Wikileaks Diplomatic Cables
- Thread starter ARCHON
- Start date
Devil Soul
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 22,931
- Reaction score
- 45
- Country
- Location
Secret US Embassy Cables
Wikileaks began on Sunday November 28th publishing 251,287 leaked United States embassy cables, the largest set of confidential documents ever to be released into the public domain. The documents will give people around the world an unprecedented insight into US Government foreign activities.
The cables, which date from 1966 up until the end of February this year, contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652 of the cables are classified Secret.
The embassy cables will be released in stages over the next few months. The subject matter of these cables is of such importance, and the geographical spread so broad, that to do otherwise would not do this material justice.
The cables show the extent of US spying on its allies and the UN; turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in "client states"; backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries; lobbying for US corporations; and the measures US diplomats take to advance those who have access to them.
This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors – and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes.
Every American schoolchild is taught that George Washington – the country’s first President – could not tell a lie. If the administrations of his successors lived up to the same principle, today’s document flood would be a mere embarrassment. Instead, the US Government has been warning governments -- even the most corrupt -- around the world about the coming leaks and is bracing itself for the exposures.
The full set consists of 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words (seven times the size of "The Iraq War Logs", the world's previously largest classified information release).
The cables cover from 28th December 1966 to 28th February 2010 and originate from 274 embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions.
Groups to contact for comment
How to explore the data
Search for events that you remember that happened for example in your country. You can browse by date or search for an origin near you.
Pick out interesting events and tell others about them. Use twitter, reddit, mail whatever suits your audience best.
For twitter or other social networking services please use the #cablegate or unique reference ID (e.g. #66BUENOSAIRES2481) as hash tags.
Key figures:
15, 652 secret
101,748 confidential
133,887 unclassified
Iraq most discussed country – 15,365 (Cables coming from Iraq – 6,677)
Ankara, Turkey had most cables coming from it – 7,918
From Secretary of State office - 8,017
According to the US State Departments labeling system, the most frequent subjects discussed are:
External political relations – 145,451
Internal government affairs – 122,896
Human rights – 55,211
Economic Conditions – 49,044
Terrorists and terrorism – 28,801
UN security council – 6,532
Graphics of the cablegate dataset
Cables by origin and classification
Cables by Subject
Cables by Country
Cables by Organization
Cables by Program
Cables by Topic
Downloads
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/static/cablegate-201011290900.7z.torrent
Cable Viewer
---------------
Sorry if its a repost
Wikileaks began on Sunday November 28th publishing 251,287 leaked United States embassy cables, the largest set of confidential documents ever to be released into the public domain. The documents will give people around the world an unprecedented insight into US Government foreign activities.
The cables, which date from 1966 up until the end of February this year, contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652 of the cables are classified Secret.
The embassy cables will be released in stages over the next few months. The subject matter of these cables is of such importance, and the geographical spread so broad, that to do otherwise would not do this material justice.
The cables show the extent of US spying on its allies and the UN; turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in "client states"; backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries; lobbying for US corporations; and the measures US diplomats take to advance those who have access to them.
This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors – and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes.
Every American schoolchild is taught that George Washington – the country’s first President – could not tell a lie. If the administrations of his successors lived up to the same principle, today’s document flood would be a mere embarrassment. Instead, the US Government has been warning governments -- even the most corrupt -- around the world about the coming leaks and is bracing itself for the exposures.
The full set consists of 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words (seven times the size of "The Iraq War Logs", the world's previously largest classified information release).
The cables cover from 28th December 1966 to 28th February 2010 and originate from 274 embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions.
Groups to contact for comment
How to explore the data
Search for events that you remember that happened for example in your country. You can browse by date or search for an origin near you.
Pick out interesting events and tell others about them. Use twitter, reddit, mail whatever suits your audience best.
For twitter or other social networking services please use the #cablegate or unique reference ID (e.g. #66BUENOSAIRES2481) as hash tags.
Key figures:
15, 652 secret
101,748 confidential
133,887 unclassified
Iraq most discussed country – 15,365 (Cables coming from Iraq – 6,677)
Ankara, Turkey had most cables coming from it – 7,918
From Secretary of State office - 8,017
According to the US State Departments labeling system, the most frequent subjects discussed are:
External political relations – 145,451
Internal government affairs – 122,896
Human rights – 55,211
Economic Conditions – 49,044
Terrorists and terrorism – 28,801
UN security council – 6,532
Graphics of the cablegate dataset
Cables by origin and classification
Cables by Subject
Cables by Country
Cables by Organization
Cables by Program
Cables by Topic
Downloads
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/static/cablegate-201011290900.7z.torrent
Cable Viewer
---------------
Sorry if its a repost
Marxist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,894
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
WikiLeaks Document Dump Exposes Muslim Governments' Hypocrisy
WikiLeaks is in the process of dramatically transforming foreign affairs and international relations. It is revealing over 250,000 cables from US embassies worldwide to the State department and other classified documents. The consequences of this 'mega-scoop' will be very far reaching indeed.
For the United States the issues are both strategic as well as ethical. On a strategic level the leaks -- which expose frank assessment of foreign leaders by senior American officials and American thinking on many critical issues -- will complicate Obama administration's ability to deal with its allies and may increase global cynicism about US intentions.
Many of the allies will be angry and distrustful. They will also be afraid of being candid in the future. All players in the future will be trying to second-guess each other, unwilling to articulate what their real intentions and goals are. After all, nobody wishes to read a summary of their confidential dialogue with Americans in the New York Times. The revelations may also reverse many of the hard earned diplomatic gains made by the State department over the years in acquiring support for US policies from many nations.
On the ethical level, the key question is: What will the American public do with the knowledge that the US government has allies who are known criminals; that it says one thing in public and pursues another policy in reality; that bullying seems to be a standard operating procedure and intervening in every affair seems to be a natural instinct of US foreign policy. Will the Senate, or the House, call for hearings to hold the administration accountable? Will there be a public outcry?
The revelations so far about the Muslim world are eye opening. Muslims, even some American Muslims have raised criticism of American foreign policy to the level of religious ritual. Often Muslim radicalism and alienation is explained as a direct consequence of US foreign policy alone (the point being that US foreign policy is anti-Islam and subversive to Muslim nations). Therefore Muslim anger and radicalism against the U.S. while often expressed in unjustifiable ways is still understandable.
But now that the shenanigans of Muslim nations, most importantly their collusion with America's so called anti-Islam foreign policy, is exposed, what will Muslims do? Will they also hate Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Qatar and other nations just as much as they hate America? Or will they recognize that nation states have interests and they pursue them in whatever ways they can; and understand that US foreign policy neither advances nor targets any religion?
The preliminary review of the cables by New York Times and the Guardian reveals the duplicity of many Arab nations on foreign policy -- especially in the case of Iran. For example, in the past few years, Arab nations have publicly countered Israeli propaganda that Iran is a bigger threat to the world, than the resolution of the Palestinian issue, with claims that the failure to bring a just solution to the Palestinians was the number one issue for Arabs and Muslims. But apparently, privately these same nations have been parroting Bibi Netanyahu's mantra to the U.S., repeatedly asking the US to bomb Iran and even invade it with ground troops.
The Saudis refer to Iran -- a fellow "Islamic nation" -- as "evil", and have asked the U.S. to "cut off the head of the snake". The same cables also reveal that even now the main financiers of al Qaeda are Saudi donors. American presidents George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama have identified al Qaeda as the biggest threat to the U.S., and yet they collude with the nation whose citizens are its biggest financiers. Why don't the Saudis cut off the head of the real snake by arresting and imprisoning al Qaeda's financiers? Most Americans know that fifteen of the nineteen terrorists that attacked the US on September 11, 2001, were Saudis. None were Iranians. A significant number of foreign fighters who joined al Qaeda in Iraq were Saudis. This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.
(Do not interpret my criticism of Saudi Arabia as support for Iran. Its current leaders are a bunch of thugs who stole governance from their own people by force and made a mockery out of the idea of an Islamic democracy.)
It seems that on key issues Arab foreign policy is the same as Israel. Except Israel is open, and Arab states are not. In the future, if we wish to understand Arab foreign policy, all we have to do is take Israeli foreign policy and add hypocrisy (nifaaq) to it; voila.
Another level of hypocrisy that Muslim nations seem to be practicing is in their dealings with their own populations. While the US is worried that WikiLeaks latest revelations will undermine its relations with its allies, Muslim governments are worried that these same leaks will expose the extent to which they routinely lie to their own people.
Nation after Muslim nation has been supporting and collaborating with the U.S. and lying to its public about the extent of its support for US foreign policy. For example, the Yemeni president acknowledged that he would continue to lie to his people and claim that American military operations in Yemen are Yemeni operations; the Pakistani government does not want its people to know the extent to which it cooperates with the U.S. on nuclear issues.
It is amazing how Muslim governments engage in policies of which they know their citizens will not approve.
Now, thanks to WikiLeaks, at least Muslims who hate America for its foreign policy must realize that their own countries are collaborators. Perhaps their hatred will now be more evenly spread rather than just focusing on the U.S. If not, then they are hypocrites, too.
Muqtedar Khan: WikiLeaks Document Dump Exposes Muslim Governments' Hypocrisy
WikiLeaks is in the process of dramatically transforming foreign affairs and international relations. It is revealing over 250,000 cables from US embassies worldwide to the State department and other classified documents. The consequences of this 'mega-scoop' will be very far reaching indeed.
For the United States the issues are both strategic as well as ethical. On a strategic level the leaks -- which expose frank assessment of foreign leaders by senior American officials and American thinking on many critical issues -- will complicate Obama administration's ability to deal with its allies and may increase global cynicism about US intentions.
Many of the allies will be angry and distrustful. They will also be afraid of being candid in the future. All players in the future will be trying to second-guess each other, unwilling to articulate what their real intentions and goals are. After all, nobody wishes to read a summary of their confidential dialogue with Americans in the New York Times. The revelations may also reverse many of the hard earned diplomatic gains made by the State department over the years in acquiring support for US policies from many nations.
On the ethical level, the key question is: What will the American public do with the knowledge that the US government has allies who are known criminals; that it says one thing in public and pursues another policy in reality; that bullying seems to be a standard operating procedure and intervening in every affair seems to be a natural instinct of US foreign policy. Will the Senate, or the House, call for hearings to hold the administration accountable? Will there be a public outcry?
The revelations so far about the Muslim world are eye opening. Muslims, even some American Muslims have raised criticism of American foreign policy to the level of religious ritual. Often Muslim radicalism and alienation is explained as a direct consequence of US foreign policy alone (the point being that US foreign policy is anti-Islam and subversive to Muslim nations). Therefore Muslim anger and radicalism against the U.S. while often expressed in unjustifiable ways is still understandable.
But now that the shenanigans of Muslim nations, most importantly their collusion with America's so called anti-Islam foreign policy, is exposed, what will Muslims do? Will they also hate Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Qatar and other nations just as much as they hate America? Or will they recognize that nation states have interests and they pursue them in whatever ways they can; and understand that US foreign policy neither advances nor targets any religion?
The preliminary review of the cables by New York Times and the Guardian reveals the duplicity of many Arab nations on foreign policy -- especially in the case of Iran. For example, in the past few years, Arab nations have publicly countered Israeli propaganda that Iran is a bigger threat to the world, than the resolution of the Palestinian issue, with claims that the failure to bring a just solution to the Palestinians was the number one issue for Arabs and Muslims. But apparently, privately these same nations have been parroting Bibi Netanyahu's mantra to the U.S., repeatedly asking the US to bomb Iran and even invade it with ground troops.
The Saudis refer to Iran -- a fellow "Islamic nation" -- as "evil", and have asked the U.S. to "cut off the head of the snake". The same cables also reveal that even now the main financiers of al Qaeda are Saudi donors. American presidents George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama have identified al Qaeda as the biggest threat to the U.S., and yet they collude with the nation whose citizens are its biggest financiers. Why don't the Saudis cut off the head of the real snake by arresting and imprisoning al Qaeda's financiers? Most Americans know that fifteen of the nineteen terrorists that attacked the US on September 11, 2001, were Saudis. None were Iranians. A significant number of foreign fighters who joined al Qaeda in Iraq were Saudis. This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.
(Do not interpret my criticism of Saudi Arabia as support for Iran. Its current leaders are a bunch of thugs who stole governance from their own people by force and made a mockery out of the idea of an Islamic democracy.)
It seems that on key issues Arab foreign policy is the same as Israel. Except Israel is open, and Arab states are not. In the future, if we wish to understand Arab foreign policy, all we have to do is take Israeli foreign policy and add hypocrisy (nifaaq) to it; voila.
Another level of hypocrisy that Muslim nations seem to be practicing is in their dealings with their own populations. While the US is worried that WikiLeaks latest revelations will undermine its relations with its allies, Muslim governments are worried that these same leaks will expose the extent to which they routinely lie to their own people.
Nation after Muslim nation has been supporting and collaborating with the U.S. and lying to its public about the extent of its support for US foreign policy. For example, the Yemeni president acknowledged that he would continue to lie to his people and claim that American military operations in Yemen are Yemeni operations; the Pakistani government does not want its people to know the extent to which it cooperates with the U.S. on nuclear issues.
It is amazing how Muslim governments engage in policies of which they know their citizens will not approve.
Now, thanks to WikiLeaks, at least Muslims who hate America for its foreign policy must realize that their own countries are collaborators. Perhaps their hatred will now be more evenly spread rather than just focusing on the U.S. If not, then they are hypocrites, too.
Muqtedar Khan: WikiLeaks Document Dump Exposes Muslim Governments' Hypocrisy
Marxist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,894
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Dealing with terrorists, the Brazil way: Wikileaks
Brazil, an ally of the United States, has come under scrutiny for its enforcement of anti-terrorist operations in the country, going by US embassy cables made public by Wikileaks on Sunday.
A cable sent by US Ambassador Clifford Sobel says the police and intelligence agencies had arrested some individuals with links to terrorism but charged them "on a variety of non-terrorism related crimes to avoid calling attention of the media and the higher levels of the government." Most of them are charged under anti-narcotics and anti-smuggling acts, the message reveals.
Brazil minister for intelligence Jorge Armando Felix, who met the ambassador in May 2005, was quoted to have said that Brazil was asking moderate, second generation Arabs, "to keep a close eye on fellow Arabs who may be influenced by Arab extremists and/or terrorist groups". It was in their own interest that the entire Arab community in the country is not brought under radar, he reportedly told the ambassador.
Another Dec. 2009 document published by Wikileaks shows that Brazilian minister Lisa Kubiske insisted on "two discourses" in the government, one apparent where the country denies any terrorist presence in the country and the other, real operations by law enforcement agencies to counter the terrorists.
"In October 2009, the Ministry of Foreign Relations did admit, for the first time, that terrorists could become interested in Brazil because of the award of the 2016 Olympics to Rio de Janeiro," says the cable.
Brazil denies the existence of counter-terrorism operations.
Dealing with terrorists, the Brazil way: Wikileaks - International Business Times
Brazil, an ally of the United States, has come under scrutiny for its enforcement of anti-terrorist operations in the country, going by US embassy cables made public by Wikileaks on Sunday.
A cable sent by US Ambassador Clifford Sobel says the police and intelligence agencies had arrested some individuals with links to terrorism but charged them "on a variety of non-terrorism related crimes to avoid calling attention of the media and the higher levels of the government." Most of them are charged under anti-narcotics and anti-smuggling acts, the message reveals.
Brazil minister for intelligence Jorge Armando Felix, who met the ambassador in May 2005, was quoted to have said that Brazil was asking moderate, second generation Arabs, "to keep a close eye on fellow Arabs who may be influenced by Arab extremists and/or terrorist groups". It was in their own interest that the entire Arab community in the country is not brought under radar, he reportedly told the ambassador.
Another Dec. 2009 document published by Wikileaks shows that Brazilian minister Lisa Kubiske insisted on "two discourses" in the government, one apparent where the country denies any terrorist presence in the country and the other, real operations by law enforcement agencies to counter the terrorists.
"In October 2009, the Ministry of Foreign Relations did admit, for the first time, that terrorists could become interested in Brazil because of the award of the 2016 Olympics to Rio de Janeiro," says the cable.
Brazil denies the existence of counter-terrorism operations.
Dealing with terrorists, the Brazil way: Wikileaks - International Business Times
The Saudi King calls Zardari the greatest impediment to Pakistan's ability to tackle terror and says when the head is rotten the body will also be....and the Pakistan govt says he considers the King his elder brother..
At least the Iranians know exactly where they stand in the Saudi calculations.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/11/29/pakistan-criticizes-release-secret-cables/
At least the Iranians know exactly where they stand in the Saudi calculations.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/11/29/pakistan-criticizes-release-secret-cables/
Last edited:
Devil Soul
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 22,931
- Reaction score
- 45
- Country
- Location
The Saudi King calls Zardari the greatest impediment to Pakistan's ability to tackle terror and says when the head is rotten the body will also be....and the Pakistan govt says he considers the King his elder brother..
At least the Iranians know exactly where they stand in the Saudi calculations.
the Iranians & the rest of the world knew long before this leak
How?...it is filled with direct quotes.The Saudi King calling Iran a snake whose head should be cut off or the UAE Crown Prince calling for an actual invasion of Iran or the Saudi King calling Zardari an impediment to tackling terrorism and saying "that when the head is rotten the body will be too".
Did the US make up these quotes and attribute it to the King of Saudi Arabia or the Crown Prince of UAE?
Developereo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 14,093
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
The article seems to be glorifying Brazil's illegal and immoral approach to counter terrorism, where the rights of the minorities are dispensed with.
Remember this from Macedonia in 2004?
Pakistanis And Indians Were Gunned Down to Impress America
Developereo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 14,093
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
I will not believe that the quotes were made up..and it blows the facade of Islamic unity to smithereens..and shows exactly how the Arabs think of the Persians.Did you read the cable where the Saudi King told that Iranian diplomat that he had no right to interfere in matters of Arabs when the Persian said that as Muslims they do have a right?
I really cannot understand why some people here are so forgiving of the Saudi Arabian Monarchy?
Developereo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 14,093
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
Nobody has any doubts about Islamic 'unity'. The 'leaks' are not revealing anything new that people didn't already know.
Like the previous set of 'leaks' which were nothing more than rehashed unsubstantiated Afghan allegations against Pakistan.
And, speaking of facades, when are you dropping yours and putting an Indian flag next to the American one?
Similar threads
