Thursday, December 09, 2010

Wikileaks Cyberwars And Julian Assange The Truth Will Always Win & A Question Of Censorship & Attack on The Public's Right To Know

UPDATE: 2:44 PM & 4:09 PM -Dec. 9, 2010

CBC, BBC, The Guardian, The New York Times have made the Wikileaks Cables available to the public. Will the US government arrest and charge their editors and publishers for sedition or treason???

BBC release online of Wikileaks Classified Cables

At a glance: Wikileaks cables , BBC Dec. 9, 2010

The Wikileaks website has been subject to cyber attacks and has been forced to change domain names and use mirror sites. For consistency's sake, in some cases we have linked to the organisation's partner newspapers where the cables have also been published.

Wikileaks Cables at Guardian. UK

The New York Times Releases Cables provided by Wikileaks

also see Cables released at CBC online

UPDATE: 2:44 PM & 4:09 PM -Dec. 9, 2010

Lets begin with a funny bit on Wikipedia anime version

Wikiweaks Keeps Publishing After Arrest

Julian Assange defends Wikileaks release of classified documents as a means to strengthen democracy . He is possibly naive enough to actually believe that governments actually believe in their citizens right to know or that the publics rights are sacrosanct.
They claim to be public servants but they serve inorder to protect their own interests and that of other members of the elite or Hoi Poloi - ie the rich & their quislings.
Most elected officials have their own personal agendas and believe that their rights and privileges come before that of the public ie the unwashed masses, the plebs, peons, serfs etc. politicians, bureaucrats, the rich and powerful and other elites

The Truth Will Always Win by Julian Assange at The Australianvia Dec. 7, 2010

In 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide's The News, wrote: "In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win."

His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch's expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.

I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.

These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia, was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.

WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?

Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.

People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.

If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.

WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain ‘s The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.

Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be "taken out" by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.

And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.

We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn't want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.

Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.

Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: "You'll risk lives! National security! You'll endanger troops!" Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can't be both. Which is it?

It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US , with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.

US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan. NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn't find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.

But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:

The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran ‘s nuclear program stopped by any means available.

Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".

Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.

The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay . Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.

In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.

Wikileaks and The Institute For Public Accuracy

Wikileaks Cyberwar and Hackers Anonymous payback project

The Young Turks -TYT
Glenn Beck & Bill O'Reilly argue that Wikileaks & Julian Assange connected to George Soros, the White House and Al Qaeda .
Glenn Beck & Fox News promulgate lies , rumors, propaganda attacking Julian Assange and Wikileaks as part of the Al Qaeda operation to destroy America and bring down Western Civilization.
Their contentious argument can be used to rationalize why the War on Terror is a disastrous failure. It is a failure because there are those in power in America and other Western Nations who are undermining the American and the West's War on Terror.

Democracy Now! Obama administration attacks Wikileaks for telling the truth
Obama hates whistleblowers and anyone in government who doesn't just follow orders- and may have some integrity. Or believe their first duty is to the nation and the people.

Daniel Ellsberg who released the US classified Pentagon Papers in 1971 supports Julian Assange and Wikileaks

and articles of interest see:

I Am Julian Assange by James Moore at Huffington Post Dec. 7, 2010

I am Julian Assange.

I want information so that I can hold my government accountable. If my country acts improperly and in my name, I want the proof. I want to know if there actually is no evidence proving weapons of mass destruction. I want to know if America is working with Israel to overthrow Iran's leadership. I want data that has not been spun by reporters that work for publishers and broadcasters with political and business goals that conflict with the facts. I want to know.

I am Julian Assange because I know unfettered information is valuable to democracy and a peaceful world. I can make the best decisions with the most knowledge. I can vote for the best candidates. I can support the smartest policies to help my country and the world. I am not naïve; I know that not every operation can be transparent but I have a right to know its outcome and how it has affected my country and me.

I do not believe Julian Assange has done anything wrong. The cables that have been published have all been printed in newspapers and redacted to protect individuals at risk. I do not want my country to prosecute a man whose actions are changing the way we get information and how we make critical decisions. I now know that my president and my country's military have not been honest about the war in Afghanistan. I know that my country has killed civilians and that we have refused to acknowledge our mistakes. I have learned that our allies are secretly consorting with our enemies.

I am also Pfc. Bradley Manning. I know that if I saw the disturbing information come across my desk that I would have confronted the conflict between my oath of service to my country and the immorality of its behavior. I do not believe I would have been able to ignore American helicopters gunning down journalists carrying cameras. I believe I would have acted on my conscience and found a way to reveal the facts. There was a reporter at the My Lai massacre in Vietnam but there was only a gun camera on the US helicopter in Iraq. And the Internet. And Bradley Manning.

I believe that governments are out of control and citizens have a decreasing belief that they can influence decisions. WikiLeaks and the Internet are empowering individuals and groups with information. Julian Assange and Bradley Manning are the first two faces and voices in a crowd that will soon be too big to control. Their arrests and charges and even prosecution will only spawn a broader resistance against war and deception and corruption. The Internet is now the reporter. This is the way the world is. I do not want to hear that there will always be wars and spying and death. I want information to prevent them and to build peace

Governments and the Mainstream Media around the globe have revved up their propaganda machinery to attack Julian Assange and Wikileaks. As Glenn Greenwald illustrates is that the media is taking part in this ongoing attack on Wikileaks by accepting disinformation as factual for instance that Wikileaks irresponsibly released over 260,000 classified cables when in fact it only released 960 vetted/redacted cables.

Anti-WikiLeaks lies and propaganda - from TNR, Lauer, Feinstein and more
By Glenn Greenwald, Dec. 7, 2010

In The New Republic today, Todd Gitlin writes an entire anti-WikiLeaks column that is based on an absolute factual falsehood. Anyone listening to most media accounts would believe that WikiLeaks has indiscriminately published all 250,000 of the diplomatic cables it possesses, and Gitlin -- in the course of denouncing Julian Assange -- bolsters this falsehood: "Wikileaks’s huge data dump, including the names of agents and recent diplomatic cables, is indiscriminate" and Assange is "fighting for a world of total transparency."

The reality is the exact opposite -- literally -- of what Gitlin told TNR readers. WikiLeaks has posted to its website only 960 of the 251,297 diplomatic cables it has. Almost every one of these cables was first published by one of its newspaper partners which are disclosing them (The Guardian, the NYT, El Pais, Le Monde, Der Speigel, etc.). Moreover, the cables posted by WikiLeaks were not only first published by these newspapers, but contain the redactions applied by those papers to protect innocent people and otherwise minimize harm. Here is an AP article from yesterday detailing this process:

[T]he group is releasing only a trickle of documents at a time from a trove of a quarter-million, and only after considering advice from five news organizations with which it chose to share all of the material.

"They are releasing the documents we selected," Le Monde's managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann, said in an interview at the newspaper's Paris headquarters. . . .

"The cables we have release correspond to stories released by our main stream media partners and ourselves. They have been redacted by the journalists working on the stories, as these people must know the material well in order to write about it," WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in a question-and-answer session on The Guardian's website Friday.

Just as they did prior to releasing the Afghanistan war documents, WikiLeaks -- according to AP -- "appealed to the U.S. ambassador in London, asking the U.S. government to confidentially help him determine what needed to be redacted from the cables before they were publicly released." Although the U.S. -- again -- refused to give such guidance, WikiLeaks worked closely with these media outlets to ensure that any material which has no valid public interest value and could harm innocent people was withheld. And Assange's frequent commitments to engage in "harm minimization" when releasing documents gives the lie to Gitlin's assertion that he is "fighting for a world of total transparency."

I understand that the media has repeated over and over the false claim that WikiLeaks "dumped" all 250,000 diplomatic cables on the Internet -- which is presumably how this falsehood made its way into Gitlin's brain and then into his column -- but that's no excuse for him and TNR editors failing to undertake the most minimal due diligence (such as, say, checking WikiLeaks' website) before publishing this claim. I've emailed Gitlin and TNR Editor-in-Chief Franklin Foer early this morning and advised them of the need for a correction, but have heard nothing. I will post any reply I get. They're entitled to condemn WikiLeaks all they want, but not to propagate this factual falsehood.

War on WikiLeaks and Assange: 6 Ways the Whistleblower Is Being Attacked and Suppressed by Tana ganeva via Alternet, Dec. 8, 2010

"WikiLeaks has faced non-stop attacks by government officials. Both internet and financial companies are cutting off services. Here's a round-up of efforts to suppress the site.

1. Financial companies block services
2. Political threats against Assange and WikiLeaks
3. Political threats against Americans reading the documents
4. Government Pressure on Private Companies
5. Internet Companies Cutting off Service
6. Attacks of Media Stupidity..."

The US government is upset that Cables released by Wikileaks shows that supporting dictators is part of US policies.

Cables Reveal Background of Pro-Dictator U.S. Policy Via, Dec. 8, 2010

by Ted Rall

".NEW YORK--After the Soviet collapse in 1991 U.S. policy toward Central Asia was transparently cynical: support the dictators, screw the people.

As the U.S. stood by and watched, corrupt autocrats looted the former Soviet republics of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. Dissidents were jailed, massacred--even boiled.

Well, actually, the U.S. was anything but passive. They negotiated deals for oil and gas pipelines. They rented airbases after 9/11. They poured in tens of millions of American tax dollars--all of which wound up in secret bank accounts belonging to the dictators and their families. Meanwhile, average citizens lived in abject poverty.

During trips to Central Asia the locals constantly ask me: "Why doesn't America stop supporting [insert name of corrupt dictator here] so we can kill him and free ourselves?"

Poor, naïve people. They believe our rhetoric. They think we like democracy. Actually, we're all about the looting. Dictators are easier to deal with than parliaments. One handshake and a kickback, that's all you need with a dictator.

Central Asia only had one democratically elected president, Askar Akayev of Kyrgyzstan. George W. Bush ordered the CIA to depose him in a coup.

Americans who care about human rights have long wondered: Is the State Department stupid and/or naïve? Or did the diplomats in Tashkent and other capitals of unspeakable misery understand the brutal and vile nature of Central Asia's authoritarian leaders?

An examination of the WikiLeaks data dump answers that question: Yes.

Hell yes"


CBC links to stories regarding Wikileaks classified documents and cables released:


Main page
News, video, analysis and more
FAQ: What is WikiLeaks?
PROFILE: Julian Assange: the man behind WikiLeaks

November 2010: U.S. diplomatic cables

Database: Text of Canadian cables in WikiLeaks
Full-text search of the cables released by WikiLeaks marked "Canada"
Database: Unreleased Canadian cables in WikiLeaks
Search of the dates, origin and tags of unreleased cables from the U.S. embassy and consulates in Canada
Database: Search WikiLeaks cable data
Search of the dates and origins of unreleased cables from Washington and U.S. embassies and consulates around the world
Brian Stewart: Who will trust Washington ever again?
Greg Weston: Why was Crosbie's memo leaked, really?
Don Pittis: WikiLeaks and the value of knowing what's really been said
WikiLeaks Watch: What's being said in Canadian political circles
Media analysis: What the world press is saying
Photos: World leaders, and what the leaks say about them


WikiLeaks payment firm to sue Visa, MasterCard
Visa, MasterCard targeted by WikiLeaks allies
WikiLeaks 'fearlessly' publishing facts: Assange
WikiLeaks boss Assange denied bail
Visa suspends payments to WikiLeaks
WikiLeaks boss Assange surrenders to U.K. police
WikiLeaks lists Canadian sites vital to U.S.
WikiLeaks's Assange to meet police: lawyer
Flanagan comments probed by Calgary police
EU doubts Afghanistan success: WikiLeaks files
Key Chinese official targeted Google: WikiLeaks
WikiLeaks founder calls for Flanagan charge
WikiLeaks data can spread without site: founder
WikiLeaks founder Assange loses Swedish appeal
Canada-Afghan relations safe: Afghan envoy
Canada shouldn't sweat WikiLeaks: ex-envoy
Ambassador: More care needed with info sharing
Flanagan regrets WikiLeaks assassination remark
France wanted 'assistance' on Khadr: WikiLeaks
CBC pushes 'anti-American melodrama': WikiLeaks
U.S. to tighten security after document leaks
Amazon pulls WikiLeaks after U.S. pressure
WikiLeaks 'hacktivist' boasts of attack
PM's troubles snagged D-Day invite: WikiLeaks
Clinton does WikiLeaks damage control in Asia
Turkish foreign minister 'dangerous': WikiLeaks
China frustrated with North Korea: WikiLeaks
WikiLeaks faces cyber-attack
CSIS ex-chief slams courts, Canadians: WikiLeaks
U.S. regrets leak of documents: Clinton
WikiLeaks reveals undiplomatic U.S. critiques
Release prompts criminal investigation
Release endangers lives: U.S.
U.S. warns Ottawa of WikiLeaks release

July 2010: Afghan war logs

Canada in the War Logs: Search for Canadian references
Media roundup: What was said about the Afghan war documents leak
Military rejects WikiLeaks friendly fire report

Read more:

And so it goes,

No comments: