more. Area 51. If you even dare ask what is dare, you are quickly put with the alien nutters who think marsians are everywhere. A very effective cover.
If you scream when you see some blood in a butchersshop, they will sanitize the meat production until meat is something that comes in little containers with tissue to soak up the blood. But that makes it very hard to question food production practices if you somehow expect your daily meat but don't want any blood. That allows real cruelty, unneeded cruelty to animals, to be hidden. If you want beef, a cow has to die. Once you accept that you can ask how the cow should be killed. It doesn't have to made to suffer endlessly or be transported hundred of miles to do so. BUT those who want their meat AND not see blood allow a curtain to be raised behind which darkness can reign unchecked.
The Iraq war is often claimed to be for resources. Fine, lets assume it is. Then do YOU not claim those resources? Anyone who drives a car about a single metric ton, is in need of the Iraq oil to do so. The US needs oil because its people want oil, but they don't want the nasty truth that wars have always been fought for resources.
The real horror of this story is that for all the outrage, when the prices of petrol goes up, resistance against the US protection its supply lines will go down. It is a whole sordid deal that begins with YOU wanting to drive a 3 ton SUV goes through a president who doesn't want high fuel prices and ends up with some country being invaded or the CIA supporting yet another dictator. Just see the mess the US is causing in Mexico right now. All because the US can't deal with its drug issue. Iraq happened because the US can't deal with its oil needs. It would be far simpler if it didn't have to appease the Arabs to keep oil while also wanting to support Israel for the sake of freedom. No oil dependence it could simply tell the Arabs to go to hell and this would never have seen Sadam in power or supported in the war against Iran. Iran would have no money to cause a fuzz. No oil, the arabs would be the backward nations their faithful wish to be. Sucks for all the other Arabs but hey, at least our hands are clean.
World politics are not nice. There are so many intrests fueled by a public that wants it fuel.
And then we send rednecks who couldn't get a job anywhere else to deal with johny foreigner in a fair and even handed manner after they just been shot at...
Sadly, I am to cynical to be outraged because I can see how the outrage at the "simple" crimes allows the extreme right, the powers that be, to hide behind the wall of the middle who might be outraged if only they didn't worry about fuel prices more. The teabaggers defend the indefensible because they feel forced into a corner. And the fact the teabaggers are here already shows how deeply divided the US is. Left and right, pro and anti-iraq war are so deeply divided that both sides feel compelled to side with their own, even if they are inside deeply against it. Got to support the troops, is a battle cry behind which covering up mass rape and murder are allowed to happen. Out of Iraq is a battle cry that allows an attitude that you got to tolerate everything in the world no matter what because someone might get hurt.
I am old enough to remember all the lefties in Holland demanding the world interfere in Iraq to stop the gassing ot the koerds. When finally the world did interfere, that was bad... but with the same breath they also demanded the world went into Darfur... can't have it both ways.
I have no solution for all of this. The US powers that be have allowed themselves to get once again dragged into a war, have its string pulled by people banned from Iraq to support them, believes that these people could hold power, believes that democracy can be enforced, demands for low petrol prices, etc etc. And in all that, countless forces make their own struggle for power. Hard to see how to get out of it.
Re:I've never given money to a web site before (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How to reduce unwanted wars (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wow (Score:1, Interesting)
Give me one fucking valid reason why you need your troops anywhere outside your own territory murdering people.
Give me one country where US troops are present where the local government doesn't want them there.
Give me one such government that represents the will of the people in that question.
All war, all the time (Score:5, Interesting)
A coalition of groups in the U.S. wanted the Iraq war:
The U.S. government has killed an estimated 11,000,000 people since the end of the 2nd world war, by invading or bombing or causing political problems in 24 countries.
So what comes next? (Score:1, Interesting)
Are we going to demand the arrest of policy makers? Military leaders?
Or just watch The Daily Show and shout "yeah take that government!!" all day?
I'm serious about this...I see a lot of passion, but what is anyone going to do?
Re:Playing devils advocate (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Playing devils advocate (Score:4, Interesting)
That's a bullshit notion about Iraq situation I see again and again. It is NOT a war, that is a lie. It is an ongoing atrocity against mankind for the purpose of lining the pockets of elite and increasing their power. Just as our arming and support of Saddam was. We have the blood of Saddam's actions on our hands as well as the blood being spilt now.
We lied that we would liberate the people from Saddam, instead nine years later our military and contractors are slaughtering, raping, and murdering innocents for amusement.
We lied that Al Qaeda was in Iraq or aligned with Al Qaeda, and then through deliberate poor strategy turned the place into magnet for Al Qaeda and recruiting ground.
We lied that Saddam was making new WMD.
We lied that this is war, by Constitution it is not. By purpose it is not.
We lied that we would bring freedom and democracy to the middle east, instead we force our puppets at gunpoint and have rigged elections.
Afghanistan is the same thing, those who attacked us aren't there and the elections are fake and not the people's choice. Those who don't go along with our farce are labeled "Taliban" and murdered.
Re:Putting soldiers lives at risk (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow you're right. We get manipulated even more than I thought. I always had the impression that the guy looked nervous and unhealthy but now I know why.