Propaganda against WikiLeaks latest disclosure

Blatant propaganda against WikiLeaks latest disclosure

news.sky.com

The US is "reaching out" to more than 300 Iraqis it believes are at serious risk after their names were exposed in secret Iraq war documents released by WikiLeaks.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
twitter.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
WikiLeaks insurance password (possibly) incoming!

edit - removed the "blatant" from the headline - seemed a bit over the top

I originally posted this in the WikiLeaks Password thread - but I feel it deserves its own topic...

Saw this tweet from WL and had to comment here...

"Absolute lies here by News Corp/Pentagon ; there are no names in the Iraq War Logs http://(link tracking not allowed)/918y0e"

The link yields this tidbit of propaganda:
"The US is "reaching out" to more than 300 Iraqis it believes are at serious risk after their names were exposed in secret Iraq war documents released by WikiLeaks."

... as WL stated, there were NO names released in the war logs.
Anyone can plainly see this for themselves if they read even a handful of the logs... but... the world being what it is... people won't take the time to read for themselves, and will gobble up the propaganda hand over fist - and tout the evils of WikiLeaks putting people "at risk".

THIS is something to spread... if there's anything that needs to be spread to as many people as possible about this entire WL/War Logs story, it's this. We need to inform people as to the absolute lies that some news outlets are no doubt going to run.. things exactly like this one. Let the MSM damn themselves, and expose themselves when people see, in black and white, that they published outright lies in an effort to demonize WikiLeaks.



news.sky.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The media doesn't need help demonizing them............they did it themselves. Those that have releases this info need to swing at Leavenworth. I think our traitorous administration actually had a hand in this to try and drum up support that they are losing to the republicans.

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
The media doesn't need help demonizing them............they did it themselves. Those that have releases this info need to swing at Leavenworth. I think our traitorous administration actually had a hand in this to try and drum up support that they are losing to the republicans.

If anything happens to WikiLeaks as a result of everything they've disclosed, you're right - they brought it on themselves. My major point with this topic was that one of the media outlets is telling outright lies... and those lies are what people are going to start believing. They say the leaks named 300 people... which isn't true. This latest batch of documents doesn't name anyone.. it doesn't even name the companies involved/deployed, or even things like how many gallons of liquid glucose were in a drum that was found.

The MSM can't go on filling peoples' head with straight-up lies... it's really got to stop, and people need to know about it.

reply to post by ConradsLaces


Admitting, right up front, that I have not yet had time to review the Wikileaks releases...

Even without mentioning specific names, simply stating ancillary facts can lead to positive identification of people. There are many more factors in identifying a source of information than just a name.

With Iraq falling under the increasing influence of Iran and of militant Islamic fundamentalism it is certainly a real concern that people in Iraq, who are considered complicit with the west would be endangered by any intelligence which might point towards them.

If even one person dies or is endangered by Assange, he should be forced, in one way or another, to see the outcomes of his actions. There is a need for personal responsibility in the release of information when others might be imperiled by it.

~Heff

so, in other words, the US is trying to protect Iraqis named as having tortured their own citizens.
Does that mean we'll be sanctioned by the UN for having committed war crimes? ...i doubt it

The fact they have openly chosen to go against those who supplied such a network and have been under the illusion that they are, or cannot be reached, is a lesson to be taught.

Humans are so predictable.

I think the problem is that Wikileaks gave this information first to left wing media. There is an insurance file that we probally will NEVER see. What is wikileaks really doing?? Giving us dog food while they eat the cavier. Wikileaks havn't even gave us anything worth knowing!!!! IMO It's these people shooting themselves in the foot. Good will always prevail over evil.

reply to post by Hefficide


All of the documents/reports have the same characteristics. I submit one, here, as an example:

AT 292017D APR , /___ WAS ATTACKED WITH SAF IVO ( ___), AT THE TRAIN STATION IN NW FALLUJAH. WHILE CONDUCTING OP OPERATIONS, /___ OP (___) WAS ATTACKED WITH (___) ROUNDS OF ___.62MM ORIGINATING FROM AN UNKNOWN DISTANCE. PID WAS NOT ESTABLISHED AND /___ DID NOT RETURN FIRE. NO CASUALTIES OR DAMAGES REPORTED.

No names of personnel, no names of the units involved, not even the number of rounds, or their exact caliber (although one can assume, in this case, that __.62mm is 7.62mm).

I admit that my knowledge of military reports isn't the best... I'm not sure if it's possible to garner personnel name from reports like this.

If it's found that Assange's leaks have caused the death(s) of person(s), then yes, I would expect that they will try and prosecute him for it. What I worry about, is him being tried for something like that, but the accusers (say the US Government for the sake of the conversation) withholding the proof from the public under the guise of national security or one of the other blankets they tend to use.

What absolutely boggles my mind is how some people come across as completely outraged at wikileaks for telling the truth under the auspices that it puts a few lives at risk and not have one shred of concern for the over 100k people that died as the result of an unjust war. How do you do it? How do you justify the war and work up enough of a mock sense of rightousness to condemn wikilileaks for telling the truth.

Allied soldiers killed 10's of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians. Thousands of American soldiers lost their lives in the fighting. An organization comes out with the truth about why all these people lost their lives and the truth about the injustice that is still occuring around the world without rhyme or logical reasoning other than the financial gain of the wealthy elite in the U.S. and you condemn them. You condemn them with the audacity to feign concern for human life. If you had the slightest concern for human life you would applaud wikileaks and any organization that attempts to bring the truth about the American Hedgomony to light. War crimes and human rights violations should not die in the darkenss of the mainstream media spin.

Maybe just maybe these documents will bring the truth about these unjust wars to light. Maybe it will be enough to finally end the madness and bring some peace to the Iragi and Afghan people. Maybe because the truth has been told over 100k people won't have died completely for nothing.

Originally posted by theuhstuf
so, in other words, the US is trying to protect Iraqis named as having tortured their own citizens.
Does that mean we'll be sanctioned by the UN for having committed war crimes? ...i doubt it

edit on 22-10-2010 by theuhstuf because: typo

The major problem is that there were no names released in the documents they just made available to the world - and the media is reporting that 300 people were named in said documents.

Have I gone through each of the 400,000 to verify that? no. But, WL says that there are no names contained therin, and i believe that's the truth. If there WERE named in the documents, than all they would be doing is condemning themselves, and all of their credibility would be gone... it would call into question everything they've ever released.

Interesting bit here from CNN...

If I read it correctly, it looks like WikiLeaks actually censored MORE information from these reports than the Department of Defense did. Interesting.

www.cnn.com...

I looked at the videos and have come to a conclusion. Wikileaks was right in releasing these files.
They show the change of the republic of the united States into a greedy war mongering military complex ruled by a bunch of insane elite that will never achieve satisfaction until they destroy everything BUT themselves.
And even then they would have killed off a planet and infighting for top dog within themselves.
I am really sad about this as life was never meant to be this way.
Maybe they should read about Atlantis. If the stories are true then the world is becoming a copy of a few thousand years ago with new players. How long does it take to learn a simple lesson?
DO NO HARM TO ANY LIVING THING
SERVE OTHERS BEFORE YOURSELF
SPREAD LOVE AND COMPASSION FOR ALL!
Adding: Serve for the common good of mankind
Advance us physically and spiritually as a common race.

reply to post by ConradsLaces

If anything happens to WikiLeaks as a result of everything they've disclosed, you're right - they brought it on themselves. My major point with this topic was that one of the media outlets is telling outright lies... and those lies are what people are going to start believing. They say the leaks named 300 people... which isn't true. This latest batch of documents doesn't name anyone.. it doesn't even name the companies involved/deployed, or even things like how many gallons of liquid glucose were in a drum that was found. The MSM can't go on filling peoples' head with straight-up lies... it's really got to stop, and people need to know about it.

I agree with your stance wholeheartedly, but I have one more question. The US government is worried about protecting 300 Iraqi's and make an effort to contact them and possibly protect them. The US government also stated this release could pose a great danger to our troops. What are they doing to protect them? Bringing them home would be a great start. If no names are in these documents, then let us refocus our attention on our troops, and get them out of harms way.

The MSM has always lied to the American people, and I agree we need to do our best to let others know the truth.

My son is medically retired from the Marine's. He served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is 27 years old, and he will live with these scars for life. His wish, as is mine, is for our boys to come home.

reply to post by retiredTxn


If the government is trying to contact these 300 Iraqis, because their names being known could somehow endanger our troops, then they must be some incredibly high-profile Iraqis. for them to be of such high value for contact/protection, they must have detailed knowledge of deployments, operational plans and procedures, or be holding some other incredibly sensitive information.

You make a very astute point... if, because of these releases, our troops are now in danger; the simplest recourse would be to get them out of harm's way... as fast as possible. I'd love to ask that question at a White House press conference... wow. I'd love to see what excuse they give. I'm sure it's much easier to issue a broad order, to the entire theater of operations, than it is to search out 300 Iraqis that could be anywhere in the country...or surrounding countries.

I definitely feel that we need to get our troops home. It's gone on for long enough...
I think the best analogy of the War on Terror, was an illustration I saw in Time magazine. I had a caption "War on Terror", and the illustration was that of an exterminator, going to someone's house to spray for bugs.
It's not something that can just be stopped outright.. it will always be there... it always has been there. Do what we can if it comes to our door, but there's no way to seek it out, and get rid of it for good.

reply to post by ConradsLaces

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.

www.dailykos.com...

Just a reminder of why some people seek out alternative news sources.

I think Assange don't give two screws about anyone but himself and wikileaks. Give us the stuff we already know and keep his insurance file ALL for himself. If he really cared about us and about getting information out without any agenda then he would do it without fear if he was really sincere. IMO all the major governments are letting him do this.

reply to post by thecinic

I think Assange don't give two screws about anyone but himself and wikileaks. Give us the stuff we already know and keep his insurance file ALL for himself. If he really cared about us and about getting information out without any agenda then he would do it without fear if he was really sincere. IMO all the major governments are letting him do this.

You are probably right. The only good that can come from this is maybe it will open the eyes of a lot more people to the fact we are in two wars we have no business being in, and it is time to stop wasting money on these countries who will not change when we are gone. It's funny how our politicians are so concerned with every other countries problems, but they can't even be bothered by our own shortcomings. It's time we fix America, and let these folks fix their own problems for once.

Originally posted by joewalker
reply to post by ConradsLaces

 

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.

www.dailykos.com...

Just a reminder of why some people seek out alternative news sources.

edit on 22-10-2010 by joewalker because: spwelling

Meant to reply to this when I first read it...

Just goes to show that Fox is all about upholding the letter of the law..as far as journalism goes... but not the spirit.
"Uhhh.. there's no law against it... so we didn't do nothin' wrong..."

I can't stand crap like that. I'm so happy I get my news elsewhere,

It should be obvious who the media is against when they lie outright to the public to create some type of public sentiment over disclosing government secrets. Here is the thing. Our government is here for us, for our purpose and if we demand to know what they are doing they should release the information. If anyone has brought this onto themselves it is the government. Had they been honest and released information throughout the years they would have a ton more creditability with the people whom they supposedly represent. Wikileaks would not exist if we were simply told the truth. Whether Wikileaks was created by the government or not is beside the point, we must look at where they are herding us. Are they trying to make an excuse to pass some law to limit our speech further? Are they really hiding truth from us, that are blatant lies? Are they trying to manipulate our emotions to support them no matter what their decisions are? Any way the outcome could fall is not in any of our interests. What should a government do that was honest and not trying to manipulate people? Simple. Tighten all information sources, increase the penalty for leaking. Ignore Wikileaks. Be honest with the people about total casualties from from now on.