WikiLeaks Discussed - "KEY POINTS" « PKPolitics Discuss

PKPolitics Discuss » Current Issues

WikiLeaks Discussed - "KEY POINTS"

(110 posts)

KHAN_Sahib
Member

:: US tried to take from Pakistani research reactor uranium that could be used in a nuclear device
:: Saudi King's opinion of Pakistan Prez Zardari: "When the head is rotten, it affects the whole body"
:: Saudi donors are chief al Qaeda financiers
:: Yemeni govt tried to cover up US role in missile strikes against al Qaeda
:: Vladimir Putin was "alpha-dog", Hamid Karzai "driven by paranoia", Libya's Gaddafi is accompanied by "voluptuous blonde" Ukrainian nurse
:: Criticism of UK operations in Afghanistan
:: Campaign of computer sabotage by Chinese government
:: Iran has obtained missiles from N Korea capable of hitting western Europe

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 20:21 #
uovervinnelig
Member

* Israel concerned about Gen. Musharaf safety
* Israel thinks Turkey turning towards islam
* Israel praise US for their support and agreeing to give 30billion dollars aid
* Israel says Iraq will be weaker state in future divided into 3 groups Shias, Sunnis and Kurds.
* Mosad Chief Dagan stressed that Iran has weak spots that can be exploited. Inflation averages more than 40 percent, and people are criticizing the government for investing in and sponsoring Hamas, saying that they government should invest in Iran itself. "The economy is hurting," he said, "and this is provoking a real crisis among Iran's leaders." He added that Iran's minorities are "raising their heads, and are tempted to resort to violence."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/120696

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 20:37 #
haider3
member

KHAN_Sahib, I don't doubt all this is more or less true, but we didn't really need Wikileaks to know most of these things. That US greatly despises the rest of the world is a given. We know it each time they open their mouths.

BTW: The real juicy bits about their opinion of Pakistan is scheduled to appear later in the week. US has apparently already warned Pakistan not to get too emotional about things. One good, safe bet: there's bound to be some mention of a) Zardari and b) Hamid Gul.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 20:39 #
nota
Member

@Basharat
@KHAN_Sahib

Is any of it "news"/"secret" that could only come out as leaks? Hardly! Wikileaks is full of it!
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/11/wikileaks-is-zionist-poison

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 20:43 #
KHAN_Sahib
Member

@Nota,

Thanks for the link.......

Some times too much information is also bad... lol
Actually this opens a new Pandora box... Conspiracy theory about the motive of WikiLeaks itself... and the timing of these spurts of leaks.... Any thoughts about this?

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 21:06 #
haider3
member

We have been told wikileaks is actually being monitored from Israel and is part of the war that entity is waging on US.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 21:40 #
d0ct0r
Member

It would be interesting to see what these guys thought about Gen Kiyani when he took over from Mush.

-

This interesting cable from Islamabad Jan 1999 talks about Bin Laden attaining a hero's status in Pakistan as US have declared him enemy number one.

They discuss how to deal with this situation..

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?

--------------------

4. (C) WE ARE UNLIKELY EVER TO MAKE MUCH INROAD WITH UBL'S HARD-CORE SUPPORTERS BECAUSE THEY ARE TRUE-BELIEVER ABSOLUTISTS AND TEND TO THINK AND REACT LARGELY EMOTIONALLY: FACTS ARE LESS IMPORTANT TO THEM THAN EMOTIONS. THEY ARE NOT OPEN TO PERSUASION. FURTHER, WE FACE A FORMIDABLE FOE AMONG THOSE WHO ARE CHURNING OUT AND WIDELY DISSEMINATING PRO-UBL PROPAGANDA AND TAKING OTHER ACTIVE MEASURES.

5. (C) HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A LARGE MIDDLE GROUND, IN PAKISTAN AND IN AFGHANISTAN, WHICH IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY ANTI- U.S./ANTI-WESTERN AND WHICH IS NOT IDEOLOGICALLY COMMITTED TO UBL AND HIS PAN- ISLAMIST REVOLUTION. THIS MIDDLE GROUND, SOMEWHAT SUSCEPTIBLE TO REASON, OR AT LEAST TO OTHER INFORMATION, SHOULD BE OUR PRIMARY TARGET. THE MESSAGE CRAFTED FOR THEM WOULD ALSO BE WELCOMED BY THE EDUCATED, WESTWARD- LOOKING ELITE OF BOTH PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN WHO FEEL THREATENED BY UBL'S ADVOCACY OF VIOLENCE AND THEOLOGICAL OBSCURANTISM.

6. (C) THE FOCUS OF ANY ENHANCED USG PUBLIC DIPLOMACY EFFORT SHOULD BE TO PORTRAY UBL AND OTHERS AROUND HIM AS CRIMINALS, BOTH BY INTERNATIONAL AND BY ISLAMIC STANDARDS. WHERE POSSIBLE, RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MOVEMENT "AL-QAIDA" SHOULD BE EMPHASIZED, NOT JUST UBL AS AN INDIVIDUAL.
..

.. -- KEEPING IN MIND THAT IN HIS DECEMBER 23 INTERVIEW UBL JUSTIFIED KILLING MUSLIMS IN HIS JIHAD AGAINST "CRUSADERS AND JEWS," AND RECOGNIZING THE EMOTIONAL ASPECT OF OUR TARGET AUDIENCE, WE SHOULD PREPARE FOR DISSEMINATION MORE HUMAN INTEREST STORIES OF UBL'S VICTIMS, ESPECIALLY HIS MUSLIM VICTIMS OF VARIOUS NATIONALITIES. U.S. MEDIA REPORTS OF BLINDED KENYANS, FOR EXAMPLE, RECEIVED GOOD COVERAGE IN THE PAKISTANI PRINT MEDIA.

-- KEEPING IN MIND THAT IN HIS DECEMBER 23 INTERVIEW UBL JUSTIFIED KILLING MUSLIMS IN HIS JIHAD AGAINST "CRUSADERS AND JEWS," AND RECOGNIZING THE EMOTIONAL ASPECT OF OUR TARGET AUDIENCE, WE SHOULD PREPARE FOR DISSEMINATION MORE HUMAN INTEREST STORIES OF UBL'S VICTIMS, ESPECIALLY HIS MUSLIM VICTIMS OF VARIOUS NATIONALITIES. U.S. MEDIA REPORTS OF BLINDED KENYANS, FOR EXAMPLE, RECEIVED GOOD COVERAGE IN THE PAKISTANI PRINT MEDIA.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/987

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 22:01 #
d0ct0r
Member

If US is not suing these newspaper and media outlets for 'helping' wikileaks leak out these cables then i guess all of it is intentional and well planned selective leak,not a total leak out,just the stuff,bits and pieces they want us all to see.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 22:24 #
tvanchor
Member

@Doctor

There is no law for suing for publishing leaked official documents. One can only sue if the news/leaks published is wrong.

Therefore not suing wikileaks actually proves that the published leaks till date are correct.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 22:37 #
d0ct0r
Member

Cable dated 25 feb 2010 from US embassy Ankara turkey.

Deputy Undersecretary for South Asian Affairs Engin Soysal led the discussion on Pakistan.

14. (C) Soysal, Turkey's former ambassador to Pakistan, said the Pakistani military, though displeased with Zardari, remains unwilling to intervene; nevertheless, senior officers' patience may not be infinite. Zardari needs to increase the democratic legitimacy of parliament. Soysal offered. Nawaz Sharif has become a much more constructive player.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/250705

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 22:40 #
KHAN_Sahib
Member

If America "Really" wanted to STOP this WikiLeaks then they would have done it and we wouldn't be talking about it.
Any thing "too good to be true" is ALWAYS a FAKE/LIE/DECEPTION in the end.
One has to take everything with a LARGE pinch of salt when it comes to USA-Israel-UK Trio.
If you read these "Leaks" carefully..... they are very "Controlled" leaks....

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 22:47 #
tvanchor
Member

@Khan Sahib

What do you mean by controlled leaks? They recently published 400,000 documents regarding Iraq war against USA.

Why didn't you raise this issue then?

There is something definitely fishy in your stance.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 23:01 #
secularists
Member

is there anything new here? the coldness between Zardari and Saudis has been visible for quite some time, the stance of Arab nations about Iran is no hidden secret and so are the ISI-Saudi Royals-Taliban links with each other.

The only positive thing is that one way or the other all Pakistani governments put a foot down when it comes to country's nuclear technology.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 23:08 #
zenith
Member

@ all

Why do you see everything as a conspiracy? Have you forgotten how the Wikileaks released the documents that stated the brutality in afghanisan and Iraq? Wikileaks has reported that it is being constantly hacked.

Posted 1 year ago on 28 Nov 2010 23:25 #
KHAN_Sahib
Member

@TVanchor/Zenith,

What were the repercussions of leaks about Iraq? Did it damaged USA? Did it do any harm directly or indirectly?
Have you even read those Iraqi leaks?????? It is all full of the events/incidents where American solider killed/tortured/raped some innocent Iraqi. So what Happened? Didn't we know that already?

I don't see any "New" NEWS and that's why I just mentioned the so called KEY points (off the net) . I don't see any other reason of these leaks apart from "Programmed and controlled" manipulation of the Geo-Politics / Relations of governments in this area and to signal their slaves to do the needful.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 0:26 #
shimatoree
Member

BBC

"Several Arab leaders and their representatives are quoted as urging the US to carry out an attack on Iran to bring an end to its suspected nuclear weapons programme.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is reported to have "frequently exhorted" the US to attack Iran in order to bring an end to its nuclear programme.

In a report of a 2008 meeting with US General David Petraeus, the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, said King Abdullah wanted the US to "to cut the head off the snake".

King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain is reported to have told the US to stop Iran "by whatever means necessary"

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 0:58 #
shimatoree
Member

From the London Independent-

Context is everything in the free-speech debate; risk to life is an undeniable caveat.
Most other caveats are, however, mere ruses by the powerful to prevent information from reaching the public domain.

It is within these parameters that the furore over Wikileaks and its exposures should be seen. The latest document is potentially more embarrassing, with its State Department assessments of governments and statesmen – from Hamid Karzai to Silvio Berlusconi to Nicolas Sarkozy.
Diplomats have launched a frantic round of damage limitation. The Americans are entitled to put their side of the story, to seek to assuage any inconvenience caused.

Only those involved do. Mr Assange's legal representatives in the UK suspect that the Swedish authorities are playing the Americans' game, cutting corners in terms of correct legal procedures.

Mr Assange is an unconventional figure, a man who lives in the shadows and enjoys doing so. He is difficult to deal with and holds himself in high regard. When he contacted me through an intermediary two months ago, suggesting that Index on Censorship host him in a London event, I was happy to accept but made clear that I did not want to give him an open forum. I would engage him in debate with a detractor.

He accepted; then he disappeared for five days, not answering phone calls or emails. When he finally surfaced, he stipulated no cameras or photographers, and that we should sneak him in through the back door. I argued that this would not look great for a free-expression organisation.
In the end we compromised, and the television crews were allowed in halfway through what turned out to be a fascinating debate with the columnist David Aaronovitch. The sell-out crowd did not give Mr Assange an easy ride. But there was a virtually unanimous presumption towards free speech, something that is woefully lacking in so much of British public life.

This must surely be the starting point.
In the US, with its First Amendment, restrictions are seen as an exception to the rule.
In the UK, free speech is regarded as a negotiable commodity.
An interest group's right to be offended is seen as just as important as the right to air an opinion.
A government's right to secrecy is seen as more important than the public's right to know.

The mainstream media in the UK are serial offenders. Newspapers that have no compunction about invasions of privacy or about shrill comment devote precious little time or energy to challenging authority through rigorous investigative journalism.
Most political "scoops" are merely stories planted by politicians on pliant lobby hacks.
Editors and senior journalists are habitually invited into MI5 and MI6 for briefings.
These are affable occasions, often over lunch.
There is no harm in that. What tends to happen, however, is that journalists are tickled pink by the attention.
They love being invited to the "D-notice" committee to discuss how they can all behave "responsibly". It makes them feel important.
Many suspend their critical faculties as a result.

Far from being "feral beasts", to use Tony Blair's phrase, the British media are overly respectful of authority. Newspapers and broadcasters tend to be suspicious of those who do not play the game, people like Mr Assange who are awkward outsiders. Some editors are quite happy to help the authorities in their denunciations of him, partly out of revenge for not being in his inner circle.

All governments have a legitimate right to protect national security.
This should be a specific, and closely scrutinised, area of policy.
Most of our secrecy rules are designed merely to protect politicians and officials from embarrassment.
Documents are habitually over-classified for this purpose. The previous government made desperate attempts to stop legal evidence of its collusion in torture from reaching the public.
Ministers argued, speciously, that this was to protect the "special intelligence relationship" with Washington.
It will be intriguing to see how much information is allowed to be published when Sir Peter Gibson begins his official inquiry. Precedent suggests little grounds for optimism.

As with all free speech, as with Wikileaks, context is key. It is vital to know when governments collude in torture or other illegal acts.
It is important to know when they say one thing in private (about a particular world leader) and do quite another in public.
It is perturbing to know that aid agencies may have been used by the military, particularly in Afghanistan, to help Nato forces to "win hearts and minds".

These questions, and more, are vital for the democratic debate.
The answers inevitably cause embarrassment.
That too is essential for a healthy civil society.
Good journalists and editors should be capable of separating the awkward from the damaging. Information that could endanger life, either in the short term or as part of a longer-term operation, should remain secret.

Once this latest flurry is over, prepare for the backlash. Mr Assange's industrial-scale leaking may lead to legislation in a number of countries that makes whistle-blowing harder than it already is. Perhaps the most curious aspect of the Wikileaks revelations is not that they have happened, but it took someone as mercurial as Mr Assange to be the conduit. Rather than throwing stones, newspapers should be asking themselves why they did not have the wherewithal to hold truth to power.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/john-kampfner-wikileaks-shows-up-our-media-for-their-docility-at-the-feet-of-authority-2146211.html

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 1:32 #
nota
Member

Wiki"Leaks" Key Points:
1. Iran is bad so you should all want to kill them.

2. Saudi Arabia is bad so you should all want to kill them.

3. North Korea is bad so you should all want to kill them.

4. Israel has nothing to do with anything

5. Osams is still ALIVE (LMAO) (so you should all want to allow killing in his name)

Could the US warmongers/State Department wish for anything more?

Wikileaks and the Setup to End Free Speech: The US Embassy Cable "Leaks"

Wikileaks, me thinks, is the Hegelian Dialectic, the Problem/Reaction/Solution for the coming shutdown of the internet, and dictatorial assault on free speech and targeting all of us, the new media, as enemies of the state. This is what the Rockefellers and Sen. Joe Lieberman want, being big fans of the Chinese model of a kill switch. If you believe the media darling and "whistleblower" Czar Assange is genuine, I have some property and a business offer to sell this corporation to you, Brewster Jennings and Associates. Valerie Plame would be your contact for more info.

BTW: No one finds it curious that these are not unadultrated/censored/well-coordinated "leaks" ("Assange made them available to the Guardian and four other newspapers: the New York Times, Der Spiegel in Germany, Le Monde in France and El País in Spain. All five plan to publish extracts from the most significant cables, but have decided neither to "dump" the entire dataset into the public domain, nor to publish names that would endanger innocent individuals. WikiLeaks says that, contrary to the state department's fears, it also initially intends to post only limited cable extracts, and to redact identities.")
Oh how nice of 'em!
Say WHAT?

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 2:54 #
pkurducols
Member

Read Urdu columns about wikileaks reports

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 6:27 #
toamin
member

so much hype created around this wikileak thing.. but i am still waiting for some actual leaked stuff... is there any?

so far what is reported in media has already been reported by different journalists-

remember seymour hersh's article which was full of leaks?

how come there is no leak on general kiyani?

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 6:28 #
haider3
member

If anyone believes wikileaks is genuine stuff, I myself have a bridge of their choice and the Eiffel Tower to sell them.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 9:48 #
alirazaster
Disabled upon Request

apparently, saudi arabia + usa (israel) + alqaida is all same

and all three of them are against iran and those who support iran and those who are supported by iran... including a portion of pakistan, lebanon, and palestine..

one one hand, saudi is supporting al-qaida which is the main reason why america has been bombarding the muslim territories since the past decade.... and on the other, it tries to behave like a kind of messiah and well wisher of the ummah...

the only good thing said by the saudi US's a$$ wipper is that zardari is an obstacle in the development of pakistan

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:10 #
ajhons
Member

MG sir

I think wikileaks's office is somewhere in white house may be next to Oval house LoL.
They sucessfully created the hype and now everyone is talking about it.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:12 #
alirazaster
Disabled upon Request

its not surprising... the key revealations were already quite obvious and known!

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:20 #
alirazaster
Disabled upon Request

its not surprising... the key revealations were already quite obvious and known!

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:20 #
spruce
Member

@MG

did you noticed in wikileeks conspiracy theory totally propagated agaisnt muslim countries.five countries are mentioned IRAN,PAK,IRAQ,SAUDI,afganistan.

now notice they have used the head of conspiracy agaisnt muslim is Royal family King abdullah of saudia,which is no doubt and no way to ignore royal families links with israil,CIA are very close and they do'nt trust in muslim world as they afriad that we have money and power gained by CIA,Israil and they rely on them but they do'nt rely on muslims this is big thing to notice what happened in iraq and what will happen in Iran need to understand who spending billion dollas to CIA,israil ,they are fighting ar free of cast with the money of arab oil.what will happen with pakistan dont think royal family has no rule they are brother of sirail,usa because of they have money but empty brain so they want use thier shoulder to put gun on then agaisnt muslim. i am still doubt arabs are not with other muslim countires as i know they are rude in thier nature and they will not accept any muslim country raise up like paksitan ,iran.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:25 #
spruce
Member

The war on terror is a scam. We created radical islam. You say more policing, and more politics would help, but those are the two institutions most people trust the LEAST! Politicians and police are puppets who do what they're told. The only way to overcome the worlds troubles is to question authority, and think for yourself. Everything in life is controlled by balance. When the balance is tipped, things happen that we are currently experiencing. Everyone must learn to look past the exterior, and think on a deeper level. By simply asking "why", you can learn so much, but first you must observe.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 10:56 #
haider3
member

Irshad, quite agree about your obsevations on wikileaks. Also, I subscribe to what you say about the Arabs in general, and KSA in particular. But it still doesn't change anything to the fact that I doubt any attack on Iran will be forthcoming anytime soon.

For the moment US is mulling over a possible attack, through the Koreas, on China instead. That way, they believe, two birds would be killed with one stone: No need to repay their debt to China and no need to repay their own internal debt to the privately-owned Federal Reserve.

THE WAR ON TERROR IS A SCAM. AL-QAEDA IS A SCAM. 9/11 IS A SCAM. RADICAL ISLAM IS A SCAM. If people could only get this through their heads once and for all, we'd be much better placed to achieve that balance and harmony without which the world cannot hope to survive for very much longer.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 11:44 #
ajhons
Member

I wonder there is not document in these reports stating the US Iran relations before Iraq war.
It is widely believed that US attack on Iraq was based on the intelgence report provided by Iran.It was Iran who initially through indirect channels raised alarams about the famous WMD in the coridors of 10 Downning street and white house.Iran, an old enemy of Iraqi Sunni state where Shias community was supressed badly by Sadam's Sunni Govt.crafted this plan to engage US in Iraq on one hand and throw away Sadam on the other.In the pre Iraq war era there were times when back door direct channels were establish with Iran and a lot to visits were paid from either sides.

Once US led army get into this Scam of WMD and they realized about the big story behind the scenec, it was too late.The anger towrads Iran is not only because ot its hostile attitiude towards Isreal but also lies somewhere the very sence of being cheated in Iraq.
And wikileaks says nothing about it.Pretty Strange
Wikileaks is the biggest Hoax of diplomatic world.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 12:10 #
aftab arif
Member

Zardari deems King Abdullah his elder brother

Presidential spokesman Farhatullah Babar said President Asif Ali Zardari considers Sauid King Abdullah as his elder brother, Geo News reported Monday.

http://www.geo.tv/11-29-2010/75073.htm

Who cares what one puppet thinks of another.....

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 12:27 #
haider3
member

Bravo aftab. Exactly the comment I might have made myself.

ajhons: most interesting comments you've made about Iran. I myself have never come across anything of this nature. Could you perhaps give us an indication of what your sources might be. I'm not asking for a link necessarily. Just a vague idea of where these comments might have emanated from.

Just by the way, during Desert Storm which preceded Shock and Awe by some 12 years, Iran was most definitely on the side of Iraq. It was official Pakistan which fought alongside West against Iraq. Give the devil his due: India, too, kept a neutral stance on that occasion. What, I wonder, changed in that 12-year interval.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 13:46 #
shriq
Member

I have not read the leaks. But the above discussion points that there is NO mention of India!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 15:36 #
spruce
Member

Someone in those millions of pages must be terribly worried about being exposed for what they are or what they've tried to do ,and that's why all the rhetoric about WikiLeaks being dangerous. This is the first time the people of this country have been given some truth and the truth ain't pretty. .

Egos and arrogancey will damage indivuduals, whose actions over the years form 2000 have caused the deaths and mutiliation of hundreds of thousands soldiers and civilians.
Obama the so called supporter of transparency should be congratulating Wilileaks. They deserve a medal for courage.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 15:57 #
gunnerz30
Member

Zardari may be an SOB but he is our SOB ..
how dare that joker say such stuff abt our president?..
we should ask for an apology..
we must remember that the saudi monarchy has played a vital role in de-railing our democracy ....
they have supported all millitary govts and hepled in toppling deomcratic ones...
i dont think we shoild appreciate these comments by a forgein head of state about our president no matter how much we hate him personally

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:08 #
spruce
Member

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

If we truly believe that we are a democracy then we must believe in transparency, and have the strength to see the truth either about ourselves, or as regards the activities that our government is doing in our name.

Then again from what I've just read of the Wiki Leaks, they are mundane documents revealing nothing earth shaking. I suspect the Obama administration's condemnation is all puffery and pretense. Anyone reading them will think, 'gee, if that's the worst our government is doing, what's the big deal?' And, I suspect, that's what we are suppose to think. The real truth? We're not getting it.

wikileaks Makes Obama happy these dumps. More he can apologize for and make USA look bad in the eyes of the world. He's probably the leaker. He hates this country afterall.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:47 #
spruce
Member

If you want to be a leader of your people you have to gain their trust by telling them the truth nothing but the truth. If you do not want to hear the true thought of your trusted people about your dealing and whiling behind their back is better not to get involved in their affaires; because the truth will be out for them before you know it.

Think how many innocent peoples been sacrificed for nothing, think how many kids and family been left behind traumatized for life all of this is just to please few individuals in power been trusted by their peoples.

Therefore people have the wright to know the truth.

Thanks God at least there are still more honest people in this planet to let peoples know what is going on in their countries behind the curtain.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:50 #
semirza
Moderator

Wikileaks has managed successfully diverting our attention from US/NATO pullout from Afghanistan and buying land in Baluchistan for a new base.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:52 #
nota
Member

Some more "Key points":
**** Off Israel and Wikileaks Will Call You a Terrorist
Turkey for one :)

A MOST DISTURBING WIKILEAKS REVELATION; MOST WORLD LEADERS SHARE ISRAEL’S VIEWS
Right!

FLASHBACK: IN CASE YOU FORGOT...
Wikileaks documents show WMDs found in Iraq
WIKILEAKS - Julian Assange: 9/11 was not a conspiracy

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:53 #
nota
Member

@S.E.Mirza
US/NATO...buying land in Baluchistan for a new base

Any links?

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 16:55 #
semirza
Moderator

Allotment of Baloch land to US, NATO forces challenged in Lahore HC
Islamabad, Nov 28 : A Pakistani lawyer has moved the Lahore High Court against the allotment of land to US and NATO forces in Balochistan. Advocate Illamud Din submitted before the court on Saturday that the government had handed over a big area to foreign forces for setting up an airbase, which was against the country's sovereignty, the Daily Times reports. The government was not authorised to hand over the country's lands to foreigners, the petitioner said, adding that giving space to the US for its airbase would increase drone attacks on Pakistan territory.
http://www.zimbio.com/World+Politics/articles/wgvUzLbfRga/Allotment+Baloch+land+NATO+forces+challenged

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 17:41 #
aftab arif
Member

You never know we may get lucky and they may turn into another Las Vegas.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 18:09 #
hariskhan
member

Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

Israel started their project in Palestine, by;

(1) getting Muslim UMMAH into debt, forced Muslim UMMAH into wars, for disintegrating Muslim UMMAH into nation states

in order to 'encourage' 'division' within us/Muslims. When a people move towards 'division', they move towards 'weakening' themselves, their collective.

(2) 'buying' land in Palestine

Today, they are 'occupiers' of the holy land. Today, we Muslims are powerless to do much about it.

People in USA may be trying to do the same with Pakistan.

I'm 'deeply' 'concerned' about the state of affairs in Baluchistan.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 18:13 #
spruce
Member

do'nt worry man america on way to end and surelly pakistan in touch with china and soon america will loose every thing as he is playing with pakistan and i ssure you if the destruction of USA took place will be done by pakistan, we will make usa like begger, as he is begger to gain help from pakistan against terorism, where there are no terorist which all knows but we know our army will fight back by diplomatic way we will burn and burry america in north pakistan and in balochistan, because china,.russia,iran,pakistan union will not allow america to achive his gaol for that he rushed in asia.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 18:27 #
nota
Member

@S.E.Mirza
Thanks!

@aftab
:)

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 18:36 #
haider3
member

Pakistan Condemns WikiLeaks Disclosure of US Diplomatic Communications
Foreign Ministry spokesman dismisses suggestions the leaks will undermine U.S.-Pakistan relations

Ayaz Gul | Islamabad 29 November 2010

Pakistan has condemned the release of classified U.S diplomatic communications as an irresponsible act. Excerpts from the documents made public by WikiLeaks have reportedly raised concerns that highly enriched uranium could be diverted from one of Pakistan's nuclear facilities to make illicit weapons.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit says Washington had alerted Islamabad to the "unauthorized leaks" pertaining to official communications within the U.S government system. He dismissed suggestions the action will undermine the bilateral relations.

"We obviously condemn this irresponsible I would say disclosure of sensitive documents," said Basit. "We are still in the process of examining them and I do not think that these documents in any manner would have negatively impact Pakistan U.S. relations."

The latest documents released by WikiLeaks have revealed that the United States was secretly making efforts to push Pakistan to accept help in removing highly enriched uranium from one of Islamabad's nuclear facilities. American officials feared the material could be diverted for use in illicit nuclear weapons.

In May 2009, say the latest WikiLeaks documents, the then U.S Ambassador to Islamabad, Anne Patterson reported that Pakistan was refusing to allow American experts to visit the site. In her reported official communication to Washington, she cited concern expressed by a Pakistani official that "if the local media got word of the fuel removal, they certainly would portray it as the United States taking Pakistan's nuclear weapons".

Pakistani spokesman Basit has defended his country's decision to deny the U.S. request, acknowledging the matter was under discussions. But he did not give any details about the nuclear reactor in question.

"No I do not think there are any secret operations going on," said Basit. "This matter was discussed between Pakistan and the United States. The atomic research reactor along with nuclear fuel was provided to Pakistan by the U.S. in the 1960's. And the U.S. had suggested that the fuel we return to the U.S. But we have very clearly told them that now it is our property and their suggestion can not be accepted."

Mr. Basit again dismissed fears about Pakistan's nuclear-weapons program, saying it is placed under international safety and security controls.

But critics fear the disclosure of secretive U.S efforts to remove the nuclear fuel will strengthen suspicions particularly among right-wing political parties and Islamic groups that Washington is working against Islamabad's nuclear weapons.

Defense analyst Talat Masood says the release of this information has put civilian and military leaders of Pakistan on the defensive.

"It will help in radicalizing Pakistan and also giving an impetus to the right wing and conservative forces, which are opposed to America and Western alliances, and of course oppose to the whole idea of Pakistan linking itself with America. So I think it is very counterproductive in that sense," said Masood.

The release of confidential U.S documents could also prove embarrassing for countries known as Pakistan's staunch allies.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is quoted in one of the communications as calling Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari the greatest obstacle to the country's progress. The Saudi leader is quoted as saying, "When the head is rotten, it affects the whole body.

A spokesman for President Zardari has dismissed the reported comments as an attempt to create misperceptions between what he says are two important Muslim countries.

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/-Pakistan-Condemns-WikiLeaks-Release-of-US-Diplomatic-Communications-110974359.html

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 18:47 #
Faarigh Jazbati
member

AoA All

These are not wikileakes but TRICKY LEAKES and more like WICKED Leakes.

The whole thing is stage managed and most likely a CIA/Mossad false flag operation.

FJ

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 19:37 #
haider3
member

Quite agree, FJ.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 19:47 #
KHAN_Sahib
Member

Asif Zardari is DIRTY but not Dangerous
Nawaz Shareef is not dirty BUT DANGEROUS.... According to Saudi Prince... lol

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 19:51 #
haider3
member

Good Lord, what a fine distinction! The Saudi Prince is going up in my esteem by leaps and bounds.

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 19:54 #
alirazaster
Disabled upon Request

both are dirty and both are dangerous.....

and saudi king is even more dirty and more dangerous

Posted 1 year ago on 29 Nov 2010 22:06 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.