Welcome to the Unhypnotize Truth Community!
A great place to discuss conspiracies, UFOs, NWO, truth, reality and enlightenment.

• » Conspiracies Discussions
• » UFOs and Extraterrestrial
• » Spiritual and Paranormal
• » World and Alternative News

Its time to wake up to the global conspiracy...and move beyond...
Our community is here to spread truth, discuss the Global Conspiracy and the world wide Truth Movement!

YES! I want to register for free right now!
Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Wikileaks’ War Logs Thread

  1. #11

    War Logs Describe Bin Laden Sightings Despite CIA Denials

    UK Daily Mail
    July 27, 2010

    Secret files leaked about the war in Afghanistan have revealed tantalising glimpses of Osama Bin Laden despite public CIA claims that they are clueless as to the whereabouts of the Al Qaeda boss.

    The claims are among 91,000 U.S. military records obtained by whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.

    Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, said last month that there have been no firm leads on Bin Laden’s whereabouts since the ‘early 2000s’.

    But a ‘threat report’ from the International Security Assistance Force regional command (north) on suicide bombers in August 2006 suggested Bin Laden had been attending regular meetings in villages on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    It said: ‘Reportedly a high-level meeting was held where six suicide bombers were given orders for an operation in northern Afghanistan. These meetings take place once every month.’

    Full article here


  2. #12

    WikiLeaks – What Leaks?

    Redacted News
    July 28, 2010
    [Excerpt; see link to article, below]

    Julian Assange’s recent comment in the Belfast Telegraph about 9/11, however, may be a more tangible source of concern for me. I know Assange isn’t an idiot, so I see three other possibilities:

    1. He is profoundly ignorant of the vast body of material that demonstrates that the 9/11 spectacle was a false flag operation.

    2. He’s “picking his battles” and not wanting to have to deal with the inevitable conspiracy theory stigma that could threaten his media access

    3. He’s running a limited hangout/honeypot

    Of these three options, I doubt that it’s number two.

    We just saw the WikiLeaks release of the Afghanistan information. Does Assange forget the pretext that was used for the invasion? 9/11 remains the elephant in the room.

    Read the article here:


    “All this ‘whistleblowing’ does little other than serve the interests of the US possibly expanding their war… We know that the powers-that-be are determined to control both sides of every argument. They lead the opposition against themselves. That’s why “Stop The War” will not even MENTION 9/11 Truth and exclude from the ranks of their leadership anyone who wants to raise reasonable questions about the events of 9/11… Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is ‘annoyed’ by 9/11 truth. That there IN ITSELF makes him, to any sensible person, a placeman of the security services.”

    by Kevin Boyle

    So Wikileaks has exposed the truth about the Afghan/Pakistan war? 91,000 leaked documents expose the fact that war is a nasty, two-faced, dishonorable business with even (shock horror) covert operations set up to assassinate leaders of the enemy.

    What is getting most attention, however, is the allegation that the ISI (the Pakistani Secret Service) is secretly backing the Taliban and other documents demanding that the Pakistani government turn decisively against the militants, creating a justification for US operations inside Pakistan and a possible pretext for full-on invasion of the country.

    A few months ago we were reading that the US were funding the Taliban. There are many other stories of this kind from people like Webster Tarpley and Wayne Madsen.


    All this ‘whistleblowing’ does little other than serve the interests of the US possibly expanding their war. No establishment figure is seriously compromised by these ‘leaks’, nor is policy undermined in any new way. The war is wicked? The people who care already know that and this ‘new’ information makes little difference to that perception one way or the other.

    Why do the ‘leaks’ contain no embarrassing whistleblowing. Why is there no exposition of the betrayal felt by many soldiers and their officers who know the war(s) have got nothing to do with protecting America or the UK (….I have spoken to one British army officer who is acutely aware of the betrayal of his troops and of wider British interests and is waiting for [and working towards] the same revolution as myself. Meeting this man was the most encouraging moment of the last six months for me).

    Wikileaks made its name with this footage.

    Again, innocent people get murdered by coalition troops. Evil…embarrassing….but tell us something we didn’t know.

    We know that the powers-that-be are determined to control both sides of every argument. They lead the opposition against themselves. That’s why “Stop The War” will not even MENTION 9/11 Truth and exclude from the ranks of their leadership anyone who wants to raise reasonable questions about the events of 9/11.

    Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is ‘annoyed’ by 9/11 truth. That there IN ITSELF makes him, to any sensible person, a placeman of the security services.

    This, like the StopTheWar position, is called a ‘limited hangout’. There is no end of this kind of maneuvering out there as in, for example, Chomsky’s indefatigable support of Israel (“America” is the problem, not the international bankers who own it nor the Jewish Lobby who control it…..criticism most definitely never goes THERE. These are simply NOT issues).


    ‘Limited hangout’ is making a pretense at protest in order to disable genuine protest.


    It is the Hegelian dialectic in action.

    Many good people are led down futile paths when they trust and follow these people.

    Even the name for the operation, ‘Wikileaks’, tells a story.

    Here we see one CIA/Mossad operation supporting another. We are supposed to see ‘Wiki’ and think ‘truth’ as in that honourable internet encyclopedia ‘Wikipedia’(……whose ‘Mossad’ entry, by the way, does NOT include their famous motto, “By way of deception thou shalt make war”). There is a lifetimes work for somebody exposing the spinning and obfuscation in support of establishment narratives on this lousy site.

    For a more detailed look at the ‘Wikileaks’ operation see here.


    Uh-O. Lookee here….Wikileaks ‘reveal’ that Bin Laden was being tracked through Pakistan:

    “In August 2006, a US intelligence report placed Bin Laden at a meeting in Quetta, over the border in Pakistan. It said he and others – including the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar – were organising suicide attacks in Afghanistan.”

    So there it is. That evil fiend, Bin Laden, is not dead (as most people who follow the information believe). He is alive and well and organising Al Qaeda, or is it the Taliban, to carry out suicide bombings against our boys in Afghanistan.

    Well, now we know.

    Don’t we?


  3. #13

    ‘WikiLeaks story soft, coverage a 9/11-like lie’

    July 28, 2010

    A massive leak of over 90-thousand secret U.S. military files has exposed cover-ups over the war in Afghanistan. The classified documents were handed to three newspapers by the whistle-blowing webiste Wikileaks. They include reports on the deaths of hundreds of civilians, increased Taliban attacks, as well as NATO fears Pakistan and Iran are backing the insurgency.


  4. #14

    Leaked files indicate U.S. pays Afghan media to run friendly stories

    Yahoo News
    July 28, 2010

    Buried among the 92,000 classified documents released Sunday by WikiLeaks is some intriguing evidence that the U.S. military in Afghanistan has adopted a PR strategy that got it into trouble in Iraq: paying local media outlets to run friendly stories.

    Several reports from Army psychological operations units and provincial reconstruction teams (also known as PRTs, civilian-military hybrids tasked with rebuilding Afghanistan) show that local Afghan radio stations were under contract to air content produced by the United States. Other reports show U.S. military personnel apparently referring to Afghan reporters as “our journalists” and directing them in how to do their jobs.

    Such close collaboration between local media and U.S. forces has been a headache for the Pentagon in the past: In 2005, Pentagon contractor the Lincoln Group was caught paying Iraqi newspapers to run stories written by American soldiers, causing the United States considerable embarrassment.

    In one of the WikiLeaks documents, a PRT member reports delivering “12 hours of PSYOP Radio Content Programming” to two radio stations in the province of Ghazni in 2008, and paying one of them “$3,900 for Radio Content Programming air time for the month of October”.

    Full article here


  5. #15

    Source of leaked military docs unknown: WikiLeaks

    OneIndia News
    July 28, 2010

    While the United States is trying to hunt for the individual behind the massive leak of US military data on Afghanistan war, the whistleblowers’ website, that made the 91,000 classified documents available to the world, has said that the source of leak is unknown.

    WikiLeaks’ chief Julian Assange told reporters that the source of the leaked military documents were unknown and stressed that one of the cornerstones of his website is the fact that the source of its data is hidden from those who receive it.
    The layer of secrecy helps protect the site’s sources from spy agencies and hostile corporations, the Australian hacker said.

    He, however, acknowledged that the site’s anonymous submissions have raised concerns about the authenticity of the material.

    Assange claimed that WikiLeaks has not yet encountered any such bogus material.


  6. #16

    US Treasury is running on fumes

    Paul Craig Roberts
    July 29, 2010

    The White House is screaming like a stuck pig. WikiLeaks’ release of the Afghan War Documents “puts the lives of our soldiers and our coalition partners at risk.”

    What nonsense. Obama’s war puts the lives of American soldiers at risk, and the craven puppet state behavior of “our partners” in serving as US mercenaries is what puts their troops at risk.

    Keep in mind that it was someone in the US military that leaked the documents to WikiLeaks. This means that there is a spark of rebellion within the Empire itself.

    And rightly so. The leaked documents show that the US has committed numerous war crimes and that the US government and military have lied through their teeth in order to cover up the failure of their policies. These are the revelations that Washington wants to keep secret.

    If Obama cared about the lives of our soldiers, he would not have sent them to a war, the purpose of which he cannot identify. Earlier in his regime, Obama admitted that he did not know what the mission was in Afghanistan. He vowed to find out what the mission was and to tell us, but he never did. After being read the riot act by the military/security complex, which recycles war profits into political campaign contributions, Obama simply declared the war to be “necessary.” No one has ever explained why the war is necessary.

    The government cannot explain why the war is necessary, because it is not necessary to the American people. Any necessary reason for the war has to do with the enrichment of narrow private interests and with undeclared agendas. If the agendas were declared and the private interests being served identified, even the American sheeple might revolt.

    The Obama regime has made war the business of America. Escalation in Afghanistan has gone hand in hand with drone attacks on Pakistan and the use of proxy forces to conduct wars in Pakistan and North Africa. Currently, the US is conducting provocative naval exercises off the coasts of China and North Korea and instigating war between Columbia and Venezuela in South America. Former CIA director Michael Hayden declared on July 25 that an attack on Iran seems unavoidable.

    With the print and TV media captive, why doesn’t Washington simply tell us that the country is at war without going to the trouble of war? That way the munitions industry can lay off its workers and put the military appropriations directly into profits. We could avoid the war crimes and wasted lives of our soldiers.

    The US economy and the well-being of Americans are being sacrificed to the regime’s wars. The states are broke and laying off teachers. Even “rich” California, formerly touted as “the seventh largest economy in the world,” is reduced to issuing scrip and cutting its state workers’ pay to the minimum wage.

    Supplemental war appropriations have become routine affairs, but the budget deficit is invoked to block any aid to Americans — but not to Israel. On July 25 the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reported that the US and Israel had signed a multi-billion dollar deal for Boeing to provide Israel with a missile system.

    Americans can get no help out of Washington, but the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, declared that Washington’s commitment to Israel’s security is “not negotiable.” Washington’s commitment to California and to the security of the rest of us is negotiable. War spending has run up the budget deficit, and the deficit precludes any help for Americans.

    With the US bankrupting itself in wars, America’s largest creditor, China, has taken issue with America’s credit rating. The head of China’s largest credit rating agency declared: “The US is insolvent and faces bankruptcy as a pure debtor nation.”

    On July 12, Niall Ferguson, an historian of empire, warned that the American empire could collapse suddenly from weakness brought on by its massive debts and that such a collapse could be closer than we think.

    Deaf, dumb, and blind, Washington policymakers prattle on about “thirty more years of war.”

    Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary U.S. Treasury, Associate Editor Wall Street Journal, Columnist for Business Week, Senior Research Fellow Hoover Institution Stanford University, and William E. Simon Chair of Political Economy in the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com.


  7. #17

    Wikileaks Afghanistan: FBI called in to hunt those responsible

    Robert Winnett
    London Telegraph
    July 30, 2010

    The FBI has been called in to help hunt those responsible for leaking tens of thousands of secret documents about the Afghanistan war.

    Robert Gates, the US Defense Secretary, warned that sources identified in thedocuments now risked being “targeted for retribution” byinsurgents in Afghanistan.

    He pledged a “thorough, aggressive investigation” to identify theleakers and said that steps were being taken to restrict access toclassified documents in future.

    Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, said theleakers “might already have on their hands the blood of some youngsoldier or that of an Afghan family”.

    Full article here


  8. #18

    Leaked Afghan war files a ‘dangerous’ risk: Gates

    July 30, 2010

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said leaked US documents on the Afghan war posed grave risks for Americans in battle and for US relationships in the region.

    Gates vowed the Pentagon will “aggressively investigate” and prosecute those behind the leak and had asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation to help in the probe.

    The leak of 92,000 classified documents by the website WikiLeaks contained no surprises and did not call into question the US strategy in the Afghan war, Gates and the US military’s top officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, told a press conference.

    Gates, however, said “the battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world.”

    Full article here


  9. #19

    Wikileaks contacted Obama Admin. before release of documents but got no response

    Floyd Brown
    Western Journalism
    July 30, 2010

    Obama is downplaying the importance of the leak of thousands of classified documents. But he won’t be able to laugh off the latest allegations. We have now learned that with quick action he and his White House Staff may have been able to limit the damage, but they were too incompetent to act.

    The video interview below blows this scandal wide open.

    When asked by Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News why he should not be held responsible for potential deaths caused by the leak, Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, answered that he contacted the White House about the leaks before they were released and asked them to review them.
    The White House’s response?


    They were too busy golfing, partying with Paul McCartney and spending the summer vacationing. In subsequent email conversations Assange’s people clarified that they sought this response through the New York Times.

    This is the part of the puzzle which could explain why Obama and his supporters have been trying to downplay this leak as unimportant.

    If someone in the Obama administration had pre knowledge of this devastating leak and they did nothing to help limit the potentially fatal consequences to our soldiers and many valiant Afghani informants, Obama has every reason to downplay the leak.

    Someone in this administration has blood on their hands, and Congress must demand a full disclosure of who knew what and when. This scandal should not be covered up.


  10. #20

    Liz Cheney calls on Obama to shut down WikiLeaks

    David Edwards and Daniel Tencer
    Raw Story
    Aug 2, 2010

    Following the release of 92,000 war log files, Liz Cheney is calling for WikiLeaks to be shut down and says that the founder has “blood on his hands.”

    “I would point out that although you’ve got the news about the WikiLeaks documents that that came out this week and clearly Julian Assange’s effort was to change course for the US policy in Afghanistan,” Cheney told Fox News’ Chris Wallace Sunday.

    “He was unsuccessful in that. He does clearly have blood on his hands potentially for the people whose names were in those documents who helped the US and I think that’s something he will have to live with now,” she continued.

    “I would really like to see President Obama to move to ask the government of Iceland to shut that website down. I would like to see him move to shut it down ourselves if Iceland won’t do it. I would like to see them move aggressively to prosecute Mr. Assange and certainly ensure that he never again gets a visa to enter the United States,” said Cheney.

    “What he’s done is very clearly aiding and abetting al Qaeda. And as I said, he may very well be responsible for the deaths of American soldiers Afghanistan,” she concluded.

    Full article here


Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

Similar Threads

  1. CIA’s ‘Facebook’ Program Dramatically Cut Agency’s Costs
    By Unhypnotized in forum On The Lighter Side (Jokes & Humor)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 25th, 2011, 04:30 AM
  2. There Is No Comet Elenin – It’s A Brown Dwarf ‘Nibiru’
    By Unhypnotized in forum Planet X / Nibiru / Brown Dwarf / Elenin
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 13th, 2011, 02:20 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 24th, 2010, 10:16 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 24th, 2009, 08:46 PM

Tags for this Thread