Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Wikileaks Releases Sensitive Guantanamo Manual

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the sorry-about-this-world dept.

Censorship 643

James Hardine writes "Wired is reporting that a never-before-seen military manual detailing the day-to-day operations of the U.S. military's Guantánamo Bay detention facility has been leaked to the web, via the whistle-blowing site Wikileaks.org, affording a rare inside glimpse into the institution where the United States has imprisoned hundreds of suspected terrorists since 2002. The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. The disclosure highlights the internet's usefulness to whistle-blowers in anonymously propagating documents the government and others would rather conceal. The Pentagon has been resisting — since October 2003 — a Freedom of Information Act request from the American Civil Liberties Union seeking the very same document. Anonymous open-government activists created Wikileaks in January, hoping to turn it into a clearinghouse for such disclosures. The site uses a Wikipedia-like system to enlist the public in authenticating and analyzing the documents it publishes. The Camp Delta document includes schematics of the camp, detailed checklists of what "comfort items" such as extra toilet paper can be given to detainees as rewards, six pages of instructions on how to process new detainees, instructions on how to psychologically manipulate prisoners, and rules for dealing with hunger strikes."

cancel ×

643 comments

I asked for a refreshing drink.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350167)

It's a Samoan pub.

Prosecute them. (5, Funny)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350197)

The folks at wikileaks.org http://wikileaks.org/ [wikileaks.org] should be prosecuted for being party to endangering National Security.

Re:Prosecute them. (-1, Flamebait)

RailGunner (554645) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350239)

Agreed. The person who leaked this document is a traitor in the mold of Hanoi Jane Fonda, John Walker Lindh, and whoever leaked the classified doucuments on the Wiretap program to the NY Times.

How ironic that the crowd complaining about the War On Terror are the same crowd working to subvert the war effort through actions like these. The Vichy French are alive and well.

It's time we start questioning these people's patriotism.

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Funny)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350275)

Well at least this time around, soldiers will have documented proof of the orders they are told to follow.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350437)

I was going to post about what a dumbass you are, but you beat me to the punch.

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350493)

Agreed. The person who leaked this document is a traitor in the mold of Hanoi Jane Fonda, John Walker Lindh, and whoever leaked the classified doucuments on the Wiretap program to the NY Times.

Actually, when I went to Wikileaks, I found the entire order of battle and equipment register for all of our forces in Iraq. What exactly was the motivation for leaking that and what higher purpose was served?

There's a moral difference between releasing a document related to human rights (which are obviously being abused at Gitmo) and releasing a document that serves no useful purpose other then giving somebody a complete picture of our forces in Iraq. Leave it to the right-wing trolls on /. to ignore the difference. I applaud them for releasing this document but question the motivation behind the other one.

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Insightful)

coplate (1187701) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350243)

The folks at wikileaks should be heralded as heroes, and given millions of dollars.
We've spent about half a trillion dollars on this 'war', and we have nothing to show for it except negative opinions from our allies, and a show of weakening ourselves in a vicious cycle to our enemies.

Re:Prosecute them. (0, Troll)

Zoe9906 (1163177) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350355)

Why are so many countries electing pro american governments then?

Re:Prosecute them. (-1, Troll)

RailGunner (554645) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350357)

and we have nothing to show for it except negative opinions from our allies, and a show of weakening ourselves in a vicious cycle to our enemies.

You forgot a few things:
+ Mass Graves aren't being filled
+ Females are attending School
+ The Rape Rooms Are Shut Down
+ Saddam isn't paying $25,000 to families of Palestinian Suicide Bombers

+ Uday and Qusay Hussien are dead
+ Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - Captured
+ Chemical Ali - Captured
+ Abu Musab al-Zarqawi: DEAD.

But don't let something as trivial as the facts interrupt a liberal talking point.

Reality based community, my ass.

Re:Prosecute them. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350583)

+ Mass graves are not being filled. Now the murdered civilians get to be buried by their families instead.
+ Females are attending school. As before. Of course, they still aren't able to work, or wear what they want.
+ The Rape Rooms are shut down. Now soldies may rape and murder the families in the families own homes.
+ Saddam isn't paying $25,000 to families of suicide bombers. As before. Instead, suicide bombers are now working for free, and there are twice as many, and they are attacking more American targets than before.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350603)

But don't let something as trivial as the facts interrupt a liberal talking point. Reality based community, my ass.

Don't be daft. You know as well as I that a similar list of negative facts about the war could be listed. Your cherry-picking of what you want to hear doesn't change that fact, and a one-sided list like that is nothing more than "conservative talking points."

Re:Prosecute them. (5, Insightful)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350613)

Hell yeah ! And here's a few more:

+ No weapons of Mass Destruction ever found
+ No realistic plan at all to rebuild Iraq
+ More Iraqi deaths since occupation than under Saddam
+ Kurdish terrorists now attacking Turkey
+ The creation of huge Iraq sized terrorist training camp
+ American and UK forces too tied up in Iraq to effectively deal with problems in Afghanistan
+ American troops seen as evil due to their behaviour running various prisons
+ Trillions of dollars wasted to no good effect
+ Thousands of American deaths and countless more severely injured
+ Iraq poised for a civil war the second the US pulls out
+ Iran and other enemies of freedom reaping the benefits of an overstretched US military
+ Constantly rising oil prices

- Females were attending school anyway, perhaps you were thinking of Afghanistan ?
- Mass graves are still being filled from the daily death toll of suicide bombs and terrorist attacks

Re:Prosecute them. (2, Insightful)

eviloverlordx (99809) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350625)

You forgot a few things:
+ Mass Graves aren't being filled


You're right. The dead are just being left at the side of the road now. I guess you need a government to bury the bodies.

+ Females are attending School

They were in Iraq before the war, too.

+ The Rape Rooms Are Shut Down

I think you forgot about Abu Ghraib, or whatever the next prison PR disaster will be.

+ Saddam isn't paying $25,000 to families of Palestinian Suicide Bombers

Now the guys behind the suicide bombers don't need to pay people to kill Americans; they have enough volunteers that'll do it for free.

+ Uday and Qusay Hussien are dead
+ Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - Captured
+ Chemical Ali - Captured
+ Abu Musab al-Zarqawi: DEAD.


Replace 'old' bad guys with new, living bad guys. Rinse, repeat.

I guess you drank enough of the neocon Kool-Aid to parrot the Administration's talking points.

Re:Prosecute them. (2, Informative)

Evanisincontrol (830057) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350635)

Mass Graves aren't being filled


Yeah, 'cause no one [iraqbodycount.org] is dying [antiwar.com] over there. Especially not now [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Prosecute them. (3, Insightful)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350677)

You forgot a few things: + Mass Graves aren't being filled
So more than 650 THOUSAND (in the first three years of occupation) iraqi civilian deaths are not filling them?

According to the surveys Saddam's Iraq was safety paradise to live in, compared to the civil war that is going on in the country as a DIRECT RESULT of the american invasion on the country. (Side note: You (in a general sense), are racist when you talk about the death of a few thousand american soldiers, but neglect to mention or even less, acknowledge the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians.)

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350731)

And conditions are far worse there now, and conditions are far worse in places we haven't bothered to invade.

You're a fucking idiot, but that's a redundant when speaking of right-wing assholes.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

jotok (728554) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350765)

Ok...what have you done with my tax dollars this week?

One time my ex got my car detailed and tuned up. Great random present. Then she cheated on me several times. She doesn't get to point to that one gift and argue that I'm missing out on the "facts" of what went wrong with our relationship. Capisce?

MOD Parent UP (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350783)

Come on Slashdot. Let people express opinions different from yours especially when they list all kinds of facts along with it.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350799)

Mass graves are still being filled [thisisby.us] .

Sill sucks to be a woman in Iraq [icrc.org] .

There will be rape rooms as long as there are US interrogators in Iraq [slate.com] .

Saddam's charitable donations to grieving families have been stopped. Wonderful. Giver yourselves a pat on the back.

A few bad guys have been captured and killed. Could have been done a lot cheaper through covert ops than the 1.6 trillion and counting war on terror. That's just the money spent on warfare. The destruction wreaked by the war... I don't think anyone wants to even try to calculate that figure.

The facts aren't very encouraging to anyone outside the military-industrial complex.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350801)

Reality based community, my ass.
Oh, this is reality. It is the reality of large group of people who have built their lives on the very sacrifices that got them to where they are sitting now, so they can write their witty posts that mock the very system that continues to support their way of life, and for their children. That they even have a chance to write such comments is a testament to the freedoms of this country. I may disagree with what is written, but I support their freedom of speech to write it. I draw the line, though, at the release of documents that could in some way harm our troops and national security. THAT is traiterous and should be punished as such.

Re:Prosecute them. (1, Troll)

bearclaw (217359) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350405)

If it is classified information, they (the leaker) should be prosecuted.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350543)

If it is classified information, they (the leaker) should be prosecuted.

From the document itself:

It is the responsibility of all personnel to protect and safeguard the contents of this SOP and ensure appropriate distribution thereof.

Hmm.... ooops ;)

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Insightful)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350415)

Negative opinion of your allies? What allies?

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350745)

>Negative opinion of your allies? What allies?

Every country that has a military force, that has not sent that force to liberate Iraq from US occupation, is an ally of the US.

Re:Prosecute them. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350639)

and we have nothing to show for it

But there have been no more terrorist attacks on the US during that time. I know it's hard to prove that it's because we went to war, but it's just as hard to prove that it is not. The economy is better, the military is stronger and the world respects our word (all of this in contrast to the Clinton administration).

I know all this truth offends your liberal bias, but it's still truth even if you don't like it.

MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350789)

+5 Funny. How I laughed.

Re:Prosecute them. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350273)

Go crawl back under your conservative rock.... People like you are the reason why our country is as fucked up as it is.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350295)

People like you are the reason why our country is as fucked up as it is.

Can you elaborate?

Re:Prosecute them. (-1, Flamebait)

mgessner (46612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350361)

No, because he's a knee jerk liberal.

They don't NEED a reason; they just "feel" like it...

Re:Prosecute them. (5, Insightful)

spleen_blender (949762) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350549)

Allow me.

The justice system is a mockery of its own title. Where is the justice for the illegally detained? It is morally unconscionable to believe we have the authority to exert our power against the people of the world in the ways we are. The tacit approval of torture by the government is a key indicator of how far from grace we have fallen.
There are mountains of evidence and personal testimonies from people who have been unjustly caught up in this whole debacle in which we are involved. Yet people like you still ignore the pleas for help and evidence of the destruction of the core principles upon which America was founded. I equate your viewpoint to that of creationists. You live in a world of self delusion which spawns further ignorance. That ignorance is exploited by the people who are causing this catastrophe as they invoke your name as the people who "support" their actions, justifying these actions as if they were approved by the sincere majority of Americans.

I'm sure you are an intelligent and thoughtful individual, but you need to open your eyes to the truth of how the war on terrorism and the drug war (by the way these are actually one and the same) are tearing apart not only America, but the world as a whole.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350701)

Actually I could, but I don't want to get into an heated argument on this sensitive topic. Sorry, I just get frustrated at the actions of conservatives more often than not these days. I apologize for my tone of my words. It wasn't directed directly at you, just at the general comments and actions of conservatives (especially the neo-cons). The mere existence of Guantanamo is a violation of human rights. Torture is a violation of human rights. Remember, a "more than normal" amount of people at Guantanamo are not guilty. I take great offense to this, as

1. it is wrong (if you condone such actions you yourself are supporting an "acceptable" form of "terror")
2. IMHO, it is a violation of our National Security, because we would (at least in theory) have a lesser chance of getting attacked if there was no Guantanamo
3. It only serves those with special interests, no matter what their direct/indirect involvement is.
4. It supports a regime of invasion. That is very dangerous from a Nat Security standpoint as we have more enemies now than before the war started. It also goes against my core American beliefs that we should be as non-militant and friendly as possible.
5. The war on terror has been a very successful tactic to reduce our freedoms and strengthen the governments grip. You give a little they take a lot... Well I for one, am TIRED of giving and having my rights (no matter how insignificant they may seem to some people)

Re:Prosecute them. (3, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350409)

Actually, I would say it's people like YOU that are the primary reason the country is fucked. People like you who choose sides, who label your fellow American citizens instead of uniting with one another. How about instead of arguing with each other over who is less corrupt, why don't people realize that republicans and democrats ARE BOTH AMERICAN!!! YOU ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!!

Maybe if you folks would stop squabbling with each other, issues would actually be resolved and we wouldn't be as fucked as we are. Fighting amongst ourselves solves NOTHING. All it does is make us look like a child throwing a tantrum. The two party system as it exists today (along with the lines of division it creates amongst the citizens of the US) is the root of all of our problems.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350611)

Could you please elaborate who isn't in that "same team" you mention?

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350721)

Anyone who isn't a US citizen. I don't mean to sound hateful or anything like that to someone of other nationality...I am also of the opinion that we are all human and that different countries really should serve no purpose other than to keep culture and tradition separate (as opposed to now where your nationality is treated more like what species you are).

I'm simply stating that before we can worry about others, we need to fix ourselves. 'Adjust your oxygen mask before helping your child with theirs', if you will.

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Insightful)

rueger (210566) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350335)

Hmmph, surely if the folks at Gitmo are doing nothing wrong then they should have nothing to hide? Only wrongdoers demand secrecy.

Re:Prosecute them. (-1, Offtopic)

mgessner (46612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350407)

Only wrongdoers demand secrecy.
This is the most idiotic thing I've heard today, although admittedly it's only a little before lunch.

How do you think product development is done? By telling your competition what you're going to do by when?

Should we have developed the nuclear bomb out in the open, so that the Germans could have done it at the same time and used it on Britain, Russia and the U.S.?

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

MadHatter2005 (886375) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350469)

Now you're confusing them with facts. Stop it, it might hurt their feelings!!

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350595)

I've done product development for just over 15 years.

We document everything we do, how we it, why we did, and the results of what we did. And at any moment the FDA can stroll in and have long in depth look.

No problem... but then again we aren't doing anything illegal, unethical, or immoral.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350741)

No problem... but then again we aren't doing anything illegal, unethical, or immoral.
I don't believe you. Please post all of this documentation on a convenient web site for review by disinterested parties.

Re:Prosecute them. (4, Insightful)

hibiki_r (649814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350627)

It seemed to me like sarcasm.

Chances are the comment had a lot to do with how the current government says that extra surveillance on Americans is necessary to fight terrorism, and that we should trust them to not misuse the information they get. He's just using their own flawed argument against them.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350695)

*whoosh*

You've seriously never heard someone use this as justification for privacy-nulling, "terrorism prevention" measures before?

GP most likely intended it as an ironic turning around of the phrase, using it on those who most often trot it seriously.

Re:Prosecute them. (1)

flitty (981864) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350411)

'sright. According to the pro-wiretapping crowd.

Re:Prosecute them. (5, Insightful)

Tridus (79566) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350497)

No no no, see its only the general public who shouldn't have anything to hide.

Remember, if the Government wants to hide stuff, its "national security." If the Government also wants to illegally wiretap everybody, its "national security." If the Government wants to send you to Syria to be tortured or lock you up for years with no evidence, its "national security."

But if you question the Government, you're a threat to "national security."

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350353)

George W Bush should be prosecuted for fraud, torture, and mass murder.

Wikileaks should be commended for helping to expose this vicious criminal.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350495)

When your other brain cell starts functioning, come back and reread what you wrote.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350617)

Well, I just had a cup of coffee and George W Bush is still a mass murderer.

Re:Prosecute them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350585)

for being party to endangering National Security.

Yes, toilet paper suppliers everywhere will be quaking in their shoes.

Get your own life, quit telling everyone else how to live theirs.

This is not necessarily a troll (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350711)

We really should ask whether these people ought to be prosecuted, even if they are doing the morally right thing.

"A man more right than his neighbors, constitutes a majority of one already," Thoreau said in On Civil Disobedience. Why "already"? Because the purpose of civil disobedience goes beyond personal liberty; it is a practical tool for changing society.

If you don't believe in speed limits, it is not civil disobedience to speed when the cops aren't looking. It is civil disobedience to speed up when you see a cop. The point is not just to disobey, the point is to force the issue upon those who would rather pretend it doesn't exist, and make them choose sides.

The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, But (0)

susano_otter (123650) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350203)

... I'm pretty sure I'd rather have publically-elected and appointed officials be the final arbiters of government secrecy, and not self-appointed anonymous individuals.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350225)

Good point. However, there are always those (GWB, Cheney) whom I'd rather *not* be in charge of such arbitration.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350249)

Make sure you read it anyway. It'll come in handy for the eventual day you end up in a secret US prison for "National Security Reasons". According to you, you would've opposed the Sons of Liberty during the American Revolution because they were anonymous individuals opposing the government also.

Too bad Bush wasn't publicly elected either.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (2, Informative)

Zoe9906 (1163177) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350417)

Neither was James Polk (1844), Zachary Taylor (1848), Franklin Pierce (1852), James Buchanan (1856), Abraham Lincoln (1860), Rutherford Hayes (1876), James Garfield (1880), Grover Cleveland (1884), Benjamin Harrison (1888), Grover Cleveland (1892), Woodrow Wilson (1912), Woodrow Wilson (1916), Harry Truman (1948), John F. Kennedy (1960), Richard Nixon (1968), Bill Clinton (1992), and Bill Clinton (1996) again.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350703)

you would've opposed the Sons of Liberty during the American Revolution

Um, I believe the Declaration of Independent had its signers

So, what's your real name, or should we just call you -pussy-.

The BIGGEST Flaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350255)


in U.S. "democracy" is this thug [whitehouse.org] .

Cheers.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1, Insightful)

spaceyhackerlady (462530) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350317)

Democracy is a fine system. For beginners.

...laura

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1, Redundant)

delt0r (999393) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350345)

As they say, "If you are doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide." If that can apply to me then it can apply to the government.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (0)

jasonhamilton (673330) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350397)

It's not about hiding. I am all for open goverment and no secret. The issue here is that any information released about how we deal with the terrorist suspects, are then used in their training camps. So our methods will not be effective and they know how far and what we will do to them once captured.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350599)

Well, now problably new detainees lives will be much worse, just to maintain "information extraction" level.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1)

delt0r (999393) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350619)

So you are all for a open government who only keeps secrets about interrogation methods?

The phrase "and they know how far and what we will do to them once captured" is very revealing.

Sounds like a Wookiee defense.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350577)

All right, let me have the entire contents of your hard drive and your life and then we'll see about the government.

If you'd never accept that for yourself (which you shouldn't because it's retarded), then don't use it against others. By using that argument you're validating it.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (4, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350363)

... I'm pretty sure I'd rather have publically-elected and appointed officials be the final arbiters of government secrecy, and not self-appointed anonymous individuals.
Sometimes for true liberty and justice you need someone other then the government controlling the information. To really have liberty you need to know what your Publically-elected and appointed officials are doing. Democracy doesn't work when the information is controlled by the government. If the government is the sole arbiter of information then you in fact no longer live in a democracy.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (2, Insightful)

miletus (552448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350377)

Self-appointed anonymous individuals -- whistleblowers to the rest of us -- are an absolutely critical source of information for the public in the face of secretive bureacracies. The Pentagon Papers which showed the clear pattern of government lying over Vietnam, or the Watergate leaks on the abuse of presidential power, are two obviously important examples of why leaking secrets are vital to political liberty and democracy. It's foolishly naive to believe that what appointed officials think should be the last word on state secrets.

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (3, Insightful)

AuntieWillow (1188799) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350391)

The founding fathers were pretty clear: secrecy is the enemy of democracy. If it's not troop movements during wartime or plans to the new Deathstar, there are very few reasons not to have something public knowledge in a democracy. After all, it's my money.

oblig (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350671)

many ACs died to get us this information...

Re:The Democratic System Certainly Has Its Flaws, (1)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350425)

That is why the US is a republic and not a democracy. The lefties tend to forget that from time to time.

Problem with democracy and secrecy (2, Insightful)

Per Abrahamsen (1397) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350705)

A great thing with democracy is that it leads to accountability. If we disagree with the decisions of the democratically elected representatives, we can vote them out of office at the next election.

However, when they keep stuff secret, we have no such option. Is it important to keep us unaware that part of a prison is not accessible to the people whose job it is to ensure that the prisoners are treated according to relevant laws and conventions? Maybe, maybe not. But when a politician decide to keep it secret, we have no way - apart from leaks - to hold them accountable for it.

Can democracy without accountability work? I don't think so. Democracy requires a transparent system to work. Which might hurt security. So it is back to freedom versus security, which is most important, and how much freedom can you sacrifice before your security is lost as well?

They are not easy questions to answer, and they certainly cannot be answered simply by a dichotomy between "publicly elected officials" and "anonymous self-appointed individuals". ...

A whole other issue is that sometimes the "publicly elected officials" aren't going to see the secrets, part of the government keep stuff secret from the people who are supposed to overlook them. In these cases, the leaks are essential to uncover the faults in the system.

Well they've done it this time... (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350227)

No extra toilet paper for these guys...gals...people. I mean... future "detainees".

Link to actual Wikileak articles (2, Interesting)

InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350229)

[wikileaks.org]

Related article on the leak: "US violates chemical weapons convention" [wikileaks.org]

Re:Link to actual Wikileak articles (1)

bragolach (855994) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350589)

The question is whether or not those agents have been used for actual wartime operations. Since no war was formally declared, it is possible that the use of CS gas is limited to law-enforcement confrontations, or even training Iraqi police forces.

US Marines are required to be exposed to CS gas in Recruit Training, as well as once per year as part of the MOPP readiness training.

You know something? (5, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350231)

I'm almost willing to bet that the reality (assuming this is actually the real document) is going to let down a lot of people - Some folks of a certain ideological bent prolly read the summary and went "a-ha! now we can uncover all those BUSH crimes!" (Of course, to be fair, a lot of folks on the other side of that ideological fence will point to it and try and say the opposite... go figure).

No matter what the ideological slant you may take, I strongly suspect that the truth is going to be a lot more mundane - again, assuming this thing is not a fabrication in either one direction or the other.

(speakin' of which, how do you tell for certain that it's not just a fabrication, either for or against? It's something I've always wondered when it comes to public wikis - unless you can verify who submitted it --or it can be independently verified-- you'll never be quite sure of its veracity.)

/P

Re:You know something? (4, Interesting)

EaglemanBSA (950534) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350301)

This is the problem inherent in the wiki-mindset...then again, who's to say anything released by any corporate news agency is any better (maybe even worse)? Fact-checking and verification is a pretty complex problem that, in the end, will always break down to faith in one party or another.

Re:You know something? (1)

Senjutsu (614542) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350445)

This is the problem inherent in the wiki-mindset...then again, who's to say anything released by any corporate news agency is any better (maybe even worse)? Fact-checking and verification is a pretty complex problem that, in the end, will always break down to faith in one party or another.
Precisely. That's why the wiki model is inherently superior.

Because, as you say, fact checking in any complex article on anything will almost certainly have broken down at some point. In a newspaper, a TV piece, or a normal encyclopedia, I have no way of seeing the evolution of the piece, and the discussions behind it; I have to blindly trust its accuracy in cases where I don't actively know I'm wrong.

Wikis at least give you extra information to base that judgement on. You still have to make that judgement on everything you ever read in any format, so extra information is always a good thing.

Re:You know something? (1)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350781)

This is the problem inherent in the wiki-mindset
This isn't really a problem particular to the wiki model of information distribution. A leak, inherently, cannot be confirmed or independently verified since (by definition) it is something that people are trying to keep secret.

The same problem occurs with any "leaked documents" or "anonymous whistle-blowers" or anonymous "sources" in general. We cannot judge the reputation of the person who is doing the leaking, so we can only use the information itself as a guide. In particular, we can see whether the leaked information matches with what we see externally. We can also use the reaction of the affected organizations as a partial guide.

Ultimately, with leaks we must use our own judgment, with full knowledge that many "leaks" are probably fabricated or altered in some way. At a minimum, potentially leaked information gives people clues for what they should be further investigating.

Re:You know something? (1)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350463)

It's an interesting document and suggests that the camp is well run and respectful of the 'inmates'. Good to see.

However, the violation of their human rights comes not from their treatment in the camp, but from the very existence of the camp in the first place. That is the crime that Bush has committed.

Re:You know something? (3, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350529)

Does it look real? Does it seem real enough and not fake?

If it does, then you start asking around. Maybe you could get someone who used to work there to confirm it (possibly anonymously). You can find ways to get it confirmed. And once you have a very good basis to believe it (insert Dan Rather joke here)... then you ask for a statement on it from the Pentagon.

If they confirm it, it's real. If they deny it you ask for some kind of proof. They can either provide it proving it's false, or they can't. If they can't prove it's false but you can good sources that agree it was real... then you have something you can write about.

That's how I see it at least. There are enough people you could find something like this out. Everything from asking former generals and analysts on if the formatting and style and such are correct, to asking people to confirm the document it's self.

Re:You know something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350767)

It is a fake, it appears to have been produced with MS Word 2007, which was not even out at the time this document was supposed have been written.

Dictated not read

D Rather.

Re:You know something? (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350675)

Whether the document is real and true or not does not matter. It does bring to the public light that there is more than a slight possibility that the US government has, and is using tactics and methods it publicly denounces as horrendous. If it is true, it is fuel for the fire, if not true, perhaps the fuel will get used in more appropriate areas. Publishing this document is what we are supposed to be fighting for... Freedoms, remember those things that the arabs hate us for? Ostensibly, the US government was trying to give such freedoms and democracy to Iraqis. If in fact the US has been abusive in doing so, even on a small scale, it brings into question ALL that the Bush administration has done, and I do mean ALL of it, and every person he has appointed etc.

The simple fact that this exists highlights the general disdain for the Bush administration, and what has been done on his watch, and/or under his order. If all was rosy and righteous, this would be seen as a easily recognizable joke. The fact that it is not should be telling you something, perhaps you should be listening to that nagging voice in the back of your mind.

Re:You know something? (1)

aproposofwhat (1019098) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350681)

I think it must be a fabrication - what mother would call her son 'Adolph', as the mother of the head MP officer named in the introduction to the document presumably did?

Adolph McQueen - that just has to be a made-up name, right?

Re:You know something? (3, Insightful)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350691)

No matter what the ideological slant you may take, I strongly suspect that the truth is going to be a lot more mundane - again, assuming this thing is not a fabrication in either one direction or the other.

Oh, I'm sure of that. It is a manual after all. It may reveal something about the nature of how detainees are treated, and it may even include things that walk that (apparently) narrow line between "aggressive interrogation" and "torture".

The problem is the things that aren't in the manual, but that they do anyway on "high value targets" because of pressure to get results. I don't think there's a manual that says wrap a guy up in a carpet and sit on him until he almost -- or in some cases fatally -- asphyxiates, but that's basically what happened under CIA interrogators in Afghanistan.

That's much more difficult to discover. We only have hints -- there are "secret" CIA prisons around the world, but damned if we know what goes on there. In most cases, it probably is boring and mundane.

(speakin' of which, how do you tell for certain that it's not just a fabrication, either for or against? It's something I've always wondered when it comes to public wikis - unless you can verify who submitted it --or it can be independently verified-- you'll never be quite sure of its veracity.)

How can you ever tell that a leaked document is the actual document? I fully agree the problem of trust is ten times worse with a wiki. The best way to verify a leak in any case though is to hope that someone who didn't want the document to leak will somehow verify it. For example, how do we know that the documents at xenu.net are really the Scientology secret teachings? Well, because the Church O' Elron sued the owner for copyright infringment. What about leaked copies of Iraq progress reports? Well, the Admin started putting spin control on the contents, not it's authenticity.

It's not reliable, but option B is to pretty much go investigate yourself and get a copy of the document yourself, in which case, why should anyone believe you if you post it on wikileaks?

Internet and the art of disinformation (1, Interesting)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350697)

The easiest way to hide a fact is misdirection. Before releasing the actual fact, release tons of extravagant misinformation, slanted to views of the various extremes. Then, when the fact is released, everyone overlooks it, or assumes it too is a fake.

Most of what you know is wrong. We live in a misinformation soup. Sorting one fact from another is not only hard, it's damned near impossible. From corporations to politicians, the truth is hidden in billions of falsehoods.

That's why I live in a fantasy world.

The internet.

Re:You know something? (1)

Mattsson (105422) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350729)

Either way, and no matter how the prisoners are actually treated, no country should be allowed to keep their prisoners on foreign soil.
If you want to have prisoners, keep them inside your country-borders and give them you own damn rights and protections.

Re:You know something? (1)

bflynn (992777) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350753)

One problem here is that by leaking such a document on a wiki, the leakers spoil its legitimacy. Regardless of how many others step up and vouch for it, the accuracy of the document can always be discounted. The document can never be trusted. This is one reason why you need an official release.

amateurs

Hunger strikers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350241)

...are force fed.

RE: (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350303)

If my wikileaks I'll be seeing a doctor, thank you very much.

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350809)

What did we have before a cursor? A precursor...

After all... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350305)

we certainly know we can trust everything we read on the internet as fact.

Re:After all... (0, Offtopic)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350643)

I made several soon-to-be profitable arrangements to help various African princes get cash out of their country's banks after a military uprising. The rep I got with one convinced all his brothers to go through me as well. Soon, riches!

Re:After all... (1)

dintech (998802) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350757)

You're right. Even better, the internet is about to make me very rich too. I've just sent $10,000 dollars to the son of an exiled Nigerian dictator in order to pay bank fees on his transfer of $10,000,000 to me. How great!

corepirate nazis now providing 'cloud' cover (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350401)

talk about being prisoners/held hostage?

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2002/06/13240.shtml [indymedia.org]

we're watching right now as they spray phoney clouds over our city. yikes almighty. took some pictures of the 'trail', & the 'lovely' 'rainbow' around the sun.

it must not be that good for US or the whoreabull corepirate nazi execrable would be bragging about it? maybe a reference for the upcoming 'ask lonesome al gore' interview here?

consult with/trust in yOUR creators, providing more than enough of everything (using an unlimited supply of newclear power), without any of the self serving motives (see also: greed/fear/ego) that many of us succumb to, since/until forever. see you there?

Seems to me... (2, Informative)

nofrak (889021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350413)

that this is pretty much the standard for post Geneva Convention POWs.

document on wikileaks (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350423)

Direct link to the document:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Camp_Delta_Standard_Operating_Procedure [wikileaks.org]

Re:document on wikileaks (2, Informative)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350517)

BitTorrent download [degreez.net]

Anonymous open-government activists (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350441)

I hear they have excellent articles on Area 51, Elvis' secret alien baby files, and the Jim Morrison's current address. Not to sound cynical, but what prevents the Bad Guys from using this to subtly (or not so subtly) influence what people think the "real" deal is ?

Re:Anonymous open-government activists (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350739)

Which goes back to the question of: is this an actual document or something someone crafted? When you think about it, both sides have a reason to use dis-information. If you wanted to give the United States a global black eye, then this is just the kind of document you'd want "leaked". And of course, the U.S. Government is in the unenviable position of either a) denying it's a real document and having no one believe them or b) confirming it is an actual document and facing withering ridicule. And given their track record of late, neither answer is going to be believed.

Hype. (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350523)

Though some of the outlined procedures are cruel and demeaning, the manual dosen't live up to the hype. I believe that the worst of what happens at Gitmo is not covered in the manual.
 
Congrats to Wikileaks. Hopefully they wont have to give in to pressure of any sort.

Re:Hype. (1)

Fast Thick Pants (1081517) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350615)

I believe that the worst of what happens at Gitmo is not covered in the manual.
Real men never read the manual anyway.

The section on "scantily clad" people was awesome (1)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21350551)

Apparently the Cubans dress like whores, or so the manual implies.

Meanwhile... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350713)

...there is human slavery happening and women getting punished for being raped in other parts of the world, but, no, the US is the core of all EVIL[tm] in the world, right?

The geek community is dead. It's a pack of ignorant, effeminate pud pullers gone so far to the Left that New Zealand wouldn't want them.

Yet Another Left Wing Loony Site (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21350793)

Why do morons like this get the time of day. People love propagating fantasy conspiracies because they so desperately wish they were true or just the thought of them might help their political cause. Really, how many "vast" conspiracies were ever really proven? I sure can't think of any. In the end the truth is nowhere near as exciting or incriminating to the other side, but who cares, by then the loons are on to the next vast conspiracy by the evil US government. It's amazing that people have such contempt for the US and it's traditional values. If the US ever crumbles, the world will closely follow. I'm so glad the hippie freaks who protest...everything...are merely an irritant and not the norm in America.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...