Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
WikiLeaks Preparing to Release More Afghan Files
LONDON - WikiLeaks spokesman Julian Assange said Thursday his organization is preparing to release the rest of the secret Afghan war documents it has on file.
WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange. Assange said Thursday his organization is preparing to release the rest of the secret Afghan war documents it has on file.(Photograph: Andrew Winning/Reuters) WikiLeaks already has published 77,000 classified U.S. military reports covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010, an extraordinary disclosure which some say could expose human rights abuses across the NATO-led campaign.
The disclosure also has angered the Pentagon, which has accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of soldiers and informants in the field, and demanded that WikiLeaks refrain from publishing any more secret data.
Speaking via videolink to London's Frontline Club, Assange said he had no intention of holding back. He gave no specific timeframe, but he said his organization was about halfway through those 15,000 or so secret files previously held back from publication.
"We're about 7,000 reports in," he said, adding that he would definitely publish them. There was no indication as to whether Assange would give the documents to The New York Times, The Guardian, and Der Spiegel - as he did before - or simply dump them on his website.
He said he had "no comment" about his current whereabouts.
Assange is under pressure from U.S. authorities who have thrown the resources of the military and the FBI into investigating the source of his scoop. The Pentagon has a task force of about 100 people reading the leaked documents to assess the damage done and working, for instance, to alert Afghans who might be identified by name and now could be in danger.
Other governments also reportedly have been urged to look into Assange and his international network of activists, but it's not clear how aggressive the U.S. has been in pursuing Assange.
Earlier Thursday, Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith told The Associated Press that Washington had not approached his government about pursuing possible criminal charges against Assange, an Australian citizen, or about putting restrictions on his travel.
"Quite clearly we're working closely with the United States on these matters," Smith said, citing Australia's Defense Department and the Pentagon as the agencies working together. "These are very serious matters for concern."
Australia, which has some 1,550 troops in Afghanistan, already has launched its own investigation into whether posting classified military documents had compromised the national interest or endangered soldiers.
Asked how the Pentagon is cooperating with Australia, Defense Department spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the U.S. task force is sharing details it finds in the leaked documents.
"Our task force is reaching out to our counterparts to update them on information that we may be finding that affects them," including information that "may affect their forces," Lapan told reporters Thursday.
"When we're coming across things that involve our allies, we are sharing info with them," he said, adding that he knows of no other form or more general military cooperation with allies on the issue. Lapan didn't name the nations that the task force has contacted.
Associated Press Writers Pauline Jelinek in Washington and Rod McGuirk in Canberra contributed to this report.
Online:
Frontline Club: http://frontlineclub.com/
WikiLeaks: http://wikileaks.org/
- Posted in
26 Comments so far
Show AllMy understanding is that police reports never reveal the true names of informants/stool-pigeons. One would think that the military are as at least as smart..... Maybe not.
Our corrupt authorities apparently see many situations as 'theatre'. A place where fiction rules, and the truth is to be avoided at all costs.
They concern themselves with how the people will respond to their stories more than anything else. They are very skilled in the art of deception - adept at making good people look like villains, and those who order, approve of, and carry out massacres of defenseless women and children, look like heroes.
The light of truth is very upsetting to them. :-)
It will set us free from their dark grip.
I hope you are right.
As much as the documents need to get out, Wikileaks should have read the documents before putting them online, and should have redacted the names. If those are real names, the Taliban will kill those people, and possibly their family members.
That doesn't mean the documents shouldn't be released, and it doesn't mean we should be militarily occupying the country. But it is true, and Wikileaks may have been hugely irresponsible to release the first batch without reading them first.
Please....The documents were scrutinized by WL, the 3 newspapers who printed them, AND in the US, the Govt.,before they were sent to press.
Julian releasing old secret war documents doesn't endanger lives, shooting and bombing people does.
Post 'em all, Julian! We'll see if the U.S. has any conscience or shame at all (so far, apparently not).
Bravo! May all corrupt elements of all governments soon have nowhere to hide the dirty dark secrets of their criminal deeds. May our news media find a spine and do their job to fight corruption.
We should all urge our politicians and news media regardless of how corrupt they may seem, to fight this scourge.
All those who order, approve of, commit, or cover up war crimes are criminals. The USA must follow the rule of law for a change. They can only fool some of the people some of the time. Thanks to Wikileaks, criminals are being exposed.
Wikileaks deserves much support - ie: money, love & prayers! Please give generously to them, please help educate your aquaintances, and please tell the politicians and news media the war crimes need to be prosecuted, not swept under the rug! This is a huge opportunity for Americans to show the world that we are not a bunch of pathetic & complacent slaves to our corrupt system.
One clear course of individual citizen action is to write and financially support the legal defense of the one accused leaker inside the military monster: Pvt. Bradley Manning. Go to "Help Bradley Manning" for updated information and his address and ways to contribute to his legal defense. The military likely aims to make him an example with severe treatment and a kangaroo courts martial. The need is for an excellent civilian team of dedicated attorneys for his defense, not the military lawyers chosen by the Judge Advocate General Office.
And the truth shall set you free.
"The Wikileaks Limited Hang-Out and the Coming War With Iran" with Webster Tarpley. How the massive document dump plays into US geostrategy; comparisons with the Pentagon Papers; war provocation incidents; Wikileaks Board; Cass Sunstein; Google; In-Q-Tel; Operation Keyhole. http://kpfaweb.kpfa.org/archive/id/63211
I know, I know, Webster's a KooK ?
Webster is a kook. For some reason, that crowd hates Wikileaks, and it makes zero sense to me. I listened to this interview and thought it was ridiculous. He made statement after statement without any substantive references, even calling Ellsberg a mole! ( I guess Nixon played along with it all when he was caught on tape wanting to go after Ellsberg).
He is essentially accusing Wikileaks and Julian of being a military operation, as though they have been leaking documents for 4 years against other corporations and governments in order to prepare for the day they can help the US Empire in Afghanistan! It's totally absurd.
Webster my be a kook, and you may consider others kooks as well, but unless one digs deep, one may not fully appreciate the intricacies of how the game is played:
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=424591681&blogId=535765804
People have been deprived of life & liberty for "crimes" far less than those of Mr. Assanges' doings...
listen for yourself
i did.
i commented more on that audio page about the details of his rant.
http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/63211
Good for them, those guys are heroes.
From Dizi-leaks: Wikileaks has WMD's and can attack America in 45 minutes with its mobile bio & chem weapons that were purchased along with yellow-cake uranium from Niger. We must save Obama, George, Dick and the countless other brave Americans who now live in luxury because they defended the Great Empire of un-insured, un-employed, un-Tea Party,.......THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!
When Cheney outed Valerie Plame Wilson, nobody cared. Are they serious?
Manning and Assange are heroes.
If all the opposing factions' secret documents and strategies are made public, then none would be able to fight against any other.
Brilliant.
I have noticed that some NGO's have come out against WikiLeaks. I'm not sure why they are doing this but their stated reasons seem extremely weak. I have had serious complaints about Amnesty International in the past.
Why WikiLeaks Is Under Fire From Rights Groups
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2010309,00.html
I suppose this is to be expected from Time Mag but I had some interesting interaction with a writer from Reason Magazine which I know nothing about. This is the article which you can judge for yourself:
Amnesty Attacks Assange
http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/10/amnesty-attacks-assange
I sent them an email and got a prompt reply from the author.
This is what I wrote:
I am not familiar with your work so I would like to know if the writing of Moynihan concerning WikiLeaks is indicative of the style of "journalism" that you use. I found the picture and string of gratuitous insults to be particularly revealing. Perhaps the "blog"
is different from your other "journalistic" endeavors.
This is what the author sent to me:
Any particular complaints? I'd be happy to answer any questions.
This is my reply:
As I stated, why the gratuitous insults and the picture. I have no complaints, I just want to know why you are doing this and how this relates to your notion of "journalism."
This is what the author replied to me:
It's not journalism. It was a jokey, opinionated blog post. And if you are a regular Reason reader, you'll understand that this is pretty standard tone on the blog.
This is my final reply to the author:
OK. That clears that up. Is the standard tone you speak of only found on the "blog" and not the "more serious" part. I never read Reason before and I will never look at it again; it is totally discredited. I suppose it is more honest and forthright to admit your hatred and give it full expression rather than do the same thing and claim impartiality, fairness and "journalism". I did notice that you have many interests in Sweden, so one wonders what is the personal problem you have with Assange. No matter. Enjoy yourself.
Good work ekzile, particularly last paragraph. They do tend to be snarky and superior in that magazine, though there are exceptions. Many of their acolytes favor the bombing of the middle east in the name of progress and 'democracy.' This reminds me too much of the christian right which advocates the same thing because they think muslims are satanic, etc.
I remembered the issue I had with Amnesty International. I had some exchanges with their London office during the US aerial bombing of Kosovo. This is a very dangerous organization that promotes "Humanitarian Intervention." We see this now in Iraq and Afghanistan and will see more of it in the run-up to the attack on Iran. AI strongly supported the slaughter of civilians in Kosovo by American and NATO forces; unfortunately the reasons for this intervention were false and faked. AI is falling in line with the doctrine of "Humanitarian Intervention" as espoused by Todd Gitlin in Mother Earth Magazine article entitled "The End of the Absolute No" which can be found online and is quite chilling. I will further note that "Humanitarian Intervention" to the real crises in Bosnia and Rwanda were absolutely useless and the intervention in Kosovo was fraudulent and caused much destruction and thousands of innocent lives. The campaign for "Humanitarian Intervention" in Iran is well underway. The Clintons and the Democrats were responsible for the US caused massacres in Kosovo as well as one of the leaders of the Democratic Party, General Wesly Clark.
It must be really exciting to be Assange, stubbing the tow of the monstrous MIC before he gets squashed.
If WikiLeaks is not some kind of psyop, something that has been suggested by others, then I make this prediction: the force with which the military takes revenge on WikiLeaks in particular, and the Internet in general, will show just how much he and his web site has truly hurt them. If he has truly truly caused them great harm, then, IMHO, they will fight back by making sure that this kind of thing can never ever happen again. It could mean them putting into motion actions to eventually have the Internet shut down (or at least severely curtailed). Now wouldn't that be a shame. But I guess its worth it to people like Assange, just so he can say "I got the bastards!"
atelios wrote: " It must be really exciting to be Assange, stubbing the tow of the monstrous MIC before he gets squashed."
_________
I hope that that which you advance does NOT happen. This man is not going against our "efforts", although he clearly doesn't agree with them.
TRANSPARENCY is the best game around. He, and his crew, are providing transparency where the gov't offers confusion; he is giving us truth, where the gov't is giving us propaganda and lies.
I am totally into protecting our troops and everyone else who put their life on line for our sake. Still, I firmly believe that, without transparency, anything the gov't tells us is probably nonsensical lies.
VIOLENCE IS OVERRATED!
My stance is, considering that government rarely tells us the truth, if at all, we have no choice but to go with the most "likely truth-teller/possibility"... the one telling us that we should be cautious as to what we profess to... as regards the gov't mainstream story...
Violence is sooooooo OVERRATED