Posted on 11/29/2010 8:51:47 PM PST by Cementjungle
It strikes me a bit odd that some of the original Wikileaks memos/cables at the WikiLeaks site have some names replaced with "XXXXXXXXXXXX", while the same memo when printed in the msm have the real names in them.
How could this be? Why would Assange try to hide certain names on the originals, while providing them to the media? Or, did the media make up the missing names somehow?
For example, this is in the news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/204917
The Wikileaks version is here: http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/04/09BEIJING1176.html
The Wikileaks version has as the subject: XXXXXXXXXXXXDISCUSSES G-20, DPRK, IRAN, AF/PAK, UNSC REFORM, TAIWAN, TIBET WITH CHARGE
while the Guardian has: VICE FOREIGN MINISTER HE DISCUSSES G-20, DPRK, IRAN, AF/PAK, UNSC REFORM, TAIWAN, TIBET WITH CHARGE
Perhaps it means nothing... but it seems rather odd to me.
Well, if its the same name or names over and over on all the doc its definitely worth looking into, but if its just random names then I doubt its anything...
I have only seen it twice. This one, and the other was a target of an Iranian assassin. I figured Assange felt sorry for the assassin target and redacted that one... but this one strikes me as odd.
Funny you should mention that...
Everyone here is up in arms over Wikileaks dumping all these intel docs, some have said that Assange should be careful incase he is targeted for assassination.
But I think when he really needs to worry about that is once he dumps his next round of docs, the ones of the banks. If anyone will have him killed it'll be the power brokers in the financial world who will stop at nothing to protect their mega ponzi schemes. Not the CIA...
Assange is going after a major US bank next...
Assange is lucky he isn’t a XXXXXXXXX right now- albeit, I’m sure it won’t be long this slime will be.
I heard today on one of the talk shows that the New York Times gave the Zero administration a “heads up” with respect to their intent to publish the WikiLeaks documents. A negotiation ensued and the Times agreed to redact some names in the documents it published.
So maybe you are reading documents that were subject to some redaction by the Times and not redactions by Assange.
I agree 100%. The US wont do anything to this guy because this information isnt really all that destructive. Most foreign intelligence agencies already know about all this stuff. It’s just not in the public realm. If Assange can get a hold of this information...trust me, the Chinese and Russians already have it.
But what would be destructive is information about a bank. Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo and Wachovia, and BoA have all rumored to do some pretty unethical stuff in recent years. If he ends up taking one of those big boys down...the crap will hit the fan big-time.
Wikileaks did supply some/all of the cables to several media outlets before they were published in the wikileaks website.
This may have been one of those outlets.
The Guardian has the names in the cables, while WikiLeaks has these names redacted.
Perhaps the US government is the one publishing the “originals” on the WikiLeaks site. This would explain why wikileaks.org domain name is still pointing to the real servers (unlike the torrent domain names that the government siezed).
We are assuming they are all true. I don’t believe any of them. The Chinese fear Nancy Pelosi? Oh yeah sure they do. maybe she could shut down the CA ports with the Long Shoreman’s union. That would scare the Chinese.
Wiki Leaks is BS.
In the full context of that particular cable, the Peolsi thing was no big deal (to the Chinese).
Funny thing about Assange feeling sorry. When he released the first round of documents, a lot of Iraqis and Afghanis who provided intel to American forces were compromised.
Assange called them traitors to their people.
I'd like to see Assange stretched out by four horses over an open fire...just short of being drawn and quartered.
Screw you Assange.
The Chinese fear Nancy Pelosi?
Yeah, that one was hilarious.
I think it is just something the muslim will use when his poll numbers start sinking to distract the fawning news media and gullible pub(l)ic.
It is all BS to misdirect the public. A Dancing With Stars of fake leaks to confuse the idiots who watch TV. These leaks could go on every other month or two and the world stops.
We now know he owns SCOTUS and ALL of the newsmedia including Al Waleed’s Fox/ABC and CNN. Those nice Saudis who control American TV who fund Al Qeada to kill our soldiers.
Exactly. This is an O job. I bet a lot of the crap is fake. Great way to distract the idiot public and the corrupt (saudi owned) news media.
That would explain why the dude is still alive, and why the domain name still points to a working server.
Now, I wonder if the previous two batches (the war docs) were all fake too. Hmmmm.
The corrupt news media is just accepting all of it as fact.
Wow let’s see - a guy leaking supposedly stolen documents? He sounds like an ethical type.
I think it is all BS to distract the public. I worry if it is a setup for something else.
I really no longer worry because the sheeple in America are so passive anymore.
Yup - he is a just a stooge for Obama. The news media plays along. Think of the global warming fraud. Just a distraction.
Obama is going to distract us til 2012 and then the media goes back in full campaign mode. Hillary is toast now.
In 2012 - he will have $3 billion to buy every ad, magazine, TV stations, radio ads, you name it.
This whole wikileaks is brazzar and by Obama actions today I think it is a wake of call from Soros for Obama to get off the stage!
I think this whole wiki things was a set in motion to crush Obama credibility
George Soros says Obama must go
22.11.2010
Last Tuesday, November 16 , Soros told financiers of the Democratic party that Obama must go. The liberal “Huffington Post” quoted Soros as saying:
“...if this president can’t do what we need, it is time to start looking somewhere else.”
Yes, Soros wants another puppet that he can use to control America with. The one he currently uses has a few broken strings and it keeps going on vacation. Also, his old puppet no longer captivates his audience like it did back in 2008.
Did he really mean that Mr Vachon? Soros’ adviser Michael Vachon tried to do some damage control and stated, “Mr. Soros fully supports the president as the leader of the Democratic Party. He was not suggesting that we seek another candidate for 2012. His comments were made in a private, informal conversation that was about the need for progressives to be more forceful in promoting their agenda. He was stressing the importance of being heard by elected officials.”
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/22-11-2010/115867-george_soros-0/
Well, next time Mr. Soros would be well-advised to choose a president with an actual brain... and without a bunch of psychoses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.