I have read the Winter Soldier testimony. It was 90% stories they overheard or standard soldier bitching about how life is unfair. The worst story I heard was of a soldier who ALMOST shot a female civilian. Almost. And the photos have been released, but they are redacted to not show the mangled bodies of armed insurgents. The only weapon visable is a damaged AK.The funny thing, is that I've heard that Wikileaks also has the unredacted photos, but has failed to release them because it damages the narrative they tacked on to the video.
Which part of the "...,implying that actions like..." this did you have trouble understanding and misconstrue for "...indicated that this was in anyway typical?" My point was by NOT making this clear and harping on stories like this ALL the time without putting them into a greater context you generate the very same falsehoods Glenn Greenwald is writing about.
"WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident."
This is really simple Bohica - either you have evidence that Wikileaks is covering something up or you are putting forward a conspiracy theory to try & support your shattered argument.Which is it?The FACTS that I am aware of do nothing to support your claim of Wikileaks hiding anything. Not to mention that it would go against the entire premise of the site & that as far as I am aware Wikileaks have historically not shown bias toward or against anyone.
aubreymaturinApr 7, 2010
It was all blue-screen.
sethcApr 7, 2010
WikiLeaks has to be one of the most useful, important websites to have ever existed.
bohicatwentytwoApr 7, 2010
I have read the Winter Soldier testimony. It was 90% stories they overheard or standard soldier bitching about how life is unfair. The worst story I heard was of a soldier who ALMOST shot a female civilian. Almost. And the photos have been released, but they are redacted to not show the mangled bodies of armed insurgents. The only weapon visable is a damaged AK.The funny thing, is that I've heard that Wikileaks also has the unredacted photos, but has failed to release them because it damages the narrative they tacked on to the video.
stubearApr 7, 2010
Which part of the "...,implying that actions like..." this did you have trouble understanding and misconstrue for "...indicated that this was in anyway typical?" My point was by NOT making this clear and harping on stories like this ALL the time without putting them into a greater context you generate the very same falsehoods Glenn Greenwald is writing about.
wiseweaselApr 7, 2010
Machinima. Some buddies and I made the wikileaks video using a Call Of Duty screen grab and a couple iMovie filters.
bohicatwentytwoApr 7, 2010
"WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident."
richmomzApr 7, 2010
I think the magnitude of their stupidity went beyond a mere 'correction' - a full retraction is in order... along with an apology.
fairdinkummateApr 8, 2010
This is really simple Bohica - either you have evidence that Wikileaks is covering something up or you are putting forward a conspiracy theory to try & support your shattered argument.Which is it?The FACTS that I am aware of do nothing to support your claim of Wikileaks hiding anything. Not to mention that it would go against the entire premise of the site & that as far as I am aware Wikileaks have historically not shown bias toward or against anyone.