Months Later, Defense Secretary Gates Reveals Wikileaks Document Leak Didn't Actually Reveal Intelligence Sources
from the so-much-for-that dept
Back when Wikileaks leaked tens of thousands of documents on the Afghan war earlier this year, the US government went into full out assault mode against the organization, accusing it of all sorts of things, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates claiming that the leak had compromised “intelligence sources and methods,” leading others to claim that Afghani informants were being killed over the leaks. That became a common theme, and we had numerous commenters insist that such informants were being killed. For many, it’s now considered fact.
Turns out… it’s not. The very same Robert Gates has now admitted that it turns out no intelligence sources were revealed. The same article quotes a NATO official as saying that “there has not been a single case of Afghans needing protection or to be moved because of the leak.” Of course, considering how widely reported the claims of such leaks were, many will continue to believe it’s been proven as fact, despite the very same person who kicked off the rumors now admitting they weren’t true.
Filed Under: intelligence, robert gates, wikileaks
Comments on “Months Later, Defense Secretary Gates Reveals Wikileaks Document Leak Didn't Actually Reveal Intelligence Sources”
Your link reference a letter from Mr. Gates to Congress that is not quite as straightforward as you state. Moreover, it does note that the DOD was put to the task of reviewing 70,000 documents to determine if their leak posed security problems for the US and its allies. Apparently, there is some concern that an even larger number of documents may be in the offing from Wikileaks, which will likewise require yet another detailed review.
Re: Re:
Oh no!
Don’t worry, I’m sure the DOD will begin spreading FUD before they actually conduct the detailed review, as they just admitted doing with the previous leak.
Re: Re:
These are documents should have already been reviewed and released to the public a long time ago. So what’s your point?
Re: Re: Re:
that should have *
Say, what?
Well, now that this is all cleared up let’s go ahead and invade Iceland, Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, UC Berkeley and Australia. It’s the only way to be sure.
Re: Say, what?
I saw some Canadians giving us the Stank Eye the other day, too. Might want to lob a nuke at ’em just to see how they react….
Re: Re: Say, what?
Manfred, if they respond with any message resembling “what the hell?” or “ey buddy I thought you were my fwend”, initiate a full scale follow up.
Re: Re: Re: Say, what?
Named Operation: I’m Not Your Fwend, Buddeh!
Re: Re: Re:2 Say, what?
Awww… the two of you are so clever and make such a cute couple. Would you two like to be alone?
I kid, ha, ha…
Your Snark is stale, maybe you can still use it for stuffing.
Leaked documents don’t kill soldiers. Incompetent leadership does.
Re: Re:
Well, your comment is one of the dumbest things I’ve read today.
I guess that's okay then.
I admit that once or twice in my youth I drove when I was probably too impaired, after reading this article I suppose I didn’t really do anything wrong though because no one ever got hurt…
Re: I guess that's okay then.
You missed the point.
The analogous situation would be: you should have been arrested for serial vehicular manslaughter because you were impaired (even though you didn’t do it).
Re: Re: I guess that's okay then.
“The analogous situation would be: you should have been arrested for serial vehicular manslaughter because you were impaired (even though you didn’t do it).”
Not far enough.
The analogous situation would be if you got pulled over and arrested for speeding and then the cops slapped you with a vehicular manslaughter charge afterwards. When you protested it, they said you had mowed down 4,553 pregnant nuns that had experienced immaculate conception. Then, six months later, they admit that they just kinda made that last part up, but they were still charging you with vehicular manslaughter because, let’s face it, immaculately impregnated nuns need to be protected….
Re: Re: Re: I guess that's okay then.
Condoms are now available in god-sized? I thought he was a Catholic…
(Sorry, hilarious analogy, btw)
Re: Re: Re:2 I guess that's okay then.
Actually, is Jewish. Think about it…
Re: Re: Re:3 I guess that's okay then.
His inability pick one religion (Jewish one day, Christian the next) suggests some level of insecurity.
Question: If a God does not believe in himself, is that blasephmy?
Re: Re: Re:4 I guess that's okay then.
Re: Re: Re:4 I guess that's okay then.
I don’t want to go off topic too much, but I wanted to clarify this. God chose the Jews to use them to reach the rest of the world, to show his authority and redemptive power. Jesus was Jewish by birth, but being fully God and fully man, he is also the fulfillment of all the Jewish traditions and prophecies of the Old Testament, the Messiah that Judaism speaks of. He is our Passover lamb and high priest, continually intervening for us before the Father.
Judaism represents the old covenant made with Abraham, and the new covenant made by Jesus through the cross and resurrection is the fulfillment of it. The Christian faith is the fulfillment of what began in Judaism. Some of the most enthusiastic believers in Christ are Messianic Jews – Jewish Christians who practice the Hebrew traditions and who have also accepted Christ, understanding that he is the true fulfillment and focus of those traditions.
Helmet, you place a paradox where none exists. And you, like we all often do, keep thinking of God in human terms. But he isn’t human, and he doesn’t have any of our failings or flaws. He isn’t anything like that. He does not change, and he is not bound by linear time. His nature is entirely different from ours. He is more like Aslan of Narnia – good, yet terrible at the same time. Just and wise, yet dangerous. Understand, perfect goodness requires perfect justice.
That’s why the law of the Old Testament was given. That and to show us our need for him. And the Son was given on the cross as a way for us to avoid the spiritual death our nature condemns us to, that which the Old Testament law puts us under. Through him we are given a new nature, Jesus’ nature, to replace our own. By grace, not by works. Salvation is a gift, given freely to us but paid for with the Son’s blood. Like digital files, it never runs out. It’s infinite. Becoming more like Jesus is a lifelong process, and all believers fall and struggle. Never believe anyone who says otherwise.
But to get back on topic, this doesn’t come as any real surprise to me. DOD is always going to be paranoid about sites like Wikileaks because they see them as a threat.
Re: Re: Re:5 I guess that's okay then.
Ugh, c’mon dude, it was a bad joke, originally from a Bloodhound Gang song. You know, insecurity, a god not believing in himself wordplay, blasphemy….
Re: Re: Re:6 I guess that's okay then.
I like this song title: Blasphemy (The Victimless Crime)
The song contains swearing and other offensive stuff.
Re: Re: Re:5 I guess that's okay then.
[joke to be told in different voices, in order of steeply increasing “jewishness”]
[Man]: Rabbi, you’ve got to help me, I don’t know what to do. Yeasterday my son told me that– that he’s going to convert to Catholicism. I’m so ashamed, what did I do wrong, did I push him away? Did I hold him too close? I just feel awful.
[Rabbi]: Oh you feel bad. You feel ashamed. Last month my son told me he’s going to convert! A fine thing, me a rabbi, and my son is going to be a Christian. How does that look? How do you think I feel?
[Booming voice from the sky]: OH SO YOU’VE GOT IT SO BAD…
Re: Re: Re:4 I guess that's okay then.
Actually it’s three, add Islam to the list.
Then again God doesn’t need to believe in himself as he trims his beard while looking in the mirror wondering if he should stop believing in Dark Helmets 🙂
Re: Re: Re:4 I guess that's okay then.
God has been fiddling with many operating systems, but he couldn’t settle on one until recently. Even though many mainstream OS’s share the same past and kernel architecture (a big, fat, monotheistic kernel that looks like it was invented about 2000 years ago), God seems to have settled with the latest version of “Catholic” (a fork of “Christianity”, which is open-source).
God settled for “Catholic” mostly because it has been around for a while and has been pretty stable lately. It has better support than most too, with a large, mostly friendly community a comprehensive manual (the Holy Bible of Christianity, they call it).
God thought about getting one of those new-fangled OS’s with Polytheistic kernels, but none seems to be in working condition just yet (but that hasn’t stopped them from bashing their monotheistic competitors, even though their kernel can barely make it past the boot-loader).
God doesn’t bother to participate in the OS holy wars that sometimes flare up. He just wishes people would choose what they like best and just get over it. He personally dislikes these new versions of “Christianity” that have been popping up recently. Sure, some of them promise that they solve this and that and that they’ll make your life so much better, but generally, they are much more unstable that the mainstream releases. Others haven’t had updates for years. And finally, some just seem like one big scam…
Re: I guess that's okay then.
But you wouldn’t take candy from a baby, would you?
So next time, don’t use inappropriate analogies in your arguments.
Like hey man! Who can believe the man?
They lied?
The government lied to us?
What haven’t they lied to us about?
Lies first; truth long after.
By the way, some may not have heard that the whole Iraqi WMD story was just made up. Not a shred of evidence after years and mamy millions spent trying to find it. And Jessica Lynch, the private who held off attack with machine gun blazing? Turned out she was merely injured in a vehicle wreck and those nasty Iraqis took her to a hospital. Pat Tillman was cut down in a blaze of glory during a firefight? Nope, shot by US troops in head at close range. — Those are just the ones too public to cover up forever. EVERY first story we’ve gotten about Iraq has turned out to be nothing but lies.
im not your buddeh, guy
Afghanistan
I am India’s expert in strategic defence and the father of India’s strategic program, including the Integrated Guided Missiles Development Program. I have shown in my blog titled ‘Nuclear Supremacy For India Over U.S.’, which can be found by a Yahoo search with the title, that all terrorism and insurgencies in the Indian subcontinent and in much of the rest of the world is sponsored by the C.I.A. Both Pakistan’s ISI and India’s RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) function as branches of the C.I.A. and participate in terrorism and insurgencies throughout the Subcontinent, under direction of the C.I.A. Yes, the ISI secretly supports the Taliban but it does so under direction from the C.I.A. whose modus operandi is support for ALL sides of a conflict to control the course of the conflict in service of its own goals. The goal of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and partial occupation of Pakistan is eventual occupation and overt colonial rule over the Subcontinent as a whole. This will not be permitted and all those participating in this enterprise, including the U.K., will be duly punished; see my blog. The document leak currently in the news has been made in preparation for abandonment of this goal and withdrawal from Afghanistan because of steps I have already taken for the nuclear destruction of New Delhi and then the coast-to-coast destruction of the United States by India with 5,000 thermonuclear warheads and extermination of its population; see my blog.
Re: Afghanistan
Psst! Master! You forgot to tell them about the secret mind control satellite!