Wiki leaks, what I don’t understand

[Bill Longley]

Pakistani media is completely in Wiki leak craze. Every channel weather Urdu, regional or English is giving maximum time to sensationalizing revelations of wiki leak. It appears that wiki leak has successfully disturbed the order. These leaks have provided opportunity to opposition, Government, establishment and media to point score against each other and tried to abet general public against targeted governments.
In International arena, US have been sent into awkward situation (it appears). Its major allies are not happy with the leaks and comments about them. There are many questions which come to mind. I will not go in details but I have questions about intensions and timing of these leaks especially with respect to Pakistan. Although few thousand leaks about them are about Pakistan but all have impacts.
• Why wiki leaks Publish these documents? Whats the motive and benefits they have(wiki leak ) in publishing these documents? I mean you hack computers of World’s only Super Power. You know it will affect its relations with its allies and you also know that that power will be at your back searching each and every stone in the world to find you. Naturally you will weigh benefits V. Problems you will face by publishing these documents? What are those benefits which wiki leaks got after publishing
• These documents have disturbed order or have tried to disturb world order? Who will benefit from such act? I don’t think they were published in love of humanity.
• Why leaks are specifically about some countries why not about Israel, UK , Australia etc?
• Why at the time when NATO conference has just ended , US has declared plan to stay in Afghanistan and Iranian crises going on…. Why these likes have come out at an important time?
• How is it possible that not 10 or twenty leaks but thousands of leaks have come out? Is this leak intentional or is designed?
• In reference of Pakistan, why only those reports/ cables are leaked which will send already under crisis Pakistan into more crises?
• Why psychological impact which these leaks create /supports opinion of Hawks especially of US and UK ?
• Is it true someone is trying to create new order by first creating a disorder in Middle East, Central and South Asia?
I looking for answers and hope readers will help me finding these answers.

http://mbik14.blogspot.com/2010/12/wiki-leaks-what-i-dont-understand.html

 

[Musafar]

• Why wiki leaks Publish these documents? Whats the motive and benefits they have(wiki leak ) in publishing these documents?

Wikileaks been releasing unclassified stuff since 2006. It's a whistle blowing site. Anyone can upload anything to their site. They've published corruption on kenyan government to Sarah Palins email inbox. Addresses of racist party members in the UK have also been published

I mean you hack computers of World’s only Super Power. You know it will affect its relations with its allies and you also know that that power will be at your back searching each and every stone in the world to find you. Naturally you will weigh benefits V. Problems you will face by publishing these documents? What are those benefits which wiki leaks got after publishing

They havent hacked anything. Toss "Bradley Manning" into your google search engine, Thanks...

• These documents have disturbed order or have tried to disturb world order?

Who will benefit from such act? I don’t think they were published in love of humanity.

How have they disturbed world order? They've embarassed the USA by telling us what they and their allies REALLY think and also validated a lot of things that were once doubted - for instance drone attacks supported by Zardari, Swat killing by Pak Army of innocent villagers etc. Isn't the truth important to you or do you only want positive news? Would you have been against the Pentagon Papers on the Vietnam war in 1971?

• Why leaks are specifically about some countries why not about Israel, UK , Australia etc?

They've leaked only a tiny amount so far. Israel has been mentioned, in particular ISI chief Pasha has been talking to Israel about intelligence. I'm sure there's more to come, remember there's 250,000 documents.

Why at the time when NATO conference has just ended , US has declared plan to stay in Afghanistan and Iranian crises going on…. Why these likes have come out at an important time?

...WHAT?

How is it possible that not 10 or twenty leaks but thousands of leaks have come out? Is this leak intentional or is designed?

Thousands havent come out with regards to the cables - the Afghan war logs and Iraq war logs have been released though. It's because one person had accesss to these files THAT's HOW.

After 9/11 the US worried that different intelligence communities weren't "co-operating" with eachother and therefore set up big databases. If you were security cleared you could access these databases. It looks like one of their citizens who was an intelligence analyst decided to develop a conscience whilst reading the material on these databases - that conscience developed when he saw what the US was doing to iraqi civillians.

In reference of Pakistan, why only those reports/ cables are leaked which will send already under crisis Pakistan into more crises?

Because the leaks are impartial. They will all be released in due time. No emphasis has been given to some more than others. That's your own media doing the sensationalizing.

Why psychological impact which these leaks create /supports opinion of Hawks especially of US and UK ?

They have been equally embarassed. I assure you.

Is it true someone is trying to create new order by first creating a disorder in Middle East, Central and South Asia?

No, you're going into the realm of conspiracy theories..
.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Even in a loud noise, but it is no harm for the US and Western, then you should know what is it? Although not all of these documents are false, or even most of the information in number is true. But this is not "leak", but an intentional choice exposure.

 

[Spring Onion]

The only thing this leaks have done is that that it has damaged the little credibility which people were earlier giving these wikileaks mania.

There is nothing classified all BS is based on claims further based on personal statements of people. Nothing solid no data nothing.

 

[Spring Onion]

Even in a loud noise, but it is no harm for the US and Western, then you should know what is it? Although not all of these documents are false, or even most of the information in number is true. But this is not "leak", but an intentional choice exposure.

not even exposure. just psy-ops which used to be done through media by west and US and now they have befooled the world in the name of wikileaks lolzz

Mr A said $%#^$^$& to Mr B. Mr Z said %^%*(^((* to Mr G.

what is it?

 

[Musafar]

not even exposure. just psy-ops which used to be done through media by west and US and now they have befooled the world in the name of wikileaks lolzz

Mr A said $%#^$^$& to Mr B. Mr Z said %^%*(^((* to Mr G.

what is it?

So whose conducting this psy-ops? The USA on themselves?

 

[Spring Onion]

So whose conducting this psy-ops? The USA on themselves?

Is there anything against US ?


"Saudi King called Zardari so and so. Saudia wanted Iran attacked, ISI wanted to attack India, Kiyani wanted to remove Zardari, Pakistani atomic program is a danger"


Who is getting hit here?

Oh BTW anyone of you knows that there over 3000 wikileaks about Sri Lanka too

 

[huzihaidao12]

In the cause, this is America's own internal strife, as the interests and policy differences. But now there may be some new things added in, it seems that the U.S. idea is that since it has been this way, it is better to do something, it will be more beneficial to the US.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Is there anything against US ?


"Saudi King called Zardari so and so. Saudia wanted Iran attacked, ISI wanted to attack India, Kiyani wanted to remove Zardari, Pakistani atomic program is a danger"


Who is getting hit here?

Oh BTW anyone of you knows that there over 3000 wikileaks about Sri Lanka too

It depends on if everyone is the idea. So if everyone does not believe that this time the U.S. will make some changes, such as intentionally put some "adverse" U.S. information, do not underestimate the American propaganda techniques.

 

[somebozo]

Wikileaks..absurd CIA funded propaganda!

 

[GentlemanObserver]

So whose conducting this psy-ops? The USA on themselves?

She has a very valid point, most of it is hearsay as in casual discussion taken out of context and reported up the chain of command.

You cannot call that authoritative. 90% of it are brain farts of one politician to another politician. Case in point "Fazur-ur-Rehman".

 

[architect_cobb]

Is there anything against US ?


"Saudi King called Zardari so and so. Saudia wanted Iran attacked, ISI wanted to attack India, Kiyani wanted to remove Zardari, Pakistani atomic program is a danger"


Who is getting hit here?

Oh BTW anyone of you knows that there over 3000 wikileaks about Sri Lanka too

Is this the only time something has been released by wikileaks?
Didn't wikileaks leak info about treatment of inmates in gtme?
A copy of Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta–the protocol of the U.S. Army at the Guantánamo Bay detention camp–dated March 2003 was released on the WikiLeaks website on 7 November 2007. The document, named "gitmo-sop.pdf", is also mirrored at The Guardian. Its release revealed some of the restrictions placed over detainees at the camp, including the designation of some prisoners as off-limits to the International Committee of the Red Cross, something that the U.S. military had in the past repeatedly denied

Was this leak in the interest of USA?
Didn't wikileaks also release information about the Voldemort of conspiracy theorists the bilderberg group?

Since May 2009, WikiLeaks has made available reports of several meetings of the Bilderberg Group.It includes the group's history and meeting reports from the years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1962, 1963 and 1980.


Earlier this year the same wikileaks released a video about a US airstrike in Iraq. On 5 April 2010, WikiLeaks released classified U.S. military footage from a series of attacks on 12 July 2007 in Baghdad by a U.S. helicopter that killed 12, including two Reuters news staff, Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen, on a website called "Collateral Murder". The footage consisted of a 39-minute unedited version and an 18-minute version which had been edited and annotated. Was this in the favor of USA?

Not to mention the leak of Iraq war logs and Afghan war diary. All they do is only mutilate further an already tarnished image of US in Iraq and Af.

So please don't pick n chose. If the same leaks blame US for human right violations, quote them to badmouth USA but if they blame some Pakistani, then it must be a conspiracy.

 

[Musafar]

Is there anything against US ?


"Saudi King called Zardari so and so. Saudia wanted Iran attacked, ISI wanted to attack India, Kiyani wanted to remove Zardari, Pakistani atomic program is a danger"


Who is getting hit here?

Oh BTW anyone of you knows that there over 3000 wikileaks about Sri Lanka too

Loads, Afghan war logs, Iraq War olds -video of Apache killing journo's /civillians in day lightetc. What US thought about different world leaders, Putin, berlesconi, Cameron, what the Governor of the bank of England thought of Cameron. etc.

That's just of the top of my head.

It's no secret arabs have a secret hatred for iranians, if you ever travel to an arab country you'll see this first hand. This is mainly down to religion though, look at iraq and the sectarian troubles, it's also evident in this leak.

America is often portrayed as the big dog in Pakistan's yard: a swaggering power that makes rules, barks orders and throws its weight around. But the WikiLeaks cables highlight the understated yet insistent influence of another country with ideas about Pakistan's future: Saudi Arabia.

In recent years Saudi rulers have played favourites with Pakistani politicians, wielded their massive financial clout to political effect and even advocated a return to military rule.

"We in Saudi Arabia are not observers in Pakistan, we are participants," the Saudi ambassador to the US, Adel al-Jubeir, boasted in 2007. A senior US official later bemoaned as "negative" the Saudi influence.

As home to Islam's holiest sites, Saudi Arabia has longstanding ties with Pakistan. In the 1980s Saudi intelligence, along with the CIA, funded the anti-Soviet "jihad" in Afghanistan; since then the Saudis have given billions in financial aid and cut-price oil.

But the close relationship has grown "increasingly strained" in the past two years, with King Abdullah and the ruling princes displaying a clear preference for the opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, over the president, Asif Ali Zardari, who is viewed with thinly veiled contempt.

In January 2009 Abdullah told James Jones, then the US national security adviser, that Zardari was incapable of countering terrorism, describing him as the "'rotten head' that was infecting the whole body". Abdullah added that Pakistan's army was "staying out of Pakistani politics in deference to US wishes, rather than doing what it 'should'".

Abdullah's preference for military rule was recorded by the Saudis' American guests: "They appear to be looking for 'another Musharraf': a strong, forceful leader they know they can trust." His views were echoed by the interior minister, who said Saudi Arabia viewed the army as its "winning horse" in Pakistan.

The anti-Zardari bias appears to have a sectarian tinge. Pakistan's ambassador to Riyadh, Umar Khan Alisherzai, says the Saudis, who are Sunni, distrust Zardari, a Shia. Last year the United Arab Emirates' foreign minister, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, told Hillary Clinton that Saudi suspicions of Zardari's Shia background were "creating Saudi concern of a Shia triangle in the region between Iran, the Maliki government in Iraq, and Pakistan under Zardari".

The Saudis betray a strong preference for Sharif, who fled into exile in Jeddah in 2000 to avoid prosecution under General Pervez Musharraf. The cables contain details of Sharif's secret exile deal – he was to remain out of politics for 10 years – as well as hints of Saudi anger when he returned to Pakistan in 2007.

Since then, however, Saudi displeasure has abated, and the Saudis clearly view him as "their man" in the Pakistani power game. In early 2008 the Saudi foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, described Sharif as a "force for stability" and "a man who can speak across party lines even to religious extremists". American officials noted that Sharif had obtained preferential business deals during his time in Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile the Saudis have pressured Zardari with oil and money. In late 2008 Pakistani officials complained that "not a drop" of Saudi oil promised at concessionary rates had been delivered, while the annual aid cheque of $300m was well below the regular rate. "Muslim brotherhood is not what it used to be," fretted an economic counsellor at the Pakistani embassy.Pakistani officials echo the American fears about the radicalizing influence of Saudi money, some of it from the government. In April 2008 Pakistani interior advisor Rehman Malik said he was "particularly concerned about the role of the Saudi ambassador in funding religious schools and mosques" in Pakistan.

"Malik said that [President] Musharraf had come close to "throwing him (the Saudi ambassador) out of the country" but Malik said he knew the Saudi royal family well and would work with them."

Zardari has asserted his independence from the Saudis. The king was unhappy that he made his first official visit to China and skipped the opening of a new university in favour of meetings in Europe and the US.

US officials noted that the go-slow was part of a broader Saudi policy of "withholding assistance" – slowing the flow of cash and oil – when it suited policy in Lebanon, Palestine and Pakistan. Such economic tactics may be familiar to US officials, who used them against Pakistan for much of the 1990s.

US diplomats see the Saudis as allies but also competitors for influence in Pakistan. In 2009 special envoy Richard Holbrooke warned Prince Mohammed bin Nayef of "unimaginable" consequences for Saudi Arabia if Pakistan fell apart, especially if its nuclear weapons fell into unfriendly hands.

"God forbid!" responded the prince.

But in Islamabad, American diplomats have sought to diminish Saudi influence by allying with another Muslim country, Turkey. After a meeting with the Turkish ambassador in May 2009, ambassador Anne Patterson noted that moderate, progressive Turkey presented a "positive role model" for Pakistan.

It was well positioned, she said, to "neutralise somewhat the more negative influence on Pakistan politics and society exercised by Saudi Arabia".

WikiLeaks cables: Saudi Arabia wants military rule in Pakistan | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[huzihaidao12]

I have already said, initially because of the struggle within the United States, as 1970s, some American elites to withdraw from Vietnam, the U.S. military and some other U.S. elites do not agree, then they have a more exciting show, the actors acting now too poor level than that time, so no dedication.

 

[Musafar]

So please don't pick n chose. If the same leaks blame US for human right violations, quote them to badmouth USA but if they blame some Pakistani, then it must be a conspiracy.

It's funny how everything is a conspiracy lol

Some are even claiming wikileaks is a CIA pys-ops. WTF.