U.S. Counterinsurgency Manual Leaked, Calls for False Flag Operations, Suspension of Human Rights

reply to post by budski



Why do you automatically believe, so called documents that have supposedly been "leaked" and then published on the internet?

Who can verify that these are a real US documents? It sounds like it's just a bunch of crap that anyone who follows world events/news would assume and could write about in a phony document.

All rich countries manipulate other poorer countries, and all countries manipulate their people to some extent.

reply to post by Electro38


Have you read the whole thread?

Please do - and look at all the comments before attacking me.

It might be a little different to your immediate perception.

reply to post by budski


No, no, I'm not attacking you. Please don't be offended.

If they are real, outmoded documents then why do they have to be leaked?

If they had to be "leaked" then how can we verify that they are real?

I'm just saying, there's no way to verify anything that has been "leaked".

All powerful/rich governments to this stuff, not just the US and UK.

My problem is with people who like to point to the US for all problems and for being the boogie man. Look at your own gov.'s and see what else you might find.

reply to post by ADVISOR


Yeah , I am sure they never even imagined what would happen if that kind of knowledge fell in the hands of the wrong (RIGHT!) people right ?

I mean , why would they support dictatorships in 3rd world countries when that would only strength the US and prevent those countries to develop ... er what ?

Not trying to be a dick either btw

reply to post by Electro38


Those questions have already been explored in this thread - but I welcome your thoughts on this.

Fire off one question at a time and I will willingly converse - isn't that what ATS is about?



Roufas starred





[edit on 5/12/2008 by budski]

This document is 100% faked and here is how I know this.

I was a records keeper in my department in the military as one of my side jobs so to speak.

The first clue is the patches on the front of the document have a boarder around them that would never get passed quality control like that because it looks trashy and the patches look like bunk. The real military documents that have patches on covers are very clean and very eye pleasing as every patch is first designed on a computer and saved as a gif and look stunning compared to this junk.

Second the headers are purple. It is illigal literaly to have any color in a publications that has any color besides black or red and red is used only as warnings about certain outcomes if a procedure is not followed directly.

It is a complete fake and a very very bad one at that.

Originally posted by Darthorious
This document is 100% faked and here is how I know this.

I was a records keeper in my department in the military as one of my side jobs so to speak.

The first clue is the patches on the front of the document have a boarder around them that would never get passed quality control like that because it looks trashy and the patches look like bunk. The real military documents that have patches on covers are very clean and very eye pleasing as every patch is first designed on a computer and saved as a gif and look stunning compared to this junk.

Second the headers are purple. It is illigal literaly to have any color in a publications that has any color besides black or red and red is used only as warnings about certain outcomes if a procedure is not followed directly.

It is a complete fake and a very very bad one at that.

Uh... Are you smoking something?

The document is in black & white, there is no color at all in it, I see absolutely no color, just black and white, I also don't see any "patch" as well, could you try posting a screen cap of this magical, purple, patchy, document you've somehow found? I mean seriously, niether in the links the OP posted or the pdf file is there any purple, color, or "patches", I think you are either high on something or looking at the wrong document, angel dust is not good stuff, stay away from it lol.

-Lahara

"There will come a day of reckoning for the west - I just hope it's not in mylifetime, because... "

Lifetime...hmmmpfff. You still are in ignorance. This will happen in in this very lifetime and it's longterm ramifications will span into your next reincarnation into a human body here on earth.

Disturbing, and yet, not surprising- at all. Now that is the truly disturbing part.

I just read most of it. This is indeed, if real, a frightening document.

Nevertheless, while I am passionately opposed to the measures outlined therein being employed in any nation, it should be clarified that this manual does not appear to refer specifically or even generally to the United States or its allies.

It uses terms such as "the security forces" to refer to other countries' defense apparatus, and this quote in particular:

Legal Considerations. All restrictions, controls, and DA measures must be governed by the legality of these methods and their impact on the populace. In countries where government authorities do not have wide latitude in controlling the population, special or emergency legislation must be enacted. This emergency legislation may include a form of martial law permitting government forces to search without warrant, to detain without bringing formal charges, and to execute other similar actions.

...demonstrates that this is a counterinsurgency and counterintelligence manual intended for use in overseas conflicts.

Now, I don't agree with that either, mind you. No one should suffer such abuses in my opinion. Additionally, yes, this could one day be applied here as well. I'm under no illusions about that. Indeed, it may already be being applied gradually. I just think it should be clarified that this isn't specifically intended as domestic policy, but rather, foreign counterinsurgence policy.

It likely wouldn't take much for this to be applied here, however, particularly if it could be persuasively indicated that an insurgency existed domestically, and that's the frightening part. (As is the casual nonchalance with which these policies are set forth.)

Originally posted by TheRandom1

Originally posted by Darthorious
This document is 100% faked and here is how I know this.

I was a records keeper in my department in the military as one of my side jobs so to speak.

The first clue is the patches on the front of the document have a boarder around them that would never get passed quality control like that because it looks trashy and the patches look like bunk. The real military documents that have patches on covers are very clean and very eye pleasing as every patch is first designed on a computer and saved as a gif and look stunning compared to this junk.

Second the headers are purple. It is illigal literaly to have any color in a publications that has any color besides black or red and red is used only as warnings about certain outcomes if a procedure is not followed directly.

It is a complete fake and a very very bad one at that.

Uh... Are you smoking something?

The document is in black & white, there is no color at all in it, I see absolutely no color, just black and white, I also don't see any "patch" as well, could you try posting a screen cap of this magical, purple, patchy, document you've somehow found? I mean seriously, niether in the links the OP posted or the pdf file is there any purple, color, or "patches", I think you are either high on something or looking at the wrong document, angel dust is not good stuff, stay away from it lol.

-Lahara

This PDF file has full color: www.dtic.mil... It's the one linked to on wikileak.

The real mystery is that people keep getting surprised by documents such as this one. Where have you been for the last 10 years or so? I dont there is a way for the US government to restore credibility for at least a few decades.

Obama having a speech in some middle eastern country wont change that.

Originally posted by TheRandom1

Originally posted by Darthorious
This document is 100% faked and here is how I know this.

I was a records keeper in my department in the military as one of my side jobs so to speak.

The first clue is the patches on the front of the document have a boarder around them that would never get passed quality control like that because it looks trashy and the patches look like bunk. The real military documents that have patches on covers are very clean and very eye pleasing as every patch is first designed on a computer and saved as a gif and look stunning compared to this junk.

Second the headers are purple. It is illigal literaly to have any color in a publications that has any color besides black or red and red is used only as warnings about certain outcomes if a procedure is not followed directly.

It is a complete fake and a very very bad one at that.

Uh... Are you smoking something?

The document is in black & white, there is no color at all in it, I see absolutely no color, just black and white, I also don't see any "patch" as well, could you try posting a screen cap of this magical, purple, patchy, document you've somehow found? I mean seriously, niether in the links the OP posted or the pdf file is there any purple, color, or "patches", I think you are either high on something or looking at the wrong document, angel dust is not good stuff, stay away from it lol.

-Lahara

You obviously aren't looking at the PDF file here's the snap shots

i449.photobucket.com...

i449.photobucket.com...

Originally posted by AceWombat04

Originally posted by TheRandom1

Originally posted by Darthorious
This document is 100% faked and here is how I know this.

I was a records keeper in my department in the military as one of my side jobs so to speak.

The first clue is the patches on the front of the document have a boarder around them that would never get passed quality control like that because it looks trashy and the patches look like bunk. The real military documents that have patches on covers are very clean and very eye pleasing as every patch is first designed on a computer and saved as a gif and look stunning compared to this junk.

Second the headers are purple. It is illigal literaly to have any color in a publications that has any color besides black or red and red is used only as warnings about certain outcomes if a procedure is not followed directly.

It is a complete fake and a very very bad one at that.

Uh... Are you smoking something?

The document is in black & white, there is no color at all in it, I see absolutely no color, just black and white, I also don't see any "patch" as well, could you try posting a screen cap of this magical, purple, patchy, document you've somehow found? I mean seriously, niether in the links the OP posted or the pdf file is there any purple, color, or "patches", I think you are either high on something or looking at the wrong document, angel dust is not good stuff, stay away from it lol.

-Lahara

This PDF file has full color: www.dtic.mil... It's the one linked to on wikileak.

That is not the document in which is being discussed. The document which is spoken about in this thread is called FOREIGN INTERNAL DEFENSE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL FORCES. You can find the link for this document in the first post.

Originally posted by tigermoff

That is not the document in which is being discussed. The document which is spoken about in this thread is called FOREIGN INTERNAL DEFENSE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL FORCES. You can find the link for this document in the first post.

Yes it is. That's the document in the wikileak page linked to from the link in the first post to which you're referring. That's the only link. If you click on the link to the blacklisted news article in the first post, then click on the link to the wikileak page cited in that article, and then click on the file the wikileak page discusses, that's the only file that opens. I don't know where people are seeing this other document.

EDIT: Nevermind, I see the UK link. That should have been made more clear.

EDIT AGAIN: Now the purple header document is completely missing from both wikileak sites. Perhaps they read this thread.

[edit on 12/6/2008 by AceWombat04]

Ok... That's it. I am saving out what I can and blowing this joint.

Anybody got any ideas where an American (soon to be EX)citizen can go and live in relative peace and quiet?

Originally posted by AceWombat04

Originally posted by tigermoff

That is not the document in which is being discussed. The document which is spoken about in this thread is called FOREIGN INTERNAL DEFENSE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL FORCES. You can find the link for this document in the first post.

Yes it is. That's the document in the wikileak page linked to from the link in the first post to which you're referring. That's the only link. If you click on the link to the blacklisted news article in the first post, then click on the link to the wikileak page cited in that article, and then click on the file the wikileak page discusses, that's the only file that opens. I don't know where people are seeing this other document.

EDIT: Nevermind, I see the UK link. That should have been made more clear.

EDIT AGAIN: Now the purple header document is completely missing from both wikileak sites. Perhaps they read this thread.

[edit on 12/6/2008 by AceWombat04]

It's link is still working the direct one but they seem to have just pulled the actual link off the wiki page

[edit on 6-12-2008 by Darthorious]

reply to post by budski

FLAG'D & STAR'D !

Real good thread ya got here, budski; jaw-dropping, eye-opening, revealing & staggering implications with this.

Yup, military planners are almost as diabolical as pharmaceutical corp's. planners!

Soon as I saw El Salvador mentioned, I flashed back to the mid-80's when Lt. Col. Oliver North was being grilled before congress!Ollie & Ellie: Defenders of Death Squads Ollie knew SO much more than them, and they hated it! But he couldn't exactly tell it like it was, could he? Because of the nature of the operations, and his obligation to secrecy as an Army officer. I almost felt bad for him!

El Salvador Death Squads being linked to the U.S. through documents such as the one you've posted would be a disaster then, and now!

Extremely disturbing how we've trained countless third world militants, and decades later declare THEM terrorists!

Example: Osama Bin Laden, when he was helping the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan repel the Soviet army! (couldn't resist)!


[edit on 12/6/2008 by FRIGHTENER]

I have to say if it is genuine, then the Army really needs to work on it's type face and logo settings. I'm not disproving, just offering my observation. I am a member of the military and I have never seen an official document so bland. Not even FOUO documents get away with that. Usually these things at least have 1)The branch logo on them or 2) something referencing the DoD, which all branches fall under. Any other service members out there care to comment?