New Wikileaks document: CIA Red Cell Memo on United States "exporting terrorism"

[CptStern]

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

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CIA_Red_Cell_Memorandum_on_United_States_"exporting_terrorism",_2_Feb_2010

 

[Warped]

We Import from everywhere and everything, and export porn, movies, games, and of course terrorism. how is this news??

 

[Kaptain H]

This is shocking. I had no idea the US is such a bad country, this sure taught me a lesson.

 

[Eejit]

An American overreacting to implied criticism of his beloved country? Say it ain't so!

 

[<RJMC>]

hey its stern what where you expecting...

funny that he didnt posted that this was a "what if" escenario memo,he just posted "exports terrorism" next to united states

how interesting.....

 

[Shakermaker]

According to the document the US is only 'exporting' Jihadists at the moment. The government has no role in this, America is simply a recruiting ground for Muslim extremists. Other countries would be less inclined to cooperate because the US clearly isn't keeping its own doorstep clean. This is not a case of the CIA organizing a revolution like in Chile or Indonesia.

 

[Kaptain H]

An American overreacting to implied criticism of his beloved country? Say it ain't so!

I suspect that this site seeks little more these days than to disrupt the socio-stability of said beloved country.

 

[Escaep]

The reason I'll be released is the same reason you think I'll be convicted. I do rub shoulders with some of the most vile, sadistic men calling themselves leaders today. But some of those men are the enemies of your enemies. And while the biggest arms dealer in the world is your boss, the President of the United States, who ships more merchandise in a day than I do in a year... sometimes it's embarrassing to have his fingerprints on the guns. Sometimes he needs a freelancer like me to supply forces he can't be seen supplying. So... you call me evil. But unfortunately for you, I'm a necessary evil.

In skimming through this article it doesn't seem like there is any substantial proof that the U.S. is exporting terrorism. More like, "well this could happen if the U.S. is suspected of exporting terrorism."

 

[Eejit]

I suspect that this site seeks little more these days than to disrupt the socio-stability of said beloved country.

anarchistlife2.net

 

[Remus]

anarchistlife2.net

More like sarcastic/cynical/assholelife2.net, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[Kaptain H]

anarchistlife2.net

Looks like we got a future rapist here.

 

[No Limit]

I suspect that this site seeks little more these days than to disrupt the socio-stability of said beloved country.

Does that mean you're not coming to the hl2.net flag burning picnic this weekend?

 

[Kaptain H]

Does that mean you're not coming to the hl2.net flag burning picnic this weekend?

No. In fact, I'll be joining the Marines out of spite.

 

[Eejit]

You can join the Marines if you like, I'll still rape you. With you gagged by a bundled up US flag.

 

[Kaptain H]

"Now we're cooking with gas."

 

[Maestro]

You can join the Marines if you like, I'll still rape you. With you gagged by a bundled up US flag.

You have double reason to do it, the United States is funding the IRA!

Unless you're a member.

Terrorist.

 

[No Limit]

No. In fact, I'll be joining the Marines out of spite.

We were hoping you'd come.

 

[Kaptain H]

You can join the Marines if you like, I'll still rape you. With you gagged by a bundled up US flag.

You have double reason to do it, the United States is funding the IRA!

Unless you're a member.

Terrorist.

We were hoping you'd come.

Things just got sexy.

 

[Maestro]

Things just got sexy.

:naughty:

 

[kineaesth]

De-de-rail this thread, please.

 

[Krynn72]

CIA exporting terrorism > sarcastic dont-give-a-**** reply > sarcastic oh-how-typically-American-of-you reply > jocular discussion on halflife2.net's political stance > name calling > picnics > spiteful reaction to picnics > anti-America rape threats > confusing remark about sexyness of previous posts > mod asking for people to get back on topic > Krynn summarizing thread

This is why I come to the Politics section. So much variety in every thread.

 

[Bob_Marley]

I thought it was all part of the American plan.

After all, if the US hadn't funded the IRA for 30 years the British army wouldn't have known how to fight terrorism. Played the long game on that one, eh?

To be honest it seems that this is more a warning about the international perception of the United States' tendency to ignore international law when it feels like it, as well as its historical export/support of terrorism (such as Cuba, Angola, Northern Ireland, etc) and how this may negatively affect cooperation with other states.

 

[CptStern]

I suspect that this site seeks little more these days than to disrupt the socio-stability of said beloved country.

..by posting a document written by the US intelligence community examining global perceptions that might arise as a consequence to their [in]actions? the fiends!

To be honest it seems that this is more a warning about the international perception of the United States' tendency to ignore international law when it feels like it, as well as its historical export/support of terrorism (such as Cuba, Angola, Northern Ireland, etc) and how this may negatively affect cooperation with other states

glad someone took the time to examine the document provided

 

[VictimOfScience]

Hey, if we can get some legit charges out of this then super, but yeah, nothing new here. All we do is export strife and **** with every legitimate government that opposes us or gets in the way of our interests. Thank goodness we have the right to vote and the power to change the way our country does their "business," right? :dozey:

 

[Kaptain H]

..by posting a document written by the US intelligence community examining global perceptions that might arise as a consequence to their [in]actions? the fiends!

Are these documents declassified? I'm opposed to a site that allows confidential material to be published to the public so easy and anonymously by anyone who may have an axe to grind. The site is a propaganda machine, and those who leak information which they've been entrusted to safeguard deserve prosecution.

 

[No Limit]

Because as we know the government can be totally trusted when it comes to declassifying the appropriate information, right?

 

[<RJMC>]

glad someone took the time to examine the document provided

but you didnt mentioned that in the title

why? trying to make the usa as oficially exporting the terrorism?

 

[CptStern]

but you didnt mentioned that in the title

why? trying to make the usa as oficially exporting the terrorism?

:dozey:

it's the title of the document, DUH!!!

Are these documents declassified?

seeing as how it's recent and the US doesnt have a habit of declassifying documents till 25 years after the fact or under court order I'd say no. but see that's what whistleblowers do; blow the whistle with their insider information. are you against the concept of whistleblowers all together? because it seems to me that that sort of the thing is an added "checks and balances" needed to keep the government on the straight and narrow. we wouldnt want them perpetrating crimes in our name would we? after all they work for us. Question for you; do you think the abu ghraib photos should never have been released?

I'm opposed to a site that allows confidential material to be published to the public so easy and anonymously by anyone who may have an axe to grind.

they've been around since 2007. it's not by any means limited to US

"WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh Hassan Dahir "

"In September 2006, commodities giant Trafigura commissioned an internal report about a toxic dumping incident in the Ivory Coast,[123] which (according to the United Nations) affected 108,000 people."

"On 28 January 2009, WikiLeaks released 86 telephone intercept recordings of Peruvian politicians and businessmen involved in the "Petrogate" oil scandal. "

"On 19 March 2009, WikiLeaks published what was alleged to be the Australian Communications and Media Authority's blacklist of sites to be banned under Australia's proposed laws on Internet censorship"

I guess you would rather these documents werent leaked?

The site is a propaganda machine, and those who leak information which they've been entrusted to safeguard deserve prosecution.

not wikileaks responsibility to ensure people abide by the of their contracts. in any event I dont understand what you mean by "propaganda". the US leaked documents are written by the US government. what propaganda are you suggesting the US is disseminating?

anyways they're not based in the US and the owner isnt american so the US has no jurisdiction over them.

 

[<RJMC>]

:dozey:

it's the title of the document, DUH!!!

still you allways made some remark or coment apart of the quoting but you didnt this time,probably cuz you didnt found a way to make fun of rednecks that time

I know your kind stern so dont try to hide it

 

[Kaptain H]

Because as we know the government can be totally trusted when it comes to declassifying the appropriate information, right?

It's the government's information. It's the government's decision. This seems obvious.

 

[CptStern]

It's the government's information. It's the government's decision. This seems obvious.

nope. you as a citizen have the right to know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_act

 

[No Limit]

It's the government's information. It's the government's decision. This seems obvious.

Lol, you really didn't just say "this seems obvious", did you? According to your logic the pentagon papers should have never been released. And deep throat should have never talked.

Who does the government work for again?

 

[Eejit]

It's the government's information. It's the government's decision. This seems obvious.

So the government should only be overseen by themselves and not the public too?

 

[Kaptain H]

nope. you as a citizen have the right to know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_act

I'm aware of this, but from what I understand, it's more for accessing records and public government information. Correct me if it's different for government agencies like the CIA, but any citizen has no right to request and see classified information. This is most certainly true with the military, though that's my only area of experience. Even with the proper clearance, it's still an isue of "need to know."

According to your logic the pentagon papers should have never been released. And deep throat should have never talked.

Maybe not, but historically it was never so easy (and possibly without personal consequence) as logging onto a website and sharing classified material as it is now.

 

[Escaep]

Correct me if it's different for government agencies like the CIA, but any citizen has no right to request and see classified information. This is most certainly true with the military, though that's my only area of experience.

You mean this act won't let me get the launch codes for all of our nuclear weapons?
:frown:

 

[No Limit]

Maybe not

So let me make sure I'm understanding this. So you actually think releasing the pentagon papers and exposing the crimes of the Nixon administration maybe wasn't such a good idea?

but historically it was never so easy (and possibly without personal consequence) as logging onto a website and sharing classified material as it is now.

Copy machines have existed since atleast the 50s. The post office much longer than that. By the 70s every big office had a xerox machine and access to stamps. So I don't get your point.

 

[CptStern]

I'm aware of this, but from what I understand, it's more for accessing records and public government information. Correct me if it's different for government agencies like the CIA, but any citizen has no right to request and see classified information. This is most certainly true with the military, though that's my only area of experience. Even with the proper clearance, it's still an isue of "need to know."

The Act applies only to federal agencies. However, all of the states, as well as the District of Columbia and some territories, have enacted similar statutes to require disclosures by agencies of the state and of local governments

the department of defense is a federal agency



you missed my previous post. it answers some of your previous statements and also poses a few questions

 

[Kaptain H]

So let me make sure I'm understanding this. So you actually think releasing the pentagon papers and exposing the crimes of the Nixon administration maybe wasn't such a good idea?

No, I was conceding the opposite.

are you against the concept of whistleblowers all together? because it seems to me that that sort of the thing is an added "checks and balances" needed to keep the government on the straight and narrow. we wouldnt want them perpetrating crimes in our name would we? after all they work for us. Question for you; do you think the abu ghraib photos should never have been released?

not wikileaks responsibility to ensure people abide by the of their contracts. in any event I dont understand what you mean by "propaganda". the US leaked documents are written by the US government. what propaganda are you suggesting the US is disseminating?

anyways they're not based in the US and the owner isnt american so the US has no jurisdiction over them.

I am not opposed in general, no. I don't think a "yes" or "no" would cover my opinion on every case (even the ones they exposed), and it's a very volitile subject. But I think these issues need to be handled carefully and fairly. It's my opinion that Wikileaks has become less and less neutral over the years. The recent incident over the shooting of Iraqi citizens and the highly edited video that was released to the public was far from neutral in its presentation. That is what I mean by propaganda.

Of course the US has no jurisdiction over the site, but I do expect those caught leaking information to be prosecuted appropriately. I'm mostly thinking of soldiers who can't resist the temptation abuse their clearances the moment they learn something they don't like, may the UCMJ prosecute them and set a firm example.

I don't mean to sound like a terrible person, but we can't all be rebels.

 

[Eejit]

They also released an unedited copy of that video, I watched it and it was the same with added tedium.

 

[Kaptain H]

They also released an unedited copy of that video, I watched it and it was the same with added tedium.

I watched both as well. Minus all the added arrows and signs pointing to the "obvious things" that were spotted after the video had been reviewed probably dozens of times by an uninvolved third party, they were very similar. The context is completely different. And don't forget the dramatic title.