Open Source Analysis of WikiLeaks?

[Jeremy White]

As a graduate student my particular area of study is military propaganda and I am very interested in viewing some of the reports that Wikileaks has reportedly published. However, when on the site I click on links such as this one claiming to be a 2006 overview of Taliban Propaganda in Helmand Province. However, the site instructs me to "see attachment" but as far as I can tell there is no attachment. Can anyone help me figure this out?

Also, in case any academics are interested, I checked with the IRB board for approval to use wikileaks as a source and they responded that until the U.S. military comes out and says that anything in the Afghan War Diaries isnt true that we should consider it to be a legit source.

[jmm99]

I'm looking at the webpage as I write - and see a database "card" and below it a photo map. The photo map can't be the "attachment" to the 31 Dec 2006 report, since the photo map is labeled: "Imagery (c) 2010 ..."

So, my guess is that the "See Attachment" ref. is to an attachment to the "card" that Wikileaks either does not have or did not link.

Welcome to the forum

Mike

[Rex Brynen]

Also, in case any academics are interested, I checked with the IRB board for approval to use wikileaks as a source and they responded that until the U.S. military comes out and says that anything in the Afghan War Diaries isnt true that we should consider it to be a legit source.

If so, your IRB gave you a rather odd reply since they ought not to be in the business of determining the veracity of data sources, but rather the ethics of using them.

As I see it (and I serve as chair of a Research Ethics Board), the issues are as follows:

1) Since Wikileaks neither obtained informed consent from individuals named in the data nor (in most cases) redacted their names, you need to be extremely careful in using any data that could possibly identify an individual.

2) Paradoxical as it seems, even though the data is in the public domain it remains classified, and disseminating it further might be technically illegal. If you ever hoped to gain a security clearance, or if you have one that you wish to maintain, you may wish to keep this in mind.

3) In discussing use or interpretation of the Wikileaks data with others who hold current security clearances, you could potentially put their future clearances and hence employment at risk. Your informed consent procedure ought to assure that they are aware of this.

To be honest, #2 and #3 are rather remote and abstract possibilities. On the other hand #1 is a major concern to which your IRB ought to have alerted you.