WikiLeaks releases 250,000 classified documents...WITHOUT actually releasing them.

[Poll_Blind]

The future has its burdens but it also its delights, even if they are a bit rindish and sour. :evilgrin:

Case in point: Today, the WikiLeaks organization released 250,000 diplomatic cables which will shake the pillars of international relations for decades to come.

Or did they? Well, it turns out they didn't. It turns out, what they actually released were 220 (two-hundred and twenty) documents, some only partially. You can see this for yourself on the official CableGate web page.

The Guardian, which had drawn readers in with the lure of being able to download the classified cables had a little surprise in store for the thousands of people who...well...who actually tried to download them:

You couldn't.

In fact, what the Guardian is allowing people to download is (wait for it), 250,000 dates, times & tags. No content, whatsoever. No content, at all.

The actual cables- where are they? Turns out they're no-where to be found. In every story you read today, even if you read them all, they would all say that WikiLeaks has released, dumped, leaked 250,000 sensitive diplomatic cables into the public domain when they haven't done any such thing. In fact the only actual cables can be found at the WikiLeaks site. Does anyone have the 250,000 secret cables?

Well, yes. Yes, it appears that The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, etc. all have copies of the data sets which, at least in the New York Times' case, delivered anonymously to them by WikiLeaks so they could begin their investigations. But they don't appear to be sharing, which I find interesting. I mean, release them or don't but don't say they've been released if they haven't. That sounds sensible, doesn't it? None of this tomfoolery was involved with the previous WikiLeaks releases and I don't think anyone expected this release would be much different.

Ok, why haven't they dumped the documents if this is their plan all along. It differs depending on whose page you read. From WikiLeaks' page:

The embassy cables will be released in stages over the next few months. The subject matter of these cables is of such importance, and the geographical spread so broad, that to do otherwise would not do this material justice.

Hrm, let's say worst-case is 6 months for all of these to spool out. And let's say they release in weekly chunks. Four releases a month. That's around 10,000 documents dropped into the public's hands, per week.

Well, that doesn't seem to make any sense either. The only way they're going to get some kind of analysis on 10,000 cables a week is by crowdsourcing with the rest of the planet who are still unable to actually access these documents.

Bottom Line: The embargo hasn't been lifted, the 250,000 documents haven't been released. All there is, so far anyway, is the trumpet which heralds a mad dash by a small number of newspapers to pick and choose the stories they want to pursue, and little else.

But I don't typically trust the mainstream media for that very reason. If the current rash of stories is any indicator of their stewardship, it would appear we're in for months (at least) of stories about how much political figure X likes political figure Y. Or a salacious quote from political figure Z...the cross-referencing and further research of which will remain entirely in the hands of a select few.

:shrug:

PB

[BzaDem]

1. It sounds like Wikileaks is doing it this way to keep it in the news for months, not to hide it. n/t

[Poll_Blind]

6. My angle is not necessarily their motivation, it's just to refute the fact that...

...those documents were released today. I'll explain why this disparity kind of struck a cord with me- but I wouldn't bother reading my response if I were you, unless you were around back when the Abu Ghraib photo court case was going on:

Remember the Abu Ghraib photos? There was a huge legal battle for those photographs to be released. It went from court to court to court and every time the Government kept losing. It finally wound up with Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein and he told the government in no uncertain terms to fuck off and release the photographs. The government didn't but what happened next was one of the strangest things I'd witnessed in the Bush Administration and something which I never was adequately able to get to the bottom of:

Someone leaked a CD of some photographs and some video to (I believe) Esquire magazine in Australia. Well the photographs and the (three, IIRC) videos all of a sudden were the Abu Ghraib photos. They weren't. But I'd cross-referenced the manifest of material mentioned in...the Taguba Report (?) and the numbers didn't match up. It was only a fraction of the material, but it was a sizable chunk.

But the media crowed and crowed at how the pictures had finally been released. But they really hadn't. And as a result, well, somehow the case just floated off like all the other things that were supposed to take down the Bush presidency. Just floated off into I dunno where.

So the playing around with words like that...well, that kind of thing has always raised my hackles since.

PB

[jeff47]

16. That's a pretty poor media strategy

"What, Wikileaks is putting out some more docs again?! Oh great. I now know what the premier of China wanted to eat for dinner on his last visit." *yawn* *ignore all future leaks, even if they're important*

There's going to be a small cadre that keeps paying attention, and the vast majority are going to go with "oh this again?"

[Toucano]

2. Assage said it would be done over the course of several months.

250,000 documents released all at once would be indigestible.

[jberryhill]

4. There are plenty of digesters on the internets

We will know only what Assange and the corporate media want us to know.

Sorry to hear about your digestion, but I gave up being spoonfed a long time ago.

[Ruby the Liberal]

3. #5. Off to the Greatest.

Actually, I can see why they are doing it this way. "If we amplify everything, we hear nothing" comes to mind - which makes sense.

That said, this should be treated as a slow drip, not a document dump.

K&R

[CTuttle]

5. It's also very selective cables...

Why are most of them the 'Bomb, bomb, Iran' cables, released by the Grey Lady in particular...?

:nuke: :wtf:

[Poll_Blind]

7. Well, that selectiveness definitely hasn't gone unnoticed. The New York Sun wrote...

...what I presume is a tongue-in-cheek editorial piece called Is Assange an American Agent? which points out the unexpected choice of focus-narrative so far.

PB

[Pavulon]

9. I find it hilarious.

I wanted to search for the memo where bush authorized 911. I thought is was a ddos, now maybe the site is intentionally down?

[ShamelessHussy]

12. i admit that thought has crossed my mind as well

i have no evidence, but the fact that no really damming secrets against america has come out... also how coordinated this all seems to be with the media, who are well known supporters of the elite.

:shrug:

at this point, everything is suspicious...

[harun]

8. Funny how they "released" them yet no one has a link to even one of them.

[Ghost in the Machine]

10. Really? What's this, then?

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2004/12/04ANKARA7211.html

[harun]

22. Fascinating stuff.

[Catherina]

17. Quite a few are on the net. You just need to know where to look.

I posted excerpts and links to several of them today as did other DUers.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kpete]

13. THIS IS IMPORTANT!

thanks Poll_Blind,
peace, kp

[Ghost in the Machine]

14. No cables to be found?? Here's another one===

S E C R E T TEL AVIV 001060

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/13/2019
TAGS: PREL MPOS KNNP IR IS
SUBJECT: REP. WEXLER DISCUSSES IRAN WITH IDF INTELLIGENCE
CHIEF YADLIN

Classified By: DCM Luis G, Moreno, Reason 1.4 (b) (d)

¶1. (S) Representative Robert Wexler (D, Florida),
accompanied by Deputy Chief of Staff Joshua Rogin and DCM
Moreno, met with Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Chief, MG
Amos Yadlin, on Sunday 10 May 2009. MG Yadlin focused his
discussion on the preparations for the upcoming visit of
Prime Minister Netanyahu to the United States and the Iranian
nuclear program. MG Yadlin informed Rep. Wexler that the PM
was preparing intensely for his upcoming visit to Washington.
In addition to hours of policy review, the PM had been
provided significant amounts of intelligence from the IDI and
Mossad on Iran's nuclear program. The intelligence presented
included assessments of the current status of the Iranian
program; timelines, effects of sanctions; views of the
international community; and outcomes of engagement. The
differences that exist between the intelligence community in
interpretations of the Iranian nuclear program as well as the
relationship between Iran and the Palestinians were also
presented. MG Yadlin indicated that the IDF had presented
its information last week, leaving the cabinet on Friday 08
May 2009 to consider policy options and how information will
be presented during the upcoming visit to Washington.
Although no direct feedback was provided, MG Yadlin opined
that the PM appears determined on Iran.

¶2. (S) Rep. Wexler asked MG Yadlin to expand on the
differences in the interpretations of the intelligence. MG
Yadlin explained that until 2003, Iran had violated the
Nuclear Proliferation Treaty by having a weaponization group
and although Iran could show civilian uses for a missile
program and a fissile program, there was no justification for
a weaponization group. He went on to say that Iran halted
its program in 2003 after the invasion of Iraq, but
reinvigorated the program in 2005. He expressed that some in
the US agree with this and others do not. He went on to
explain that Israel is not in a position to underestimate
Iran and be surprised like the US was on 11 September 2001.

¶3. (S) MG Yadlin explained that Israel tries to be more
precise than the US in estimating Iran's intentions and
timeline for obtaining a nuclear bomb. Iran is in the
position of wanting to pay only a minimum cost for its
current program. It does not want to be North Korea or what
Iraq was before 2003. Iran intends to keep resolutions and
sanctions at a certain manageable level and continue to
produce low enriched uranium until there is enough for
several bombs. MG Yadlin stated that Iran could decide to
produce a bomb by 2010, but Iran is waiting for the right
time in the future and that there are some who will always
doubt it despite the evidence.

¶4. (S) Rep. Wexler then asked about the prospect of
engagement. MG Yadlin said he does not oppose engagement,
and in fact gave a speech approximately six months ago
expressing that Israel needed to find a way to find positives
in engagement. He feels there needs to be an agreed upon
deadline; a measure for success or failure; and a plan B if
engagement does not work in order for engagement to have any
chance. He also expressed strongly that engagement should
have already started. MG Yadlin outlined four possible
outcomes of engagement. Two good outcomes would be the
Iranian nuclear program stopped or a failure of engagement
that allows Russia and China to see the US made all efforts
to prevent the program diplomatically and allows for greater
cooperation in the future. Two bad outcomes would be Iran
playing for time with no claim of failure on the part of
engagement or a bad bargain that still allows Iran to obtain
a nuclear bomb even if in a longer timeline. Rep. Wexler
went on to discuss that there is a third good option in that
the President may have better leverage with the American
public to support action if engagement efforts are attempted
and failed. Rep Wexler recommended that the Israeli people
need to consider the US perspective and public opinion. MG
Yadlin responded that he is not recommending the US enter a
third front, but it has to be understood that Israel sees
things differently and that Israel has to be ready and can
not remove the military option from the table. Rep Wexler
stated that he expected Israel would be pleasantly surprised
by the President's acceptance of all possible options in
regards to Iran.

********************************************* ********************

********************************************* ********************
CUNNINGHAM

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/05/09TELAVIV1060.html

Could it be user error and you just can't navigate the site? I've read a bunch of the cables...

[jeff47]

15. You haven't ready 250,000. Because only a tiny fraction are available

That was kinda the point of the OP.

[Ghost in the Machine]

19. "The actual cables- where are they? Turns out they're no-where to be found."

Quote from the OP... the assertion was incorrect, I just showed you that. Here, try again:

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/reldate/2010-11_0.html

How long do you think it takes to upload 250,000 documents? Give it a little more time at least...

[Poll_Blind]

20. I did make it clear that WikiLeaks had 220 documents of the 250,000 up.

When I said there were no documents to be found, I was speaking of the same cables, but the ones dispensed by the Guardian- which aren't the cables at all.

How long do you think it takes to upload 250,000 documents? Give it a little more time at least...

Text compresses down very, very well nowdays. Even UTF-8.

But that's a little beside the point, because the embargo has not been lifted. The documents are still embargoed. I know that sounds strange because absolutely every article you are likely to read has told you otherwise but the truth lies in the number of documents released as shown on the official WikiLeaks site (look directly under the WikiLeaks symbol and under the words "Currently Released so far...", but more importantly WikiLeaks is still fishing for more media partners until (presumably) the embaro is lifted.

To wit, from the WikiLeaks Twitter Feed:

Tomorrow we will provide information on how other media groups can apply to for embargo access to #cablegate info.

There is no there, there, currently. Just the 220 that have been released so far.

PB

[Ghost in the Machine]

21. Ok, I can dig what you're saying now...

I'm still going to give it some time though...


Peace,

Ghost

[Catherina]

18. Rec'd but don't stick to the media, especially the US media.

People are diligently combing through them as we type.

Don't forget the Wikileaks Insurance File :evilgrin: There's lots more coming.

[Poll_Blind]

23. Oh I'm getting my El Pais on just as much as NYT. But I want to ask you some...

...semi-rhetorical questions- which may come off as more pointed than they're meant.

When you say:

People are diligently combing through them as we type.

I respond "Who?" All of us are only allowed to comb over the 220 released cables, in such shape as they're in. And several people have released "cables"- which are appear to be snippets of cables utilized in stories by any of the partner newspapers.

But those are kind of dicey because I don't recall seeing any yet with their serial number. I totally could be wrong about that- and if I am I retract the assertion. But, Catherina have you been reading some of these articles? About 90% (no kidding) or more of the articles I've seen are shit like "Wikileaks reveals Prince Charles wears women's panties".

And that's it. Sometimes the material isn't even quoted.

My question is- if there's a layer of interpreters who are the priests who have the right to read the information in its unadulterated form, what is the difference between them and myself? That's less of a jab and more of a...question of the structure of this, if that makes any sense.

Don't forget the Wikileaks Insurance File :evilgrin: There's lots more coming.

One pet idea of mine is that the Insurance file is all the raw cables and Assange has a dead-man's switch mass e-mailer with the password loaded. If he doesn't check in, the password goes out. If this is the case the U.S. knows it and so they're going to leave Assange alone because they're smart enough to take their licks from the NYT or Le Monde who exercise a lot of editorial filtering (they are very upfront about this, Guardian interviews on video with the reporters they even make a big point of it).

So will the cables ever be released in their raw form? I think the answer is arguably "no". BUT, I believe part of the "plan" is to secretly release enough copies of the raw cables to organizations that it will eventually leak out entirely (but not, per se, by WikiLeaks' hand) and they'll never have to release them at all.

By now there must be unauthorized copies of this made by (someone) of the full set. It's just the nature of information, especially when this is text. In other words, a Bradley Manning type working at El Pais. That sort of thing.

I dunno, I'm rambling. This is getting a quite a bit more convoluted- and at the same time murkier- than it really needs to be.

PB

[Poll_Blind]

24. 23 more cables added, total 243 / 251,287 - Request for help, can anyone:

Help me identify the new cables as they're added? In other words, I don't see a place on the WikiLeaks site to search by "Released Most Recently From WikiLeaks" or something similar. Anyone got a way to sort to see the newest (as released by WikiLeaks) first/last?

:shrug:

PB

[CherryU]

25. Wikileaks...

Well, I am having a mixed reaction on this http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/2010/11/29/wikileaks-state-department-cables/">Wikileaks turn of events. I am all for free speech, but when it put lives in great danger, I think it will be better if they just sit down and don't expose anything. It will be for the better after all.