Wikileaks : Secret Afghanistan War logs

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Karan1970

Oh yeah , i ll be anxiously waiting to see a Pakistani being harrased in US on the basis of these reports. Isnt that goes against there laws .. !
However , i have to agree that there have been incidents of such nature in the past and most probably we might see one or more in the light of events this leakage of reports have brought about.
Frankly many of the politician's kids or influential Pakistanis work/study in US. I wish any of that sort happens to them. The music back home will be deafening and the public will eventually react in the similar fashion.But this time America will finally be wiped off from our land for good . . . . .

 

[ice_man]

wonder how shukriya barakzai got to power? how many votes did she get to get to her post???

 

[fawwaxs]

What's The Appeal Of Wikileaks?

C.W. Anderson is an Assistant Professor of Media Culture at the College of Staten Island, and a research fellow at Yale Law School and the New America Foundation.

A lot of smart people have already written a lot of smart things in a really short amount of time about "the largest leak in U.S. military history" — the release of more than 92,000 documents about the Afghan War by the transparency organization Wikileaks. I think it is worth looking at what the nature of this disclosure says about the politics and the journalism of 2010, particularly the way that politics and the media have changed since the last comparable wartime leak, the Pentagon Papers.

When I heard about the documents, I was immediately struck by the question: why Wikileaks, and why the legacy news media? By that I mean: when Daniel Ellsberg released the Pentagon Papers, he had to go to the biggest newspaper he could find, The New York Times. This time, whoever released the documents went straight to Wikileaks, who then turned around and went — you guessed it — straight to The New York Times. So why bother with Wikileaks at all? What is it about them that attracts whistleblowers in the first place? Former Huffington Post social news editor Josh Young has argued that Wikileaks attracts leakers because of their technical skill, because they have "chosen to focus lower in the journalism stack ... on the logistics of anonymity." I think that's part of it. I also think they might be popular because they've promised leakers anonymity. But I also think that, to understand the appeal of a place like Wikileaks, we need to understand their cultural positioning vis-a-vis the dissident hacker and geek communities.
C.W. Anderson
Jessica Kaufman

C.W. Anderson

There's something about their language, their methods, and their networks that resonate in this world, and I think that's a big part of their appeal to people who might be thinking about disclosing data. There's a certain technical language of encryption and surveillance that Wikileaks speakers have used when talking about journalism that I haven't heard inside many traditional media organizations. There's this notion of being "shadowy," being "everywhere," and being there "all at once" that I've noticed coming out of Wikileaks as well. I haven't seen Wikileaks invited to many future of journalism conferences — but they were the keynote speakers at last week's Hackers on Planet Earth conference in New York City. So to understand the power of Wikileaks, you have to understand this particular hacker world. It is worth reading what NYU professor Biella Coleman and UCLA professor Chris Kelty, who have both done research on the relationship between the media, geeks and hackers, have to say.

There are a lot more questions that are worth trying to answer. What does it mean that we can watch a major news story break in real time, and watch the entire online world start to talk about it? Does that make it more powerful, or easier for governments to ignore? How are the Guardian, Der Spiegel, and the Times framing the documents they got from Wikileaks differently, and what does that tell us about world opinion of the Afghanistan War? And perhaps most interesting: what does the Wikileaks story tell us about the new journalism world we're living in now? The amazing thing about Wikileaks is that it gets to play by multiple sets of rules; it can embrace what The New York Times columnist David Carr has called "journalistic asymmetry." What we're seeing in the complex dance between Wikileaks and the more traditional media is a dance between two informational cultures, one of
hackers and one of reporters. Both cultures appear to need the other — The New York Times needs Wikileaks, and Wikileaks, it seems, needs the The New York Times. Wikileaks seems to have figured this out, and that's what makes it so powerful.

 

[fawwaxs]

Pentagon Launches ‘Manhunt’ for Document Leaker

According to Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, the Department of Defense has launched a “manhunt” to discover whoever leaked the 92,000 classified documents on the Afghan War which WikiLeaks presented to The Guardian yesterday.

Though it is widely assumed that the leaker is already in custody, Pfc. Bradley Manning who is currently being held over a previous leak, it seems that officials are not discounting the possibility that another person with “secret” level clearance is actually responsible, and officials say more leaks may well be on the way.
The enormous collection of documents details some six years worth of the Afghan War, and has been angrily condemned by administration officials. Morrell insisted that the scale of the leaks was “clearly alarming” but that the documents were just “low level” assessments of little value.

Manning is already charged with leaking the “Collateral Murder” video, which shows US helicopters killing Iraqi civilians in 2007, and could face upwards of 50 years in prison for “mishandling” classified documents. He is also said to have leaked an enormous number of other files to WikiLeaks, but whether these are they, or if these are some other, different collection, is apparently unknown.

 

[SMC]

Tom = Al Jazeera
Dick = American media
Harry = Russian Media

Take your pick and I will send a link of a news report from one of them.

And perhaps you can shed light on who the sources are for all these media outlets. And on top of that, whether the information is verified, is from a credible source, is contradictory to what US is doing, etc.

 

[Dr sim]

My my, we have an armchair expert/keyboard warrior knowing little what he's talking about. Just look at this reply. I don't even want to go into it because it's so simplistic, childish, naive, to the highest order that one can't even put it into words.

We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan
Musharraf reveals post-9/11 threat in book serialised by The Times
FromTim Reid in Washington
PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, the President of Pakistan, claimed last night that the Bush Administration threatened to bomb his country “into the Stone Age” if it did not co-operate with the US after 9/11, sharply increasing tensions between the US and one of its closest allies in the war on terrorism.
The President, who will meet Mr Bush in the White House today, said the threat was made by Richard Armitage, then the Deputy Secretary of State, in the days after the terror attacks, and was issued to the Pakistani intelligence director.

“The intelligence director told me that [Armitage] said, ‘Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age’,” President Musharraf said. “I think it was a very rude remark.” The claims come at the end of a week in which relations between the US and Pakistan have sharply deteriorated, and days ahead of the publication of President Musharraf’s memoir, In the Line of Fire, which will be serialised in The Times from Monday
We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan - Times Online

when it comes to the lives of its citizens America takes of kid's gloves. they have already bent u into submission in the past.They invited ur general and then insulted him and then made him do what they wanted.
So, stop living in a delusional world and wake up. unfortunately the threat to ur country is more real than ever before.

 

[SMC]

What you're saying contradicts what's happening on the ground. So on one hand US would bomb us to stone age for supporting Taliban, on the other hand they're selling us weapons and giving us aid. Make up your mind.

And for the 100th time, these reports are from Afghan Intelligence. There's no evidence to support the reports yet you have the audacity to say that questioning these reports is delusional. Perhaps you need to straighten out your definition and your use of the word 'delusional'.

 

[Dr sim]

What you're saying contradicts what's happening on the ground. So on one hand US would bomb us to stone age for supporting Taliban, on the other hand they're selling us weapons and giving us aid. Make up your mind.

And for the 100th time, these reports are from Afghan Intelligence. There's no evidence to support the reports yet you have the audacity to say that questioning these reports is delusional. Perhaps you need to straighten out your definition and your use of the word 'delusional'.

They r giving u weapons to balance India in south asia.But as the relationship between India and America grows that scenario is fast changing. Who would have thought 10-15 years ago that America will actually support India over Pakistan (regarding the pak-china nuclear deal.)

 

[SMC]

What about the aid then? Why does our electricity problem have anything to do with them, etc? It's not as black and white as you make it to be.

And if we're supporting Taliban, I highly doubt they would care about balancing India and would be more concerned about Taliban.

 

[Agni 5]

What about the aid then? Why does our electricity problem have anything to do with them, etc? It's not as black and white as you make it to be.

And if we're supporting Taliban, I highly doubt they would care about balancing India and would be more concerned about Taliban.

Aid is for Drone attack and safe passage of goods through pakistan.

USA hands are tied due to 2 wars. Once Iraq war ends, 100k soliders will be free. That is the time for pakistan. No more aid, no more drones. Only B-52, F-22 fighter.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Correction :

That aid is for Civilian projects for Pakistan/US strategic cooperation.
7.5 billion civilian projects in Pakistan.

Pakistan is a valuable partner in NATO , in case you might not have checked.

Also we will be recieving more aid from US as part of package to improve Pakistan's defensive posture vs Russian centric influences

We don't care about Wikileaks the reports are
"not accurate not official release" no credibility

The drone technology will be transfered to Pakistan to engage all TERRORIST , all across border , who might be lanching any interference & And other military aid to help fight the war.

 

[sparklingway]

Fighting the Taliban
​

Wednesday, July 28, 2010
By Husain Haqqani

The much publicized leaking of several thousand classified documents relating to the war in Afghanistan may have provided the war’s American critics an opportunity to press their objections. It does not, however, make the case against military and political cooperation between the governments of the United States and Pakistan, made necessary by the challenge of global terrorism.

Under elected leaders, Pakistan is working with the US to build trust between our militaries and intelligence agencies. In recent months, Pakistan has undertaken a massive military operation in the region bordering Afghanistan, denying space to Taliban extremists who had hoped to create a mini-state with the backing of al-Qaeda. Pak-Afghan relations have been enhanced to an unprecedented degree. And exchanges of intelligence between Pakistan and the US have foiled several terrorist plots around the globe. The WikiLeaks controversy and the ensuing speculation about Pakistan’s role in the global effort against the terrorists should not disrupt the ongoing efforts of the US and Pakistan to contain and destroy the forces of extremism and fanaticism that threaten the entire world.

Pakistan is crucial for helping Afghanistan attain stability while pursuing the defeat of al-Qaeda led terrorist ideologues. For that reason the White House, the Pentagon and the State Department have denounced the leaking of unattributed and unprocessed information implicating Pakistan in supporting or tolerating the Taliban. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, a Democrat, warned Monday against judging Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war by “outdated reports,” adding that Pakistan had “significantly stepped up its fight against Taliban.” Most Americans and many Pakistanis agree on the need for improvements in Pakistan’s efforts, but that is not the same as suspecting lack of cooperation.

The tragedy that has unfolded in South Asia is the product of a long series of policy miscalculations spanning fully 30 years. The US, in its zeal to defeat the Soviet Union-a noble goal indeed-selected Afghanistan as a venue. Pakistan became caught up in an ideological battle between communism and a politicized version of our Islamic faith. The most violent and most radical elements of the Mujahideen resistance were empowered to fight the surrogate war against the Russians. Concerns, such as former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s warning in 1989 while visiting the US that the world had created a Frankenstein monster in Afghanistan that would come back to haunt us, were generally ignored.

Alliances and relationships forged among supporters of the Afghan jihad 30 years ago have not been easy to dismantle within Pakistan. But they have been dismantled. After 9/11, Pakistan made a deliberate and courageous decision to confront the terrorists as the civilized world’s first line of defence. Since the return of democracy in 2008, Pakistan has paid a terrible price for its commitment to fight terrorism. More Pakistanis have been killed by terrorism in the last two years than the number of civilians who died in New York’s Twin Towers. Over the past nine years more Pakistanis than Nato troops have lost their lives fighting the Taliban. Two thousand Pak police have been killed; our mosques and hotels savagely attacked; scores of billion dollars of foreign investment frozen; and tens of billions of dollars of funding for education and health diverted to the battlefield against the extremists.

We cannot undo the past, but we can certainly alter the course of the future. The democratically elected government of President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani has followed a clearly laid out strategy of fighting and marginalizing terrorists, even when that decision was less than popular with a public still cynical because of what it believed was the political manipulation of the past. The course laid out by Pakistan’s democratic leaders has been executed brilliantly by Pakistan’s military and intelligence services.

The documents circulated by WikiLeaks do not even remotely reflect the current realities on the ground. For example, a retired Pakistani general is named as the master planner of the Afghan Taliban’s strategy. For its part, Pakistan’s current leadership will not be distracted by something like these leaks. We have paid an unprecedented price in blood and treasure over the last two years.

As we speak, the military of Pakistan is engaged in a bloody battle, taking enormous casualties, in the mountains of South Waziristan to purge the tribal areas of terrorist sanctuaries. Our intelligence forces are gathering information across the country and targeting terrorist cells in North Waziristan to thwart their designs for destabilizing our government and terrorizing our people.

This is Pakistan’s war as much as it is a battle for civilization. Pakistan’s very existence and traditional way of life are at stake. We fight alongside our friends from all over the world to protect freedom. The US could not have a more committed ally in this defining battle of the third millennium than the people, the government and the military of Pakistan. (Courtesy Wall Street Journal) Mr Haqqani is Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States

 

[SMC]

Aid is for Drone attack and safe passage of goods through pakistan.

USA hands are tied due to 2 wars. Once Iraq war ends, 100k soliders will be free. That is the time for pakistan. No more aid, no more drones. Only B-52, F-22 fighter.

You seem to have a crystal ball at your disposal along with a very good idea of what's going on at the ground.

Well whatever prophecies you make, let's just say I am not going to deal with armchair expert-like prophecies.

 

[Rafael]

YouTube - BrassTacks-Zaid Hamid on Inside Story-Aljazeera-Part 3!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Aid is for Drone attack and safe passage of goods through pakistan.

USA hands are tied due to 2 wars. Once Iraq war ends, 100k soliders will be free. That is the time for pakistan. No more aid, no more drones. Only B-52, F-22 fighter.

Keep dreaming.

Yes, the phrase 'wet dreams' is quite overused, but it really is applicable here.