Wikileaks : Secret Afghanistan War logs

[third eye]

Denial again.

The world denied the link between the bad boys and the Af Pak border region till 9/11.

What will it take for this fiction to become facts ?

 

[Devil Soul]

Britain laments leak of Afghan war files
Updated at: 1625 PST, Monday, July 26, 2010 ShareThis story

LONDON: Britain said Monday it regretted the leaking of tens of thousands of secret military files about the Afghanistan war, which have thrown the spotlight on civilian deaths there.

"We would lament all unauthorised releases of classified material," a Downing Street spokeswoman said. "The White House has made a statement. We will not comment on leaked documents."
Britain laments leak of Afghan war files

 

[somebozo]

Americas "yellow journalism" tactics are famous for making such deceptive "leaks" to mass media through geniune channels to disrupt and alter public attentions. We should take these leaks as an act of "electronic warefare" until geniune evidence of leaks surfaces.

 

[Jet Li]

Afghans React to Leaks With Jubilation

By Maria Abi-Habib

The mood among Afghans over leaked U.S. documents outlining Pakistan’s collaboration with the Taliban wasn’t one of surprise Monday but jubilation.

For many Afghans, it was an “I told you so” moment after lawmakers have to Pakistan for nearly a decade as a main source of support for the Taliban.

But what Afghan President Hamid Karzai does with this moment is what matters most, say parliamentarian Shukria Barakzai and Gen. Zahir Azimi, the spokesman for the defense ministry. “This is a golden opportunity for Karzai. He can now say ‘we told you all along’ to NATO and demand more support and funding,” Mrs. Barakzai says.

Mr. Karzai’s faith in the U.S.-led war here is wavering and his confrontational approach to Pakistan has been ditched for softer words of late. Afghan officials say Mr. Karzai is trying to forge a better relationship with Pakistan, worried about coalition forces withdrawing from Afghanistan while the Taliban insurgency strengthens.

But the leaked documents, which show the U.S. is aware of Pakistan’s support to the Taliban, may see Mr. Karzai return to his hard-line approach by bolstering his past claims of Pakistani interference, lawmakers say.

The documents, lawmakers and cabinet ministers hope, will also publicly embarrass the U.S. and force them to take a tougher approach with Pakistan after donating billions of dollars in exchange for Pakistan’s help in the war on terror.

“Everyone here knows that a lot of U.S. aid money for Pakistan to build schools or hospitals never gets delivered, but goes to work against the U.S. in Afghanistan,” Mrs. Barakzai said.

Afghans React to U.S. Document Leaks With Jubilation - Dispatch - WSJ

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

My own 'told you so' moment for Ahmad and some other Afghan's who defended Amrullah Saleh.

Pakistan's concerns about him manufacturing information to malign Pakistan and distorting the facts to destroy the Pak-Afghan relationship have proven true after all.

By deliberately falsifying intelligence and seeking to vilify Pakistan and poison the minds of Afghans and NATO against Pakistan, he has done a greater disservice to the Afghan cause than perhaps any other.

 

[indushek]

Way too simplistic and logically incorrect reply.

Whether someone is an academic or not is irrelevant when it comes to these issues.

Secondly, just because a lot of noise is being made - which can be done if a state as powerful as the US wants to -, it doesn't make it necessarily.

The denial argument is a cheap and convenient argument. Very simplistic too, might I add. It's as good as me saying that you're in denial of Indian involvement. It doesn't mean much without clear evidence.

And what according to u sir is solid proof ?? No i am not here to troll please understand. In various threads time and again by almost everybody here

If the news is from Indian Newspapers like TOI and (even the hindu) its a Bull.... news. Agreed. Everybody asks for a neutral source.

If the news is in anyway connected to India the news is Bull..... u ask for a neutral source.

Now in this matter the US govt has admitted the leakage however USA is a zionist, selfish govt all it wants to do is malign Pakistan and get its work done, i will agree to this argument also. However in parts there are bits and pieces of other intelligence services too like polish, now u say this is also Bull......

So can u please tell me what is an authentic source for everybody here?? Mr.Sparklingway is painstakingly along with posting the leaks has been advocating in various posts to people not to see this as an effort directed only against Pakistan. He is speaking about the larger picture. The reason why i am questioning only about Pakistani part is that all those allegations have been called accusations by each and every member here.

The most funniest thing is that some are saying that because Junior Officers collected, this information is not authentic. I am an Accountant without even basic knowledge other than reading material public and Movie experience about spying. Even in my filed when entries are to be accounted for only the Junior guys do this work not the Finance Manager or the CFO. Well if this doesn't apply in the spying world i am sorry.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Now in this matter the US govt has admitted the leakage however USA is a zionist, selfish govt all it wants to do is malign Pakistan and get its work done, i will agree to this argument also. However in parts there are bits and pieces of other intelligence services too like polish, now u say this is also Bull......

So can u please tell me what is an authentic source for everybody here?? Mr.Sparklingway is painstakingly along with posting the leaks has been advocating in various posts to people not to see this as an effort directed only against Pakistan. He is speaking about the larger picture. The reason why i am questioning only about Pakistani part is that all those allegations have been called accusations by each and every member here.

The most funniest thing is that some are saying that because Junior Officers collected, this information is not authentic. I am an Accountant without even basic knowledge other than reading material public and Movie experience. Even in my filed when entries are to be accounted for only the Junior guys do this work not the Finance Manager or the CFO. Well if this doesn't apply in the spying world i am sorry.

The point is not that the information is not authentic because 'junior officers' collected it, but because in the words of the Western media itself and US military officials quoted in the Guardian reports, the sources and claims in many of the reports could not be verified.

The following quotes are all from the Western media, primarily the NYT and Guardian the collaborated with wikileaks to expose these documents:

Much of the information — raw intelligence and threat assessments gathered from the field in Afghanistan— cannot be verified and likely comes from sources aligned with Afghan intelligence, which considers Pakistan an enemy, and paid informants. Some describe plots for attacks that do not appear to have taken place.

Experts cautioned that although Pakistan’s militant groups and Al Qaeda work together, directly linking the Pakistani spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, with Al Qaeda is difficult.

American officials have rarely uncovered definitive evidence of direct ISI involvement in a major attack.

But for all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of "rumours, bullshit and second-hand information" and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. "As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim," said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.

"The fog of war is particularly dense in Afghanistan," said Michael Semple, a former deputy head of the EU mission there. "A barrage of false information is being passed off as intelligence and anyone who wants to operate there needs to be able to sift through it. The opportunities to be misled are innumerable."

But many of the 180 reports appear to betray as much about the motivation of the sources than those of the alleged foreign puppet-masters. Some US officers were aware of this. One report from 2006 notes that an informant "divulges information for monetary remuneration and likely fabricated or exaggerated the above report for just that reason".

Some of the most striking claims come from the National Directorate of Security, Afghanistan's foremost spy agency and a bitter rival to the ISI.

But many such reports appear highly implausible. In February 2007 the ISI and insurgents planned "to buy alcoholic drinks from markets in Miranshah [in Pakistan's tribal belt] and Peshawar [in order to] mix them with poison and use them for poisoning ANSF and ISAF troops" according to a C3 report. The Karzai plot is assessed to be "probably true".

Apparently more credible reports of ISI skulduggery are marked SEWOC, or Signals Intelligence Electronic Warfare Operations Centre, signifying they come from intercepted communications. One SEWOC report, in December 2007, accused the ISI of deploying children as suicide bombers. But the military source said that such intelligence was also prone to distortion, and that its value depended on whose conversation was being eavesdropped. "If we ever found out anything that the ISI or Pakistani military were somehow complicit in the insurgency, it never came from these sources. Never," he said.

But while Gul, 73, is a well-known fundamentalist ideologue in Pakistan, experts say he is unlikely to play a frontline role in the fighting. Afghan informers may have used his name – he is notorious in Afghanistan – to spice up their stories, said Semple.

"There's a pattern of using a dramatis personae of famous ISI officers and Afghan commanders, and recurring reports of dramatic developments such as the delivery of surface-to-air missiles, to give these reports credibility," he said. "But most of them are simply fabricated."

The retired US officer said some NDS officials "wanted to create the impression that Pakistani complicity was a threat to the US". And more broadly speaking, "there's an Afghan prejudice that wants to see an ISI agent under every rock".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Afghans React to Leaks With Jubilation

By Maria Abi-Habib

The mood among Afghans over leaked U.S. documents outlining Pakistan’s collaboration with the Taliban wasn’t one of surprise Monday but jubilation.

For many Afghans, it was an “I told you so” moment after lawmakers have to Pakistan for nearly a decade as a main source of support for the Taliban.

But what Afghan President Hamid Karzai does with this moment is what matters most, say parliamentarian Shukria Barakzai and Gen. Zahir Azimi, the spokesman for the defense ministry. “This is a golden opportunity for Karzai. He can now say ‘we told you all along’ to NATO and demand more support and funding,” Mrs. Barakzai says.

Mr. Karzai’s faith in the U.S.-led war here is wavering and his confrontational approach to Pakistan has been ditched for softer words of late. Afghan officials say Mr. Karzai is trying to forge a better relationship with Pakistan, worried about coalition forces withdrawing from Afghanistan while the Taliban insurgency strengthens.

But the leaked documents, which show the U.S. is aware of Pakistan’s support to the Taliban, may see Mr. Karzai return to his hard-line approach by bolstering his past claims of Pakistani interference, lawmakers say.

The documents, lawmakers and cabinet ministers hope, will also publicly embarrass the U.S. and force them to take a tougher approach with Pakistan after donating billions of dollars in exchange for Pakistan’s help in the war on terror.

“Everyone here knows that a lot of U.S. aid money for Pakistan to build schools or hospitals never gets delivered, but goes to work against the U.S. in Afghanistan,” Mrs. Barakzai said.

Afghans React to U.S. Document Leaks With Jubilation - Dispatch - WSJ

Not very surprising in the light of this comment:

The retired US officer said some NDS officials "wanted to create the impression that Pakistani complicity was a threat to the US". And more broadly speaking, "there's an Afghan prejudice that wants to see an ISI agent under every rock".

 

[Jet Li]

The point is not that the information is not authentic because 'junior officers' collected it, but because in the words of the Western media itself and US military officials quoted in the Guardian reports, the sources and claims in many of the reports could not be verified.

The following quotes are all from the Western media, primarily the NYT and Guardian the collaborated with wikileaks to expose these documents:

Much of the information — raw intelligence and threat assessments gathered from the field in Afghanistan— cannot be verified and likely comes from sources aligned with Afghan intelligence, which considers Pakistan an enemy, and paid informants. Some describe plots for attacks that do not appear to have taken place.

Experts cautioned that although Pakistan’s militant groups and Al Qaeda work together, directly linking the Pakistani spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, with Al Qaeda is difficult.

American officials have rarely uncovered definitive evidence of direct ISI involvement in a major attack.

But for all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of "rumours, bullshit and second-hand information" and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. "As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim," said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.

"The fog of war is particularly dense in Afghanistan," said Michael Semple, a former deputy head of the EU mission there. "A barrage of false information is being passed off as intelligence and anyone who wants to operate there needs to be able to sift through it. The opportunities to be misled are innumerable."

But many of the 180 reports appear to betray as much about the motivation of the sources than those of the alleged foreign puppet-masters. Some US officers were aware of this. One report from 2006 notes that an informant "divulges information for monetary remuneration and likely fabricated or exaggerated the above report for just that reason".

Some of the most striking claims come from the National Directorate of Security, Afghanistan's foremost spy agency and a bitter rival to the ISI.

But many such reports appear highly implausible. In February 2007 the ISI and insurgents planned "to buy alcoholic drinks from markets in Miranshah [in Pakistan's tribal belt] and Peshawar [in order to] mix them with poison and use them for poisoning ANSF and ISAF troops" according to a C3 report. The Karzai plot is assessed to be "probably true".

Apparently more credible reports of ISI skulduggery are marked SEWOC, or Signals Intelligence Electronic Warfare Operations Centre, signifying they come from intercepted communications. One SEWOC report, in December 2007, accused the ISI of deploying children as suicide bombers. But the military source said that such intelligence was also prone to distortion, and that its value depended on whose conversation was being eavesdropped. "If we ever found out anything that the ISI or Pakistani military were somehow complicit in the insurgency, it never came from these sources. Never," he said.

But while Gul, 73, is a well-known fundamentalist ideologue in Pakistan, experts say he is unlikely to play a frontline role in the fighting. Afghan informers may have used his name – he is notorious in Afghanistan – to spice up their stories, said Semple.

"There's a pattern of using a dramatis personae of famous ISI officers and Afghan commanders, and recurring reports of dramatic developments such as the delivery of surface-to-air missiles, to give these reports credibility," he said. "But most of them are simply fabricated."

The retired US officer said some NDS officials "wanted to create the impression that Pakistani complicity was a threat to the US". And more broadly speaking, "there's an Afghan prejudice that wants to see an ISI agent under every rock".

after posting this if indians keep on saying that why are pakistanis in denial of evidence, nothing you read is credible, you should start to issue out bans, because i have noticed they like to do these repetitive nonsensical belligerent rants in every single thread. constantly repeating over and over and over the samething while completely disregarding the revelant important facts. don't take this as me trying to censor them, consider it blocking out repetitive stupidity.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistani Officials: WikiLeaks Claims "Outrageous"​

Posted by Farhan Bokhari

Pakistan's government and its powerful counter-espionage agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), on Monday rebuffed claims contained in leaked U.S. intelligence reports alleging close ties between the ISI and Taliban militants fighting Western forces in Afghanistan.

However, the reports released by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks.org raised concerns in the Pakistani capital over new strains surrounding the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, almost a decade after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington brought the two countries into a close military alliance.

Relations between the two countries have periodically come under stress, mainly over American concerns that Pakistan's security establishment continues to retain ties with Islamic militant factions in Afghanistan while it supports the U.S. effort in that country.

"The ISI completely follows the government's policy, and therefore to expect it to work on its own does not make any sense," Farahnaz Ispahani, an advisor to President Asif Ali Zardari, told CBS News. "We have an alliance with the U.S. and other partners, and we are working in the best interest of our region. People must appreciate the sacrifices that Pakistan has made and continues to make.

"Do you seriously believe we will be irresponsible enough to have any links with those who have killed our own people?" Ispahani said.

Senior Pakistani officials and the country's leaders have defended their record in the past by citing the sacrifices made by Pakistan in terms of human lives and material loss.

Pakistan has witnessed a dramatic rise in suicide and armed attacks since 2007.

An ISI official who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity, said that the reports released by WikiLeaks "are all preliminary reports which in our line of work are often presented but not necessarily ever taken as the fact."

The ISI official, in the rare gesture of agreeing to attribute his agency (though anonymously), said the preliminary reports contain "outrageous claims" that are "far out from the reality."


Western defense officials in Islamabad who also spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity described the revelations as a serious setback to intense efforts being made by the U.S. and Pakistan to forge a close partnership for securing Afghanistan.

"The U.S. has been aware of Pakistan's links with the Taliban and other militant groups. But the Americans have been carefully trying to woo Pakistan away from these contacts," said one Western defense official. "Now, that effort becomes hugely difficult."

"This is a major public relations disaster," said a second Western defense official, who added, "Some of the contents of this report even tell you about the failing U.S. war effort in Afghanistan. How can any president in Washington ever defend a losing war effort which has so far been put across as a possible success in the end?"

In a related development, Lieutenant General (retired) Hameed Gul, the former head of the ISI who is named in the leaks as an individual who continues to coordinate some of the militants' efforts, rebutted the claims as "nothing more than fiction."

In an interview with CBS News, General Gul said, "This information contains absolutely no truth and I have no association with the activities (mentioned in the report)."

A second former ISI official with long-term experience of training Afghan insurgents with the backing of the CIA in the 1980s (who also spoke to CBS News on the condition that he not be named) said, "The claims now being put across are not new. We have heard them before, but as before, there is no evidence, no smoking gun."

He said there was a danger that "U.S. politicians may get completely carried away and look for ways to put pressure on Pakistan. But they must realize, doing so will only risk breaking the world's only alliance — and spoiling a relationship — that is confronting the Taliban and al Qaeda today."


By CBS News' Farhan Bokhari reporting from Islamabad

Pakistani Officials: WikiLeaks Claims "Outrageous" - World Watch - CBS News

 

[Devil Soul]

The point is not that the information is not authentic because 'junior officers' collected it, but because in the words of the Western media itself and US military officials quoted in the Guardian reports, the sources and claims in many of the reports could not be verified.

The following quotes are all from the Western media, primarily the NYT and Guardian the collaborated with wikileaks to expose these documents:

Much of the information — raw intelligence and threat assessments gathered from the field in Afghanistan— cannot be verified and likely comes from sources aligned with Afghan intelligence, which considers Pakistan an enemy, and paid informants. Some describe plots for attacks that do not appear to have taken place.

Experts cautioned that although Pakistan’s militant groups and Al Qaeda work together, directly linking the Pakistani spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, with Al Qaeda is difficult.

American officials have rarely uncovered definitive evidence of direct ISI involvement in a major attack.

But for all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of "rumours, bullshit and second-hand information" and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. "As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim," said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.

"The fog of war is particularly dense in Afghanistan," said Michael Semple, a former deputy head of the EU mission there. "A barrage of false information is being passed off as intelligence and anyone who wants to operate there needs to be able to sift through it. The opportunities to be misled are innumerable."

But many of the 180 reports appear to betray as much about the motivation of the sources than those of the alleged foreign puppet-masters. Some US officers were aware of this. One report from 2006 notes that an informant "divulges information for monetary remuneration and likely fabricated or exaggerated the above report for just that reason".

Some of the most striking claims come from the National Directorate of Security, Afghanistan's foremost spy agency and a bitter rival to the ISI.

But many such reports appear highly implausible. In February 2007 the ISI and insurgents planned "to buy alcoholic drinks from markets in Miranshah [in Pakistan's tribal belt] and Peshawar [in order to] mix them with poison and use them for poisoning ANSF and ISAF troops" according to a C3 report. The Karzai plot is assessed to be "probably true".

Apparently more credible reports of ISI skulduggery are marked SEWOC, or Signals Intelligence Electronic Warfare Operations Centre, signifying they come from intercepted communications. One SEWOC report, in December 2007, accused the ISI of deploying children as suicide bombers. But the military source said that such intelligence was also prone to distortion, and that its value depended on whose conversation was being eavesdropped. "If we ever found out anything that the ISI or Pakistani military were somehow complicit in the insurgency, it never came from these sources. Never," he said.

But while Gul, 73, is a well-known fundamentalist ideologue in Pakistan, experts say he is unlikely to play a frontline role in the fighting. Afghan informers may have used his name – he is notorious in Afghanistan – to spice up their stories, said Semple.

"There's a pattern of using a dramatis personae of famous ISI officers and Afghan commanders, and recurring reports of dramatic developments such as the delivery of surface-to-air missiles, to give these reports credibility," he said. "But most of them are simply fabricated."

The retired US officer said some NDS officials "wanted to create the impression that Pakistani complicity was a threat to the US". And more broadly speaking, "there's an Afghan prejudice that wants to see an ISI agent under every rock".

This policy is also followed by few others in the region, guess they r exporting it to Afghans as well

 

[GUNNER]

ISLAMABAD, July 26, 2010 (AFP) - Pakistan on Monday denounced leaked US intelligence reports accusing its premier spy agency of supporting Taliban insurgents as "skewed" and inconsistent with realities on the ground.

"These are far-fetched and skewed reports, evidently inconsistent with ground realities," Pakistan's foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Basit told AFP.

"If anything these betray the lack of understanding of the complexities involved".

"Pakistan's constructive and positive role in Afghanistan cannot be blighted by such self-serving and baseless reports," Basit added.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

An administration official went further in an e-mail to reporters: “I don’t think anyone who follows this issue will find it surprising that there are concerns about ISI and safe havens in Pakistan. In fact, we’ve said as much repeatedly and on the record. …

“The period of time covered in these documents (January 2004-December 2009) is before the President announced his new strategy. Some of the disconcerting things reported are exactly why the President ordered a three month policy review and a change in strategy.”

The official added: “t’s worth noting that WikiLeaks is not an objective news outlet but rather an organization that opposes U.S. policy in Afghanistan."

The official highlighted this passage in The Guardian’s coverage: “[F]or all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

“A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of ‘rumours, [baloney] and second-hand information’ and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. ‘As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim,’ said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

“If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.”

W.H. condemns 'irresponsible' leaks, dismisses stories - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

The highlighted part shows that even the US administration views much of these reports detailing ISI links with the Taliban with the same skepticizm that has been expressed by other Western officials quoted before.

 

[somebozo]

If you propogate a lie enought it may start sounding like a truth. So if ISI and Taliban links are echoed everywhere, they might lead to coverup of CIA actually funding and training talibans and using ISI as a middle men after american withdrawl from Afghan war.

 

[indushek]

The point is not that the information is not authentic because 'junior officers' collected it, but because in the words of the Western media itself and US military officials quoted in the Guardian reports, the sources and claims in many of the reports could not be verified.

The following quotes are all from the Western media, primarily the NYT and Guardian the collaborated with wikileaks to expose these documents:

Much of the information — raw intelligence and threat assessments gathered from the field in Afghanistan— cannot be verified and likely comes from sources aligned with Afghan intelligence, which considers Pakistan an enemy, and paid informants. Some describe plots for attacks that do not appear to have taken place.

Experts cautioned that although Pakistan’s militant groups and Al Qaeda work together, directly linking the Pakistani spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, with Al Qaeda is difficult.

American officials have rarely uncovered definitive evidence of direct ISI involvement in a major attack.

But for all their eye-popping details, the intelligence files, which are mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, fail to provide a convincing smoking gun for ISI complicity. Most of the reports are vague, filled with incongruent detail, or crudely fabricated. The same characters – famous Taliban commanders, well-known ISI officials – and scenarios repeatedly pop up. And few of the events predicted in the reports subsequently occurred.

A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of "rumours, bullshit and second-hand information" and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. "As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim," said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.

"The fog of war is particularly dense in Afghanistan," said Michael Semple, a former deputy head of the EU mission there. "A barrage of false information is being passed off as intelligence and anyone who wants to operate there needs to be able to sift through it. The opportunities to be misled are innumerable."

But many of the 180 reports appear to betray as much about the motivation of the sources than those of the alleged foreign puppet-masters. Some US officers were aware of this. One report from 2006 notes that an informant "divulges information for monetary remuneration and likely fabricated or exaggerated the above report for just that reason".

Some of the most striking claims come from the National Directorate of Security, Afghanistan's foremost spy agency and a bitter rival to the ISI.

But many such reports appear highly implausible. In February 2007 the ISI and insurgents planned "to buy alcoholic drinks from markets in Miranshah [in Pakistan's tribal belt] and Peshawar [in order to] mix them with poison and use them for poisoning ANSF and ISAF troops" according to a C3 report. The Karzai plot is assessed to be "probably true".

Apparently more credible reports of ISI skulduggery are marked SEWOC, or Signals Intelligence Electronic Warfare Operations Centre, signifying they come from intercepted communications. One SEWOC report, in December 2007, accused the ISI of deploying children as suicide bombers. But the military source said that such intelligence was also prone to distortion, and that its value depended on whose conversation was being eavesdropped. "If we ever found out anything that the ISI or Pakistani military were somehow complicit in the insurgency, it never came from these sources. Never," he said.

But while Gul, 73, is a well-known fundamentalist ideologue in Pakistan, experts say he is unlikely to play a frontline role in the fighting. Afghan informers may have used his name – he is notorious in Afghanistan – to spice up their stories, said Semple.

"There's a pattern of using a dramatis personae of famous ISI officers and Afghan commanders, and recurring reports of dramatic developments such as the delivery of surface-to-air missiles, to give these reports credibility," he said. "But most of them are simply fabricated."

The retired US officer said some NDS officials "wanted to create the impression that Pakistani complicity was a threat to the US". And more broadly speaking, "there's an Afghan prejudice that wants to see an ISI agent under every rock".

You know i have been reading about International Politics from some 10 years or so. Though i have not considered it as a subject i have gone through Newspapers and other stuff for some time before the onset of Internet or Wiki. I can assuredly say out of this reading that never does the whole truth come out and there is no nation on this earth which does not work for its own sake, because if not so it would be cheating the public.

I am not saying that by this i accuse Pakistan or anything just based on this leak. Since being from a country which is an enemy to speak truly or a rival to speak diplomatically i am prone to look at you with suspicion no matter what. However i am trying to be unbaised here.

One thing is for sure that whenever the media comes up with sensational news it surely ends up as half truth or even a lie most of the time no matter where in this world. The reason i believe this is as i said above no matter what the real truth never comes out at the right time, surely not at the particularly needed hour since the timing is very very important. As time passes on the truth looses its sheen. By your post the glaring inconsistencies are pretty evident.

So with these personal thoughts i will stop here.