FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
WikiLeaks: An NWO Timewaste Intelligence Op
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6486

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:11 pm    Post subject: WikiLeaks: An NWO Timewaste Intelligence Op Reply with quote

Quote:
Afghanistan war logs:
tensions increase after revelation of more leaked files


• Coalition commanders hid civilian deaths, war logs reveal
• US, Afghanistan and Pakistan trade angry accusations
• Leak poses 'very real threat' to US forces - White House

The Guardian, Tuesday 27 July 2010 - David Leigh and Matthew Taylor

Tensions between the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan were further strained today after the leak of thousands of military documents about the Afghan war.

As members of the US Congress raised questions about Pakistan's alleged support for the Taliban, officials in Islamabad and Kabul also traded angry accusations on the same issue.

Further disclosures reveal more evidence of attempts by coalition commanders to cover up civilian casualties in the conflict.

The details emerge from more than 90,000 secret US military files, covering six years of the war, which caused a worldwide uproar when they were leaked yesterday.

The war logs show how a group of US marines who went on a shooting rampage after coming under attack near Jalalabad in 2007 recorded false information about the incident, in which they killed 19 unarmed civilians and wounded a further 50.

In another case that year, the logs detail how US special forces dropped six 2,000lb bombs on a compound where they believed a "high-value individual" was hiding, after "ensuring there were no innocent Afghans in the surrounding area". A senior US commander reported that 150 Taliban had been killed. Locals, however, reported that up to 300 civilians had died.

Other files in the secret archive reveal:

• Coalition commanders received numerous intelligence reports about the whereabouts and activity of Osama bin Laden between 2004 and 2009, even though the CIA chief has said there has been no precise information about the al-Qaida leader since 2003.

• The hopelessly ineffective attempts of US troops to win the "hearts and minds" of Afghans.

• How a notorious criminal was appointed chief of police in the south-western province of Farrah.

Speaking at a press conference at the Frontline Club in central London yesterday, Julian Assange, of Wikileaks, the website which initially published the war logs, said: "It is up to a court to decide clearly whether something is in the end a crime. That said, on the face of it, there does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material."

Four days after it was first approached by the Guardian, the British Ministry of Defence said it was still unable to give an account of two questionable clusters of civilian shootings by British troops detailed in the American logs.

They were alleged to have taken place in Kabul in a month in 2007 when a detachment of the Coldstream Guards was patrolling, and in the southern province of Helmand during a six-month tour of duty by Royal Marine commandos at the end of 2008. The MoD said: "We are currently examining our records to establish the facts in the alleged civilian casualty incidents raised."

The UK foreign secretary, William Hague, told the BBC that the leaked documents could "poison the atmosphere in Afghanistan" but at the same time insisted they would not affect British troops:

Writing in the Guardian, Eric Joyce, a former soldier and parliamentary aide to the former Labour defence secretary Bob Ainsworth, described the leaked documents as a "game changer", adding that some of the questions raised were "stunning in their enormity".

The former Liberal Democrat leader and spokesman on defence and foreign affairs, Sir Menzies Campbell, said the documents showed how difficult it would be for UK troops to leave Afghanistan in 2015, the date set by David Cameron.

"The leaked documents show just how awesome the task will be to bring the Afghan police and army to a condition where they can be responsible for security," said Campbell.

Amnesty International called for reforms to the recording of civilian casualties after a row broke out over an incident in which the Afghan government says 45 villagers were killed in a rocket attack. The coalition disputes that it was responsible. Amnesty called on Nato "to provide a clear, unified system of accounting for civilian casualties in Afghanistan".

Daniel Ellsberg compared the publication of the war logs to the Pentagon Papers, which he leaked to the New York Times in 1971. "The Pentagon Papers did not stop or even affect the war but affected public opinion a great deal. Are we really going to do better with another $300bn [spent on the war in Afghanistan] on more bombs, more special forces, more drones? The Taliban are not going to quit."

The director of the military thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, Professor Michael Clarke, said in London: "There is no doubt that the leaks are politically pretty damaging. The papers give an impression of a lack of military discrimination in how operations were conducted."

The Pentagon said it was conducting an investigation into whether information in the logs placed coalition forces or their informants in danger.

Last night President Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, claimed the logs published by the Wikileaks website posed "a very real threat" to US forces: "It's not the content … there are names, there are operations, there are sources, all of that information out in the public domain has the potential to do harm."

The Guardian was allowed to investigate the logs for several weeks ahead of publication, along with the New York Times and the German weekly Der Spiegel. The three have published excerpts from the documents which do not pose a risk to informants or military operations.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/27/afghanistan-war-logs-tensions-strained

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.


Last edited by Fintan on Wed Dec 08, 2010 12:22 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6486

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meanwhile claim and counter-claim
over yet more Afghan civilian deaths:


Quote:
Karzai says 52 Afghan civilians killed in NATO strike

NATO officials deny the charge, saying six insurgents were slain during
heavy fighting. The incident, coming amid WikiLeaks document release,
highlights the issue of civilian deaths.

By Laura King, Los Angeles Times - July 27, 2010

President Hamid Karzai asserted Monday that up to 52 civilians had been killed by NATO rocket fire in southern Afghanistan, a controversy that erupted just as thousands of leaked military documents depicted a pervasive pattern of underreported civilian deaths and injuries in the course of the long conflict.

Karzai's claim of civilian casualties last week in Helmand province was sharply disputed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization force. Provincial authorities said the incident was still being investigated, and that neither the number of deaths nor culpability had been established.

But taken together, the leaked documents and the familiar scenario of conflicting claims emanating from a remote battle zone underscore that civilian casualties remain one of the most bitterly divisive issues between Western forces and Karzai's government.

Afghan human rights activists vowed to investigate civilian casualty cases described in documents posted Sunday on the Internet by the watchdog group WikiLeaks.

Most of the documents, from 2004 through 2009, are reports from field-level commanders. Many offer detailed descriptions of lethal encounters between Western forces and Afghan civilians.

"We will look to see how much of the information about these incidents provided by the military at the time matches up with what is in the leaked documents," said Nader Nadery of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission.

The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, told reporters in London that he believed some of the documents, particularly those involving civilian deaths, could be used as evidence in war crimes cases. The group has said it will release more of the classified reports.

According to the British newspaper the Guardian, the military reports contain 144 entries describing civilian deaths, in incidents ranging from shootings at checkpoints to airstrikes. The Guardian, the New York Times and the German magazine Der Spiegel were given advance access to 92,000 documents and spent weeks analyzing them before they were published Sunday.

FULL ARTICLE:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghan-civilians-20100727,0,6290435.story

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aurora025



Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wikileaks, an intelligence operation? It certainly smells like it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6486

PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well Daniel Ellsberg is in the mix:

Quote:
Daniel Ellsberg compared the publication of the war logs to the Pentagon
Papers, which he leaked to the New York Times in 1971. "The Pentagon
Papers did not stop or even affect the war but affected public opinion
a great deal.

So, we could draw an analogy between the Pentagon Papers and the
latest release: 'Afghan Papers' from Wikileaks. To take Ellsberg at his
word, both are/were aimed at public opinion.

In the case of the 'Pentagon Papers,' the aim was to undermine a war
the establishment had already decided to end: Vietnam. And to at the
same time undermine a US Presidenr the establishment had already
decided to throw under a bus for diversionary political theatre.

I wrote back in 2005 of Ellsberg and Sibel Edmonds:

Quote:
For those still coming to terms with the scope of our CIA Internet Fakes list, an extract from L. Fletcher Prouty's "The Secret Team" gives some indication of the lengths to which a secret intelligence service will go to cover it's tracks.

Even without necessarily endorsing Prouty, the issues he raises illuminate the real world subtleties of how intelligence services work.

One chapter has some stimulating stuff on Ellsberg that seems quite relevant:

The tremendous pressures in this country that have built up during the long tragic years of the conflict in Indochina are driving researchers, politicians, and other concerned Americans to search for the origins and sources of responsibility for that disaster.... This pressure is now forcing Agency and ST (Secret Team) supporters to begin a serious program of rewriting history, in a massive effort to protect and shield the Agency while shifting the search into other avenues.

We have already said that the work of Daniel Ellsberg and the number of people who helped him may have been the first major step in this effort. The released Pentagon Papers do much to portray the CIA as it is supposed to be, while doing all it can to shift any censure of the CIA as an organization primarily concerned with clandestine operations, to the military, the National Security Council, and the White House.


Read more in the Forum here. It's a valid criticism of Ellsberg, no matter what your attitude to Prouty. All the more relevant because this Vietnam-era issue has modern echoes in relation to 9/11, as the agency dons a public cloak of ineptitude to cover it's much-suspected culpability.

But, this time there's too much blame to shift. Some must be taken on board -even if under the guise of incompetence.

In that light it hardly seems surprising that a man who --unwittingly or not-- shifted blame from the agency's reputation in the past, has teamed up with a lady who is today helping to spread yet more blame away from the agency.

In one fell swoop Sibel Edmonnd has offloaded blame from the CIA --and spread it across the FBI, the State Department; an unnamed (i.e. Mossad) foreign intelligence operation; and a non-terrorist criminal network.

Quite a feat.

http://wagnews.blogspot.com/2005/08/ellsberg-sibel-edmonds-secret-team.html


We've debated the legitimacy of Wikileaks on BFN.
Back In April I wrote about the last Wikileaks exclusive
and Lord Carpainter and Bri replied:

Quote:
Tangled-Web Alert.
Bluff-Double-Bluff Alert.
Skepticism Engaged - Level 9.

Wikileaks Alleged to Be CIA Front.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=12441

Full BFN Post:
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5745&highlight=wikileaks

See Also:
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5748&highlight=wikileaks

In summary, it looks like the job of Wikileaks is softening
up the US political climate ahead of a negotiated deal in
Afghanistan. The idea is to 'spin' the state of the US/NATO
War In Afghanistan as "complex," rather than "a defeat."

Meme: "We cudda won that war if it wasn't for the Pakistani ISI"
Meme: "We cudda won that war if it wasn't for Collateral Damage"
Meme: "We cudda won that war if it wasn't for White House goons"
Etc....

General McCrystal getting the boot was part of the same 'spin.'

You remember McCrystal's supposedly terse meeting with Obama
aboard Air Force One, after off the cuff comments by the general?

That was setting the scene, too.

Afghanistan is to be a negotiated solution.

All this 'spin' is to sideline those in the US who would say: That's a defeat.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 1968

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Win" or "Lose" is not the objective.

The objective is to spend the maximum amount of taxslaver money(preferably borrowed) so that it may be transferred to the pockets of the owners of the Fed and the MIC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atm



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 3758

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MC

you often sound like the 'controlled opposition' that you claim to be against.

How so?

atm Neutral
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 1968

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

atm: you are saying that what i said is incorrect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 791
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oddly or funny enough, I saw a while back on AJ's site that Assange was being "sought" by the DoD (as if they need to look that hard lol) giving the implication that Assange was a patriot of some sort and on the run from the "vile blackops" operatives. He was already being portrayed as someone on "our side".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
abcar



Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 335
Location: Being Charles Mingus

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello....been a while since I posted here..but anyway I am so thankful that my instincts were trained and sharpened by my time here at BFN... that being said, as soon as the WikiLeaks thing hit, I smelled a psyop.

My thing is the TAPI pipeline.

If this diversion by the 'leaks' is the beginning, as Fintan said, of some kind of negotiated solution of the Afghanistan war, and the target date for the actual building of the 1,680-km long pipeline from Turkmenistan (which has the 3rd largest gas reserves after Russia & Iran) to India is this year, 2010... is it all falling into place?

When I searched on the WikiLeaks website for any reference to TAPI, TAPI pipeline, Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline, Afghanistan gas pipeline...or any combination of these, I got NO RESULTS.

That's proof enough for me that they're fake.

But.. here's an article I found to add to the archives.. hope it wasn't already here. I knw it's old news but it's worth revisiting since it's construction time. It's from a socialist website. I'm not a member but thought it was pretty well written. It doesn't give a specific author's name:

http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2010/04/tapi-pipeline.html

The TAPI Pipeline Friday, April 16, 2010

Canada’s official objective is “to protect Canadians by ensuring that Afghanistan never again falls into the hands of the Taliban and that Afghanistan becomes a stable, free and democratic society.” Canadian officials have offered other reasons, such as liberating women, educating girls, spreading democracy, killing insurgents, and keeping NATO from failing. Public relations efforts emphasize development; it sells well in Canada. Regional geopolitics are avoided altogether.In US strategy, Afghanistan plays a vital role. Although official reasons for being in Afghanistan relate to terrorism, the US has other goals too. It wants to ensure that countries in the region and worldwide have access to Turkmenistan’s natural gas. Richard Boucher, US Assistant Secretary of State, said in 2007: “One of our goals is to stabilize Afghanistan,” and to link South and Central Asia “so that energy can flow to the south.” In 2009, George Krol, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, told Congress that one US priority in Central Asia is “to increase development and diversification of the region’s energy resources and supply routes.” In addition to its military bases in the Middle East, the US now has numerous bases in Afghanistan. Together they provide the United States with a military bridgehead close to the energy resources of the region.It is the continuance of the Carter Doctrine

Turkmenistan, a Central Asian country that borders Afghanistan to the northwest, is rarely in our news. Yet it has the fourth (possibly third) largest natural gas reserves in the world. (Iran is number two; Russia is number one). The planned pipeline is called TAPI, after the initials of the four participating countries — Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.Since 1991, there has been rivalry among great and regional powers for access to Turkmenistan’s natural gas. It can only get to market through pipelines.Pipelines are geopolitically important; they connect trading partners and influence the regional balance of power. Moves by various countries to gain access or control of Central Asia’s energy resources are closely watched. The Russians have a pipeline north to connect with a network serving Europe. The Chinese have just completed a pipeline east, to connect with their network and go all the way to Shanghai. The US and European Union have proposed a pipeline west to link up with a network of existing and planned pipelines to Europe (bypassing Russia and Iran). And since the mid-1990s, the US has actively promoted the TAPI pipeline south through Afghanistan to Pakistan and India, and possibly Gwadar, Pakistan’s deep-sea port.Iran, a nation that shares a long border with Afghanistan, has the world’s second largest reserves of both oil and gas. Iran has offered Pakistan and India an alternative to the gas pipeline through Afghanistan. The US position is clear. It supports the TAPI pipeline through Afghanistan; it objects to the pipeline from Iran.

In April 2008, representatives of the four participating nations (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India) signed a Gas Pipeline Framework Agreement that envisaged construction to start in 2010, supplying gas by 2015. The announced 1,680-km route would follow the ancient trading route from Central to South Asia, extending from a gas field in Turkmenistan along the highway through Herat, Helmand, and Kandahar in Afghanistan, to Quetta and Multan in Pakistan, and on to Fazilka in India. The Asian Development Bank, a cousin of the World Bank, is sponsoring the project (several countries with troops in Afghanistan — including the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Norway — are also active members of the Asian Development Bank). The starting date for construction is uncertain, because security in Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan remains a huge problem.

Are Canadian troops in Afghanistan to defend a pipeline route? The Minister of National Defence, Peter MacKay, was asked that on a Halifax talk show in 2008. His answer was that Canadian troops were “not there specifically to protect a pipeline across Afghanistan,” but “if the Taliban were attacking certain places in the country or certain projects, then yes we will play a role.” MacKay appears to be reiterating NATO’s position. In January 2009, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, then NATO Secretary General, recognized that NATO is not in the business of protecting pipelines. Nevertheless, he said that “when there’s a crisis, or if a certain nation asks for assistance, NATO could, I think, be instrumental in protecting pipelines on land.” Thus NATO troops could be called upon to assist Afghanistan in protecting the pipeline. Since pipelines last 50 years or more, this could auger a long commitment in Afghanistan. Indefinite occupation is a recipe for ongoing bloodshed and disruption.

_________________
The New World Order!!#!! There goes my career..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 1968

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Intel dis-info story in Financial Times this weekend further confirms wikileaks as CIA psy-op.

Last edited by MichaelC on Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atm



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 3758

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The logs were not leaked; they were planted.

MC, bang on the SDR, for once.

atm Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 791
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here goes the left lol.....

http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2010/07/amy-goodman-interviews-julian-assange.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawkwind



Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 699

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This issue more than stinks ... its a rotting opp ...

Quote:
WikiLeaks report fictitious, says Pakistan's ex-spy chief Hamid Gul

WikiLeaks' release of classified US documents include claims that Pakistan's former spy chief Hamid Gul ordered attacks against NATO troops. Mr. Gul speaks with the Monitor about the WikiLeaks reports.


Gul says he is prepared to testify before US Congress to clear his name, adding that he is also prepared to share his own secrets about the US involvement in Pakistan and Afghanistan. “I know your wrongdoings in Afghanistan and deficiencies in your leadership, your involvement in the narcotics trade, and how your security complexes are minting money and cheating their own taxpayers,” he says.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0726/WikiLeaks-report-fictitious-says-Pakistan-s-ex-spy-chief-Hamid-Gul

This is the same Hamid Gul who supplied this interview for CNN.


The stink takes your breath away ... Confused

- Hawk

_________________
"It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6486

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Playing catch up here on developments over the last few days.

It took a few days to see where the story was heading. Now we see.

As well as the General Gul angle, the ISI is being enthusiastically slimed
with responsibility for the failure of the US/NATO Afghan War effort.

And London is now playing political games off the back of the Wikileak:

Quote:
Pakistan withdraws from terror talks in Cameron protest

Prime Minister's comments on terrorism provoke
anger in the government and streets of Karachi


By Brian Brady, Whitehall Editor

Sunday, 1 August 2010

David Cameron's comments about Pakistan's alleged links with terrorism
threatened to cause a full-scale diplomatic row last night
after the
country's intelligence officials boycotted a counter-terrorism summit in
the UK and demonstrators burned an effigy of the Prime Minister on the
streets of Karachi.

Three days before President Asif Ali Zardari is due to arrive in London,
members of his intelligence services cancelled a planned conference with
British counterparts over the stinging criticism delivered by Mr Cameron
in India last week......

READ MORE:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-withdraws

So, after a few days of playing up the "revelations" of civilian casualties
in the Wikileaks documents (to rather flimsily establish that this leak was
against the interests of US/Nato forces. Wink, Wink.) the spin does a 180
and the usual black propaganda emerges.

That turnaround was a bit quick and even the slowest learners
in the media game must surely have figured out the big game.

Not that any of them are talking about that.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
James D



Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 747

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

http://cryptogon.com/?p=17237

WikiLeaks Release: CIA Red Cell Special Memorandum – What If Foreigners See the United States as an ‘Exporter of Terrorism’

August 25th, 2010

This document is ridiculous.

The CIA created al-Qaeda (1, 2, 3). Now, WikiLeaks reveals an allegedly leaked SECRET CIA document that perpetuates the boneheaded, mainstream al-Qaeda legend. The cave people are recruiting home grown American terrorists, don’tchaknow…

Does CIA’s “Red Cell” know about OPERATION CYCLONE? Curiously, that, uh, unfortunate business isn’t mentioned in the big leak below.

The document states, “This report examines the implications of what it would mean for the US to be seen increasingly as an incubator and ‘exporter of terrorism.’” However, it doesn’t go on to mention the U.S. state sponsored terrorist activities of the Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG):

Specifically, the plan “recommends the creation of a super-Intelligence Support Activity, an organization it dubs the Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG), to bring together CIA and military covert action, information warfare, intelligence and cover and deception. For example, the Pentagon and CIA would work together to increase human intelligence (HUMINT) forward/operational presence and to deploy new clandestine technical capabilities.” The purpose of P2OG would be in “‘stimulating reactions’ among terrorists and states possessing weapons of mass destruction, meaning it would prod terrorist cells into action, thus exposing them to ‘quick-response’ attacks by US forces.”[2] In other words, commit terror to incite terror, in order to react to terror.

See also: Two British SAS Soldiers Dressed as Arabs, Shoot at Iraqi Police.

Look into the CIA-ISI-al-Qaeda nexus and P2OG before you move on to the PSYOP payload from the CIA below.

Via: WikiLeaks:

This CIA “Red Cell” report from February 2, 2010, looks at what will happen if it is internationally understood that the United States is an exporter of terrorism; ‘Contrary to common belief, the American export of terrorism or terrorists is not a recent phenomenon, nor has it been associated only with Islamic radicals or people of Middle Eastern, African or South Asian ethnic origin. This dynamic belies the American belief that our free, open and integrated multicultural society lessens the allure of radicalism and terrorism for US citizens.’ The report looks at a number cases of US exported terrorism, including attacks by US based or ?nanced Jewish, Muslim and Irish-nationalism terrorists. It concludes that foreign perceptions of the US as an “Exporter of Terrorism” together with US double standards in international law, may lead to noncooperation in renditions (including the arrest of CIA officers) and the decision to not share terrorism related intelligence with the United States.

Keep in Mind: WikiLeaks Founder, “Constantly Annoyed that People Are Distracted by False Conspiracies Such as 9/11?


So what is the general concensus on Wikileaks?

Does CIA fake truthseeker calling the Wiki-kettle black make him squeaky clean?

I reckon Wikileaks is dodgy, but I'd be interested to know what you all think and have that confirmed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.