Pentagon bracing for new WikiLeaks release

Oct 18, 2010 by Olivia Hampton
The homepage of the WikiLeaks website. The Pentagon scoured through an Iraq war database Monday to prepare for potential fallout from an expected release by WikiLeaks of some 400,000 secret military reports.

The Pentagon scoured through an Iraq war database Monday to prepare for potential fallout from an expected release by WikiLeaks of some 400,000 secret military reports.

The massive release, possibly early this week, is set to dwarf the whistleblower website's publication of 77,000 classified US military documents on the war in Afghanistan in July, including the names of Afghan informants and other details from raw intelligence reports. Another 15,000 are due out soon.

In order to prepare for the anticipated release of sensitive intelligence on the US-led , officials set up a 120-person taskforce several weeks ago to comb through the database and "determine what the possible impacts might be," said Colonel David Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman.

The Department of Defense is concerned the leak compiles "significant activities" from the war, which include incidents such as known attacks against coalition troops, Iraqi security forces, civilians or infrastructure in the country.

The data was culled from an Iraq-based database that contained "significant acts, unit-level reporting, tactical reports, things of that nature," said Lapan, noting that officials still do not know how many and which documents would be released.

He urged WikiLeaks to return the documents to the US military, which he said found no need to redact them in the interim.

"Our position is redactions don't help, it's returning the documents to their rightful owner," Lapan said.

US soldiers guard a detained Iraqi suspected of ties to Al-Qaeda on the southern outskirts of Baghdad, in 2007. The Department of Defense is concerned a new WikiLeaks leak compiles "significant activities" from the war, which include incidents such as known attacks against coalition troops, Iraqi security forces, civilians or infrastructure in the country.

"We don't believe WikiLeaks or others have the expertise needed. It's not as simple as just taking out names. There are other things and documents that aren't names that are also potentially damaging."

For the Iraq leak, Wikileaks is believed to be teaming up with the same news outlets as it did for the Afghanistan document dump -- The New York Times, Britain's Guardian and Der Spiegel of Germany -- and Newsweek magazine has reported that all partners would release the material simultaneously.

The July release caused uproar in the US government, with director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA director Michael Hayden warning it could undermine the post-9/11 effort to break down walls between rival intelligence agencies.

Difficulties in sharing intelligence information have been repeatedly identified as a problem plaguing spy and law enforcement services since the attacks of September 11, 2001.

In a speech this month, Clapper said President Barack Obama was full of "angst" over a "hemorrhage" of leaks of sensitive intelligence from government officials.

"I think it's going to have a very chilling effect on the need to share," he said.

WikiLeaks has not identified the source of the documents it has released so far but suspicion has fallen on Bradley Manning, a US Army intelligence analyst who is in military custody.

Manning was arrested in May following the release by WikiLeaks of video footage of a US Apache helicopter strike in Iraq in which civilians died, and he has been charged with delivering defense information to an unauthorized source.

Launched in 2006, WikiLeaks is facing internal troubles amid criticism its releases harm US national security and an ongoing investigation into its founder, Julian Assange, over an alleged sex crime in Sweden.

It also has some money problems.

Assange told The Guardian that British firm Moneybookers, an online payment company it uses to collect donations, closed his website's account in August after the US and Australian governments blacklisted in the days following the initial release of Afghan documents.

The website has been undergoing "scheduled maintenance" since September 29, but promises to "be back online as soon as possible."

Explore further: Vatican's manuscripts digital archive now available online

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Last Afghan WikiLeaks out in 'couple of weeks'

Aug 14, 2010

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange vowed Saturday to publish the last batch of secret documents on the Afghan war in "a couple of weeks", despite Pentagon pleas they would put further lives at risk.

WikiLeaks founder 'free to leave Sweden'

Sep 18, 2010

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is free to leave Sweden, after prosecutors said there was no arrest warrant against him for an alleged case of rape, one of his lawyers said Saturday.

Recommended for you

Kickstarter suspends privacy router campaign

Oct 20, 2014

Kickstarter has suspended an anonymizing router from its crowdfunding site. By Sunday, the page for "anonabox: A Tor hardware router" carried an extra word "(Suspended)" in parentheses with a banner below ...

User comments : 42

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (51) Oct 18, 2010
The Obama admin and the DOD have been remarkably weak in resoundingly solving this idiot wikileaks problem.
Pkunk_
3.8 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
Why don't they just go back to the old system ?
Top Secret papers in leather "Top Secret" files.
Not easy to mass copy 77,000 papers. Any thing electronic CAN and WILL be cracked , decrypted and copied at will.
NotAsleep
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2010
The Obama admin and the DOD have been remarkably weak in resoundingly solving this idiot wikileaks problem.


What do you recommend?

Why don't they just go back to the old system ?
Top Secret papers in leather "Top Secret" files.
Not easy to mass copy 77,000 papers. Any thing electronic CAN and WILL be cracked , decrypted and copied at will.


Information is only useful if you can access it readily. The way of "paper media" is mostly gone in the military because it takes more time than they have to FIND the info. Also, Secret networks are not connected to public networks. Unfortunately, one bad egg is all it takes to mess the system up...
Noumenon
4.7 / 5 (51) Oct 18, 2010
It's an on going war where we (USA) find importance in drone attacks without legal procedures, so taking down a web site and or arresting those that run it, should pose little problems, except for the mush headed left. If it's important enough to be kept from the public, make it top secrete so that idiot activists can be arrested. Not complicated. If someone is even in possession of secrete military documens they should be locked up without trial until the end of the war.
NotAsleep
not rated yet Oct 18, 2010
If the world were a civilized, understanding place, that's exactly what would happen. However, look at it from a propoganda point of view, "USA arrests peace activist for leaking proof of military wrong-doing". China, North Korea and Iran are examples of countries that frequently do this... the USA is certainly not in the position to silence such a public figure in the same way
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2010
It's an on going war where we (USA) find importance in drone attacks without legal procedures, so taking down a web site and or arresting those that run it, should pose little problems, except for the mush headed left.
It's funny how the big free market, small government guys always want the government to step in and shut down websites they don't like. Hypocrisy anyone?
Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (52) Oct 18, 2010
If the world were a civilized, understanding place, that's exactly what would happen. However, look at it from a propoganda point of view, "USA arrests peace activist for leaking proof of military wrong-doing". China, North Korea and Iran are examples of countries that frequently do this... the USA is certainly not in the position to silence such a public figure in the same way
That's the problem, worrying what other countries think to the point of paralysis. Other countries don't have the best interest of the USA in mind. It's justified to the USA in an on going war and that's all that matters.
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (51) Oct 18, 2010
It's an on going war where we (USA) find importance in drone attacks without legal procedures, so taking down a web site and or arresting those that run it, should pose little problems, except for the mush headed left.
It's funny how the big free market, small government guys always want the government to step in and shut down websites they don't like. Hypocrisy anyone?
What does war have to do with capitalism and free market? I'm mean are you joking or are you that dense.
Noumenon
4.8 / 5 (50) Oct 18, 2010
Classified military documents are a thing, not just free information. They were stolen, and anyone in possession of them should be arrested.
Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2010
It's an on going war where we (USA) find importance in drone attacks without legal procedures, so taking down a web site and or arresting those that run it, should pose little problems, except for the mush headed left.
It's funny how the big free market, small government guys always want the government to step in and shut down websites they don't like. Hypocrisy anyone?


I nominate this one for hands down the most harebrained post of the month.
Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (49) Oct 18, 2010
It's an on going war where we (USA) find importance in drone attacks without legal procedures, so taking down a web site and or arresting those that run it, should pose little problems, except for the mush headed left.
It's funny how the big free market, small government guys always want the government to step in and shut down websites they don't like. Hypocrisy anyone?
When did I ever say I want zero government? We still require law and order and a competent military and CIA.
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2010
See how fast they change their tune when confronted with their own BS?
What does war have to do with capitalism and free market? I'm mean are you joking or are you that dense.
Well, let's talk about these wars. Who's doing the fighting, the US military or US military contractors? Iraq and Afghanistan are outsourced wars. Yes we have groud troops out there, and they're in a lot of danger.

The majority of that danger is from contractors with a thrill kill attitude. 51% friendly fire casualty rate. This is a "free market" war.
NotAsleep
not rated yet Oct 18, 2010
That's the problem, worrying what other countries think to the point of paralysis. Other countries don't have the best interest of the USA in mind. It's justified to the USA in an on going war and that's all that matters.


I wasn't referring to how much other countries care. I was alluding to our own people seeing us as becoming the thing we fear the most
Modernmystic
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2010
That's the problem, worrying what other countries think to the point of paralysis. Other countries don't have the best interest of the USA in mind. It's justified to the USA in an on going war and that's all that matters.


I wasn't referring to how much other countries care. I was alluding to our own people seeing us as becoming the thing we fear the most


A totalitarian regime with a command economy?

Just add water and wait 20 years...
Skeptic_Heretic
3 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2010
A totalitarian regime with a command economy?

Just add water and wait 20 years...
They said the same thing after the new deal. Did we not add enough water then or are we talking a biblical 20 years, which is to say not a year at all?
Quantum_Conundrum
2.6 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
I think having possession of top secret documents should be considered treason, unless those documents prove someone else has committed treason or a felony.

That is to say, if you stole atop secret document to prove the president was a murderer, then that should be ok, because the constitution allows for impeachment and so on, and if the only evidence is hidden from investigators, it would never be brought to light. This is similar to how a police officer is allowed to speed while chasing a murder suspect, or another emergency vehicle is allowed to speed.

But if someone steals a secret document just to do what wikileaks and these other agencies do, it is treason.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (2) Oct 18, 2010
A totalitarian regime with a command economy?

Just add water and wait 20 years...
They said the same thing after the new deal. Did we not add enough water then or are we talking a biblical 20 years, which is to say not a year at all?


Ask "them"..."they" said it, not me.

Besides, we're closer to a totalitarian regime and a command economy now than we were then. So, "they" weren't all wrong...were they.
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2010
Ask "them"..."they" said it, not me.
So your promulgation and postulation of doom is about as accurate as piss in the wind. Thanks for clearing that up for us.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (2) Oct 18, 2010
Ask "them"..."they" said it, not me.
So your promulgation and postulation of doom is about as accurate as piss in the wind. Thanks for clearing that up for us.


No "their" postulation of doom was inaccurate as far as time-frame. MINE is pretty reasonable. Glad to clear that up for you.
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2010
No "their" postulation of doom was inaccurate as far as time-frame. MINE is pretty reasonable. Glad to clear that up for you.
So since you don't know what they based their statements on, you very well could have based yours on the exact same line of reasoning. Due to the cyclical nature of society, and the fact you're a self labeled conservative, that would mean you're most likely saying the exact same thing they did for the exact same conservative reason.
Noumenon
4.7 / 5 (49) Oct 18, 2010
A totalitarian regime with a command economy?

Just add water and wait 20 years...
They said the same thing after the new deal. Did we not add enough water then or are we talking a biblical 20 years, which is to say not a year at all?
Devaluing the dollar by printing money to pay for insane entitlement costs, is in effect redistribution of wealth by the government. $100+ trillion in unsourced entitlements owned,... but no, that won't effect the economy. How about the "entitlement" of owning a home without having to proove credit worthiness, that caused the current bad economy,..
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (2) Oct 18, 2010
No "their" postulation of doom was inaccurate as far as time-frame. MINE is pretty reasonable. Glad to clear that up for you.
So since you don't know what they based their statements on, you very well could have based yours on the exact same line of reasoning. Due to the cyclical nature of society, and the fact you're a self labeled conservative, that would mean you're most likely saying the exact same thing they did for the exact same conservative reason.


I'm a fiscal conservative, which means I'm a classical liberal. Whatever else you think I've "self labeled" I'm not sure.

I do know one thing you're far better at pissing in the wind trying to label people than making an argument.

I will say that we have higher tax rates, less personal liberty, and more regulation than we did in the New Deal era. Sounds like whatever those "conservatives" were basing their reasoning on was fairly sound...
gwargh
3 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2010
I will say that we have higher tax rates, less personal liberty, and more regulation than we did in the New Deal era. Sounds like whatever those "conservatives" were basing their reasoning on was fairly sound...

Top marginal tax rate during New Deal era: 65%, now: 35%
Modernmystic
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
I will say that we have higher tax rates, less personal liberty, and more regulation than we did in the New Deal era. Sounds like whatever those "conservatives" were basing their reasoning on was fairly sound...

Top marginal tax rate during New Deal era: 65%, now: 35%


The first bracket was 4%, we're now at 10%, but we have a lot more brackets. And that's just income tax, we have a LOT more other direct and indirect taxes now than we did then...

Way to cherry pick though dingbat.
Skeptic_Heretic
3.4 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
I will say that we have higher tax rates
Incorrect
less personal liberty
Incorrect
and more regulation than we did in the New Deal era
Depends on which industry.
Sounds like whatever those "conservatives" were basing their reasoning on was fairly sound...
Which would be why you fiscal conservatives disagree with it so much today....
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2010
How about the "entitlement" of owning a home without having to proove credit worthiness, that caused the current bad economy,..
How about the deregulation of the banks allowing for mortgage tradeoffs where the value was continually increased even though the same valueless asset hadn't changed in nature while being brokered between the two banking entites multiple times?

Bank A writes a crappy loan for 500k sells it to bank B for 510k. Bank B holds it for a month then sells it to Bank A for 520k, Bank A holds it for a month and sells it to bank B for 530k. Multiply by 10 million homes, 400 banking groups, and you have the cause for the bubble and its subsequent burst all without demonizing a population that was enticed into getting an unaffordable loan in the first place.

The banks get together and say to the US, "hey, if you don't give us 700 Billion, you're all screwed." So we buy the loans to prevent ourselves from being screwed, then the banks foreclose. Good game.
Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 18, 2010
I will say that we have higher tax rates
Incorrect


Incorrect.

less personal liberty
Incorrect


Incorrect.

and more regulation than we did in the New Deal era
Depends on which industry.


There may be a few you could name...one or two, but basically no it doesn't.

See how fun that is :-)
Skeptic_Heretic
3.4 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
See how fun that is :-)
Difference is I can substantiate what I say, can you? Perhaps if you give us a source I won't dismiss your inaccurate claims without one of my own.
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (50) Oct 18, 2010
@SH, That's all clean up, after the fact. If left to their own devises the banks would require 20% down payment and strong credit,... but no do gooder democrats wanted to make it easy for lower class to own homes. Once the market is flooded with anything (homes) the value tanks. How the banks dealt after the fact with the tanted loans is nearly irrelevant. [when i say "left to their own devices" I mean, if there wasn't a gov entity ready and willing to buy up sub-prime loans]
Skeptic_Heretic
4 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2010
SH, That's all clean up, after the fact.
It was an artificial inflation, hence why it was called a bubble. Housing prices should have been increasing in lockstep with inflation, instead you see the deregulation of the banking system's handling of loans for consumers under Carter, with little to no home value change, then a big deregulation of liquidity and asset trading for banking institutions under Reagan and Bush, and then the home prices skyrocketted. So what causes the home values to rise so sharply, Nou? The banks control the asset valuation through their internal trade mechanisms overseen by the ill funded SEC.Remove the regulations of oversight and look at what happens, bubble time.

The market became flooded with homes because homes became worthless compared to their inflated price.

So if you're following along, who owns those homes now? And who's foreclosing on mortgages that they no longer own?
finitesolutions
1 / 5 (3) Oct 18, 2010
Owning a home is more expensive than renting one. You should all rent instead of owning. Otherwise renters are stupid.
NotAsleep
5 / 5 (1) Oct 18, 2010
I thought this was an article about WikiLeaks and the ramifications of sharing classified information... when did it turn into a discussion on housing and the economy?
Modernmystic
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2010
I thought this was an article about WikiLeaks and the ramifications of sharing classified information... when did it turn into a discussion on housing and the economy?


Probably because, and this is just my opinion, it's a no-brainer that the United States government has every right to keep information that would endanger lives classified. Moreover it's pretty straightforward reasoning that they'd also have the right to prevent such information from being released and impose stiff penalties on the parties either guilty of treason or collusion with traitors.

OTOH I think it's probably just as pointless to talk about whether or not we're taxed more now than we were in the 30s when half the social programs we have now didn't exist then. Kind of three year old logic, but there are people here who apparently can't grasp it...*shrug*
danman5000
5 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2010
I thought this was an article about WikiLeaks and the ramifications of sharing classified information... when did it turn into a discussion on housing and the economy?

Because any thread longer than about 10 comments on this site is almost guaranteed to be totally off-topic. Somewhat disappointing, but certainly entertaining.
DamienS
5 / 5 (1) Oct 19, 2010
Long live WikiLeaks.
MarkyMark
5 / 5 (2) Oct 19, 2010
Long live WikiLeaks.

Yea while i do not 100% support them as some of the info endangers civillians [i.e. iraqi and afghani informants identaties], suddenly these wars have some real transparancy and.... Suprise Suprise the US does not come out looking that good even when you take into accounts the war conditions.
Skeptic_Heretic
3 / 5 (4) Oct 19, 2010
Suprise Suprise the US does not come out looking that good even when you take into accounts the war conditions.
The US hasn't looked good in war since the middle of Korea.
NotAsleep
3.3 / 5 (3) Oct 19, 2010
It's what occasionally happens when you take a teen, train him in the art of war and killing, send him into a foreign country where it's nearly impossible to tell enemies apart from friendlies, where every broken down car, animal carcass, pile of sand and person can be a bomb, and tell him he's not allowed to do what he was trained to do. I don't think anyone, particularly in this forum, condone the acts of the few that break from time to time... but it's not hard to understand why it happens.
donjoe0
not rated yet Oct 19, 2010
Liars. There is no "ongoing investigation into its founder, Julian Assange, over an alleged sex crime". Ask the Prosecutor from the jurisdiction where the alleged "investigations" began, she can tell you there's no such thing.
hylozoic
not rated yet Oct 21, 2010
Wow, this is one of the more entertaining threads on the P-org. Anyone of you bodies want to attempt to reduce the 'competing' positions down to a succinct matrix format?
hylozoic
1 / 5 (1) Oct 21, 2010
The only sense I'm teeping is a lack of surprise if one were to point out to me that Skeptic H has read Fuller's Critical Path.
Which tickles me to no end!
It seems that, given the paltry attempts in this thread at defending the 'sincerity' of American foreign 'relations' as of late, the Robber Barons have a lot of free guard dogs; of a breed which also seems to paint fences for the same cost.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (1) Oct 21, 2010
Suprise Suprise the US does not come out looking that good even when you take into accounts the war conditions.
The US hasn't looked good in war since the middle of Korea.


This makes it sound like it's more important to "look good" than it is to have a proper defense policy and be concerned about actually winning the wars we get into.

This idiocy is what basically cost us Vietnam btw.