Wikileaks

[Licho]

I see full text there.. of various diplomatic cables.

If you ever browsed stuff like FOIA released documents its even worse - just pdf with scanned papers, no text conversion at all :)

This specific leak isn't that interesting imo.

[Machete234]

.. i still don't get how to use that website.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org

It seems it is hard work to search it, because they dont pick out the cool stuff for you.

I just read a little about turkish prime minister erdogan, seems he is sort of a patriarch type who would have thought?

[FireStorm_]

It is true that you may fool all of the people some of the time;
you can even fool some of the people all of the time;
but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

If only people weren't so cursedly proficient in fooling themselves...

The stuff about "leaders" brings a small smile to my face though.

I think Intelligence Gartering (simply put: spying instead of asking) always allows for infinitive reversed psychology constructions, witch often leads to paranoia. (or great chess players )

[Gota]

.. i still don't get how to use that website.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org

It seems it is hard work to search it, because they dont pick out the cool stuff for you.

I just read a little about turkish prime minister erdogan, seems he is sort of a patriarch type who would have thought?

He should have been born in a full on islamic dictatorship though he might be able to turn turkey into one..

[Argh]

American diplomats speak about EU leaders in terms of "Teflon Merkel," "authoritarian Sarkozy" and a "feckless, vain and ineffective Berlusconi" who is a "mouthpiece" for Russia, a first batch of secret cables sent to and from US embassies abroad and published by WikiLeaks shows.

Wow, that's shocking. Not.

This kind of news must be really disturbing for people who are utterly ignorant of how things really work. Note that nobody has actually shut WikiLeaks down, which is what would happen if it was a serious threat to anything important.

Various people will be embarrassed, demoted and fired. Oh well.

More importantly, I'm sure various agents will probably either be killed, jailed, tortured or turned, due to various regimes reading between the lines, despite the careful redaction (i.e., names and place names being blanked or replaced). But what else is new? Our press has probably killed more of our spy rings than the Russians ever managed during the Cold War; it's part of the costs of a free society.

About the only part I'd like to wade through are the sections dealing with Taiwan, North Korea and China, and I doubt if any of the information covers the Chinese plans to massively expand their navy, since that's too new. That, and to what extent contingency planning for certain future events has progressed, such as papers on crop prices and effects on regional stability. Not that the papers are available, so the analysis won't be public, unfortunately, but a lot of these papers are published, and it would be interesting to know what has been influential.

I for one think it's wonderful that even at 4th-highest after trivial crap, that still means that millions are learning a lot more about how the world actually works, especially here in the U.S. While I have little illusions about the extent to which redaction will save the agents exposed by the news articles, if it makes people wake up and see how things work a little more clearly, it may be worth the price.

[Licho]

There are no names or specific information. US agencies themselves concluded it does not put any personnel at risk.

Waging war for dubious geopolitical reasons on the other hand is proved to be significant risk and kills thousands.


Whats more interesting is information that US orders its own diplomats to spy on anyone - from UN to various allied countries.

Or that other gulf countries want Iran pacified more than US really wants. Or that there are silly obscure deals to trade guantanamo prisoners..

[Argh]

There are no names or specific information. US agencies themselves concluded it does not put any personnel at risk.

Don't buy that line of garbage. The only reason they're saying that is because WikiLeaks and the media outlets they've released to (including Al-Jazeera) have been pretty cooperative about the timing of the releases, and have probably even cooperated in cases where a given document would expose an agent or ring. That said, people will certainly die because of this, if they can't be removed.

Waging war for dubious geopolitical reasons on the other hand is proved to be significant risk and kills thousands.

I agree with that. And I'm certainly not a bellicose 'neo-con' or whatever. I'm just a fairly cynical realist who usually says nothing about what's going on, because nobody wants to hear it.

However we're not living in a world where everything is going to go peacefully, there really are regimes that are playing for high stakes. In my opinion, we're entering an extremely dangerous period for humanity. If this stuff wakes people up, that's a good thing, even if they don't approve of what's been done or why things are the way they are.

Whats more interesting is information that US orders its own diplomats to spy on anyone - from UN to various allied countries.

That's SOP for all diplomatic personnel, moreso for democracies (we have problems getting agents into dictatorships, amongst other problems).

I'm sure that exposure of the French, British, Russian, Egyptian etc. diplomatic messages would reveal the same things, frankly. It's just part of being a diplomat- they're supposed to be our eyes and ears, quite openly, but everybody knows that they're also tied heavily to the intelligence community. That's why embassies and their personnel are legally sacrosanct and have those diplomatic bags that cannot be opened by local police, amongst other things.

If you're shocked by this, you've obviously never read our spy thrillers, where our authors talk about this stuff explicitly

Or that other gulf countries want Iran pacified more than US really wants.

Not terribly shocking at all.

Why do you think we went to war with Iraq? Only part of it was Colin Powell's explanation to the U.N.- but a lot of it was unfinished business. That's why I was supportive at the time- Saddam needed to go, and I was pretty annoyed we didn't remove him the first time.

The Saudis practically demanded it, amongst other players. The Iraqis were on their doorstep during the first Gulf War, after all.

You've got to understand what a mess that area is. They're all various flavors of bad government propped up by handouts from the oil-wealthy states and various other players, and nobody there wants a regional Power strong enough to make a bid for control.

The various tribes and cultures hate each other, mainly for ancient reasons, but also because of things that happened when the Europeans partitioned the region and the evil stuff the U.S. and the Soviets did during the Cold War.

And, unlike Europe, they have neither the prosperity nor have they had a big land war to convince them that yes, they're all going to have to get along in some sort of confederation, quit undermining each other's economies and political systems, and join the modern world.

Even the shock of Iraq's change hasn't been enough, largely because the post-war situation has been handled fairly badly. The regime's just another weak, corrupt state that will probably fall to the first group that gains a firm hold over their military. If there's anything I'd like to blame our own government for, it's that unsatisfactory result.

So it's a lot of semi-feudal warfare atm- assassinations, incidents, and public hogwash handed out in job lots. But if they didn't spend so much time re-affirming their hatred of the foreigners and 'death to Isreal', there'd be various wars in the region within a year. It's pretty sad, really.

And the Iranians have been doing everything they can to make sure that the regimes stay on the edge of instability, and they're awash in Chinese cash, so they're a real threat, simply because a confrontation with them really means a possible confrontation with the Chinese. Which is why everybody's stalling while they build their nukes- we don't have a firm enough grasp of what the Chinese really want to make a deal.

It's quite likely that the next thing that will happen is that the Iranians will announce that they have the Bomb during Obama's second term (yes, I'm betting he wins one). At that point either the Egyptians, Turks or the Saudis will start building them (or all of the above), and the Isrealis will probably explicitly announce that they have had them for some time now. And Europe will continue to prevaricate and do nothing useful at all, because it's so much cheaper for them politically than redirecting enough GDP to defend themselves or be players again.

And we're in the middle of this mess, because nobody else is willing to be involved, the threat's pretty dire... and we need the oil, or we won't be able to feed the world, which is an increasingly dangerous problem.

I'm hoping that the need for oil will be the common interest that keeps the U.S. and China aligned for the next two decades, but it's unclear how things will play out. I think the Chinese may prove to be their own worst enemy, by not making a clear deal with us about how to handle the geopolitics of the region.

But we don't have a better solution for this mess that doesn't involve a huge military operation, and we're too poor to do that for another generation at least- and everybody knows that.

Like I said, we're entering a period of extreme danger. The U.S. is so weak that any number of wheels may fall off, frankly.

Or that there are silly obscure deals to trade guantanamo prisoners.

Again, not remotely shocking. Nobody wants those people, and we're haven't been willing to just kill them, so they're a continual embarrassment to our government. Worse yet, many of them have disappeared right back into the terrorist organizations after being released. So, it's no surprise nobody wants a human time bomb on their soil.


In short, if this stuff is shocking, it's good for you; the real world is pretty messed up. None of this was news to me.

[Gota]

I like how your so confident.are you banging Hillery?

[Argh]

Could you clarify that? I'm not sure what you mean there. Preferably without the insults.

[Gota]

Could you clarify that? I'm not sure what you mean there. Preferably without the insults.

"Insults" stay.
I meant Hillary Clinton.


What with the puritan attitude?since when is it an insult to say your banging someone?
Your just posting as if your the head of the FBI or something.

[Argh]

Well, besides the particular slang (don't use that word, it's one step away from 'fucking' and will not be received well by most Americans) it's an insult because it implies that I'm 'in bed' with the current Administration, or that I agree with their response to the leaks, which frankly I don't.

In my opinion, they would have been far wiser to simply work with the media to keep the real damage to a minimum, find the leakers... and say little or nothing otherwise.

At any rate, do you have something more substantial to say here? I'm rather puzzled why you're trying to be offensive- these issues aren't going to magically go away just because you don't want to see how the world actually works.

[FireStorm_]

That said, people will certainly die because of this, if they can't be removed.

I agree you seem very sure. Perhaps to sure.

What made me less sure about these kind of statement, was the idea that the shift of focus of the world media could be beneficial for the us. Perhaps this small thing to get people upset about keeps people from getting really upset about other bigger things unfolding at the same time.
A tactic strait out of spy thrillers .

Sure you're not missing anything? I'm not sure. I imagine I could be missing a lot.
(What I am sure about is that fear makes for a poor counsellor.)

[Gota]

Well, besides the particular slang (don't use that word, it's one step away from 'fucking' and will not be received well by most Americans) it's an insult because it implies that I'm 'in bed' with the current Administration, or that I agree with their response to the leaks, which frankly I don't.

In my opinion, they would have been far wiser to simply work with the media to keep the real damage to a minimum, find the leakers... and say little or nothing otherwise.

At any rate, do you have something more substantial to say here? I'm rather puzzled why you're trying to be offensive- these issues aren't going to magically go away just because you don't want to see how the world actually works.

Well not everyone can be such "cynical realists" such as yourself (i always enjoy when people characterize themselves,especially if its something positive).
Im just amused at how seriously you take yourself.
As if any of what you had to say was amazingly intelligent or any of your assessments come form some intelligent source based on studies or analyst groups yada yada.

Your jsut like the rest of us reading the news..

[Argh]

I agree you seem very sure. Perhaps to sure.

Perhaps. However, I've read various histories about how spy networks work, and the kind of data that has been released is exactly the kind of information counterintelligence people use to 'read between the lines' and backtrack information to the sources it comes from.

For example, if some diplomat says, 'we know that so-and-so has offered this-and-such', and the information in that statement was supposedly a secret at the time, counterintelligence people will cross-check all of it very carefully and sift it out.

In short, nobody on the public side of this has the pieces, or knows what part of the information may be dangerous, and neither does the American government (data that seems harmless to us may be the crucial clue needed by the other side, whoever that is- we aren't aware of what parts of the puzzle they have- it's just how the game works).

It's still stupid to basically confirm to the world how damaging it may be. It just makes whoever leaked this stuff look like a martyr, emphasizes the issue in the world's press, and and makes our government look like thugs when we talk loudly about finding and punishing them.

As if any of what you had to say was amazingly intelligent or any of your assessments come form some intelligent source based on studies or analyst groups yada yada.

If you'd care to actually fact-check my statements, feel free to have a substantial discussion about my conclusions.

I believe that most of what I've said is accurate. But we can't have that discussion when one of us doesn't have anything to say.

[SpliFF]

cool beans...
funny stuff...
The only trouble is that we don't see any leaks coming from all the baddies and dictatorships and chinas and koreas and irans etc...only leaks are coming from democratic countries with free press...

This is bad since with all the bad stuff going on in democratic countries the things going on in dictatorships are way worse.

Dictatorships leak information all the time. Heard of a little place called "Tienanmen Square"? Really the only difference is most of the time nobody in the west really cares.

Democracy never works very well when leaders keep secrets from the electorate. How can you vote for issues and people you don't fully understand - or worse - are total fabrications (Iraq WMD's, "children overboard", etc)?

My view on all of this is if you want to avoid embarrassment don't do embarrassing things. We live in the information age now, you can't send documents to 3 million field agents and call them "secret" anymore. All these documents reveal so far is what most people already know - American politicians tend to say one thing and do another.

I prefer "Say what you mean, mean what you say". If that ruffles feathers then so be it, you can't be friends with everyone.

I don't think there'll be many "smoking guns" in these releases. That stuff has a higher level of classification (or gets shredded). Most of this stuff is just pure entertainment value. I wouldn't want to be the guy who has to go to the next UN, EU or Arab Emirates meeting though.

[Gota]

It is entertaining indeed.

[Sleksa]

the biggest leak so far has been thatsomeone called putin a "alpha male" , and berlusconi likes to party. What world changing information ~~


Well ok there's been some stuff about china's mongolian ambassador telling the us ambassador there that they'd allow (and like to see) a unified korea (ie north's leadership crumbling), couple of "wrong" kidnappings of eu citizens by cia, and us trying to relieve pakistan of its nukes

regarding the iran's nuclear program there's no need to hurry since the israelis are already doing what they do best
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11860928

Maybe they should do a trade of sorts, israel turns over its nukes , stops its own r&d and stops the creation of gaza concentration camp.

in turn iran turns off its own centrifuges, r&d, and recalls its insurgents from iraq/'ganistan . fair deal eh?

[hoijui]

you may think, everyone already knew that (US) (diplomatic-)officials do one thing and say an other, butdo not forget though, that a lot of people like sarkozy cause he has a beautiful wife, which is raising money to help the poor (or the like), or because of her haircut, or they like merkel cause they are ugly them-selfs, or cause she is a women, or bush because he likes showing off guns, or obama cause he is black, or schwarzenegger cause he is the terminator, or ...
... other aspects of these people that clearly make them good leaders.
people that say, it is a complete nonsensical thing to even think about if US might be involved in Irak, Afghanistan and so on because of oil and drugs.
people that might feel forced to think about things possibly being different then what they think when they get "official black-on-white facts" that this is the case. of course, it will not convert the masses, but i believe it sure can convince at least some already close on the turning point.

it is hard to believe that anyone would not know any people that do not still trust eg. the US (officials) to be "the good". then again, i may just be biased by living in an exceptionally stupid environment.

[Gota]

the biggest leak so far has been thatsomeone called putin a "alpha male" , and berlusconi likes to party. What world changing information ~~


Well ok there's been some stuff about china's mongolian ambassador telling the us ambassador there that they'd allow (and like to see) a unified korea (ie north's leadership crumbling), couple of "wrong" kidnappings of eu citizens by cia, and us trying to relieve pakistan of its nukes

regarding the iran's nuclear program there's no need to hurry since the israelis are already doing what they do best
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11860928

Maybe they should do a trade of sorts, israel turns over its nukes , stops its own r&d and stops the creation of gaza concentration camp.

in turn iran turns off its own centrifuges, r&d, and recalls its insurgents from iraq/'ganistan . fair deal eh?

As an Israeli "f*ck you".
First of all how the hell do you know that assassination was done by Israel?
It could easily have been Any number of countries including iran itself by the way as a convenient way to deal with scientists that might have released secret info to foreign powers while blaming it on its enemies.

#2 Israel is not obliged by any law to allow any passage of goods into gaza from its borders.
Why the hell would we cooperate with an entity that tries to wage war with us in any way possible if its through the media or physically?
Also the gaza strip has borders with Egypt too so why didn't you mention Egypt?
Not only does Egypt have a big border with the gaza strip but the strip itself, now, belongs to Egypt since it was its last occupant before Israel.
It definitely does not belong to the entity that now occupies gaza and tries to pass it as its own.

But of course your biased, as usual might i add, and isn't it attractive to blame Israel for creating a "concentration camp" in gaza like the nazis did to the jews..
I think a fairer assessment would be that the arabs managed to create a new jewish concentration camp by not agreeing to normalize relations with Israel(not even Egypt and Jordan with whom were suppose to be at peace with).
Not only is it insulting, it is also naive and ignorant.
I dont get it, Did someone fuck you over and you noticed he was wearing a yammaka?

[Gota]

it is hard to believe that anyone would not know any people that do not still trust eg. the US (officials) to be "the good". then again, i may just be biased by living in an exceptionally stupid environment.

Yeah "the good" are obviously the Russian or Chinese representatives.
As oppose to the Americans the Chinese and the Russians have a people and the press to answer to.
They obviously do not represent mostly themselves and their own personal needs like the American officials.