Wikileaks: List of facilities 'vital to US security' leaked - Polidicks

[quote=BBC] A long list of key facilities around the world that the US describes as vital to its national security has been released by Wikileaks. The US State Department in February 2009 asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security. The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs. Several UK sites are listed, including cable locations, satellite sites and BAE Systems plants. This is probably the most controversial document yet from the Wikileaks organisation. The definition of US national security revealed by the cable is broad and all embracing. In addition to obvious pieces of strategic infrastructure like communications hubs, gas pipelines and so on, it contains, amongst other things, a cobalt mine in Congo, an anti-snake venom factory in Australia and an insulin plant in Denmark. The US missions were asked to list all installations whose loss could critically impact the public health, economic security or national security of the United States. In Britain, for example, the list ranges from Cornwall to Scotland, including key satellite communications sites and the places where trans-Atlantic cables make landfall. A number of BAE Systems plants involved in joint weapons programmes with the Americans are listed, along with a marine engineering firm in Edinburgh which is said to be "critical" for nuclear powered submarines. 'Targets for terror' The geographical range of the document is extraordinary. If the US sees itself as waging a "global war on terror" then this represents a global directory of the key installations and facilities - many of them medical or industrial - that are seen as being of vital importance to Washington. No wonder then that the Times newspaper in London has published the story under the headline "Wikileaks lists 'targets for terror' against the US". Some locations are given unique billing. The Nadym gas pipeline junction in western Siberia, for example, is described as "the most critical gas facility in the world". It is a crucial transit point for Russian gas heading for western Europe. In some cases, specific pharmaceutical plants or those making blood products are highlighted for their crucial importance to the global supply chain. Of course the critical question is that raised by the Times newspaper's headline: Is this really a listing of potential targets that might be of use to a terrorist? The cable contains a simple listing. In many cases towns are noted as the location but not actual street addresses. That, of course, is not going to hinder anyone with access to the internet. There are also no details of security measures at any of the listed sites. What the list might do is to prompt potential attackers to look at a broader range of targets, especially given that the US authorities classify them as being so important. It is not perhaps a major security breach, but many governments may see it as an unhelpful development. It inevitably prompts the question as to exactly what positive benefit Wikileaks was intending in releasing this document. Former UK Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind condemned the move. "This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal," Mr Rifkind said. "This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing." [/quote] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11923766[/url] [url]http://213.251.145.96/cable/2009/02/09STATE15113.html[/url] I dunno how important or dangerous this list is, but this does seem to be one of the first cable's I have seen which seems to be something actually important.

The only people interested in this information would be terrorists and enemy nations. Great job Wikileaks. :downsbravo:

Aaaaww sheeeit. It does sound pretty important.

Shitstorm incoming. Now the US is going to want to take him down, any means necessary.

This one might be going a bit to far...

Now what good does releasing THIS do?

I don't see the point of this, this seems like revenge.

Exposing injustices and dirty shit is one thing. But if the list is real then that's going too far.

Exposing injustices and dirty shit is one thing. But if the list is real then that's going too far. Oh jesus what the fuck balls double post

I can't see anything good coming from this to be honest

I was a supporter of what he was doing before, but I strongly disagree with this release. There's no corruption to be exposed here, so far as I can tell. This isn't exposing any dirt at all.

This actually could be harmful to people it shouldn't effect if it's used by a malevolent party. Just imagine, you're a soldier who just so happened to get bit by a snake but hey no anti-venom, terrorists blew up the anti-venom HQ in Australia. This could lead to a plethora of snake based terrorist weaponry.

From having a (really) brief look through the list (paragraph 15 of the cable if anyone wants to skip straight to it) it does seem that quite a few of these places are fairly obvious as the BBC article mentions (Transatlantic cable landing points etc). So I think some of the things on this list might be an issue, however I also think most of them are fairly obvious (Wow, they consider a factory where US military equipment is built "vital to security", big shock there)

I don't see the point in releasing this information, it doesn't help anybody.

Is this really necessary now?

[QUOTE=superdinoman;26518452]This one might be going a bit to far...[/QUOTE] Oh come on, several of them have been skipping lightly over the line. There comes a point where "whistleblowing" goes too far, Wikileaks has been toeing it for a while, I'd say this one crosses it.

[QUOTE=BANNED USER;26518557]I don't see the point in releasing this information, it doesn't help anybody.[/QUOTE] This is the problem when you run an organization which publishes leaks, and someone hands you quarter of a million secret cables and asks you to publish them. There might be a few in there that are a bit iffy. Although I do think if this was really a risk to anything or anything it would be higher up on the classified documents scale. Although this is 'secret' which is quite high.

Even though no terror may come of this list being leaked, it serves no whistle blowing purpose.

[QUOTE=5killer;26518622]Even though no terror may come of this list being leaked, it serves no whistle blowing purpose.[/QUOTE] Actually it is quite easy for an underwater cable to be damaged. Anyone else remember this? [url]http://articles.cnn.com/2008-02-01/world/internet.outage_1_undersea-cables-new-cables-older-cable?_s=PM:WORLD[/url]

Now they dun goofed.

Guys, this isn't a new leak It was a part of the cables

[QUOTE=Zeke129;26518654]Guys, this isn't a new leak It was a part of the cables[/QUOTE] Yes it was part of the cables, but now its been put out into the public by BBC. Quite a few people read these news sites.

This is just spitting in the face of the big kid bullying you around. Wtf Julian. Wtf.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;26518654]Guys, this isn't a new leak It was a part of the cables[/QUOTE] I suppose the title of the news article (and this thread) [I]suggests[/I] its a separate leak, it makes a bit more sense on the BBC site as its inside the cablegate section. Is there any chance if A mod reads this they could edit the title to include something like (cablegate) at the end of it?

[QUOTE=superdinoman;26518675]Yes it was part of the cables, but now its been put out into the public by BBC. Quite a few people read these news sites.[/QUOTE] Quite a few people read the cables too, these "vital facilities" have been public for like a week now

Huh, this is interesting.

[QUOTE=Jsm;26518704]I suppose the title of the news article (and this thread) [I]suggests[/I] its a separate leak, it makes a bit more sense on the BBC site as its inside the cablegate section. Is there any chance a mod could edit the title to include something like (cablegate) at the end of it?[/QUOTE] Title should be "Diplomatic cables leak contains list of facilities "vital to US security": BBC"

Well shit.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;26518711]Quite a few people read the cables too, these "vital facilities" have been public for like a week now[/QUOTE] More people watch/read the news than read Wikileaks, far more. By putting this information directly into the public eye they are pretty much asking for trouble.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;26518711]Quite a few people read the cables too, these "vital facilities" have been public for like a week now[/QUOTE] This cable was only released late last night according to the page.