Unlimited Wikileaks Shenanigans

[Adios]

Why hasn't any other news channel picked this up?

Strange indeed. I checked the Guardian, and nothing.

But the twitter feed confirms:

http://twitter.com/wikileaks

and indeed links to the BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3714864.stm

reading now.

Thanks.

[Triple Zero]

You can thank me for nothing, I guess, because that BBC article turns out to be a generic article about Belmarsh dated 2004.

... and Google News on assange+belmarsh only returns recent hits that are all Spanish language, which means they're probably all just copied from the same source. And the source most probably is just that single tweet mangled through bad reporting.

As Google News defaults to a kind of local news search, had to manually switch to UK news (since that's where it is, I suppose they'd write about it first, yeah?), and I also filtered for just the results from the past day (might wanna change that if you're reading this post after tomorrow), resulting in this query:

http://news.google.com/news/search?cf=all&ned=uk&hl=en&q=assange+belmarsh&as_qdr=d&cf=all&as_drrb=q

... which still returns only Spanish articles, and a Guardian blog-post from this sunday (despite I told Google to filter) that just happens to mention the two terms.

So, basically, yeah, nothing much is going on and if other media is going to write about it, it will be tomorrow (it was late evening in the UK when they posted that tweet).

Additionally whoever wrote that first Spanish article that everybody copied from, is an idiot. And the people that blindly copied it, even more so.

[Adios]

You can thank me for nothing, I guess, because that BBC article turns out to be a generic article about Belmarsh dated 2004.

... and Google News on assange+belmarsh only returns recent hits that are all Spanish language, which means they're probably all just copied from the same source. And the source most probably is just that single tweet mangled through bad reporting.

As Google News defaults to a kind of local news search, had to manually switch to UK news (since that's where it is, I suppose they'd write about it first, yeah?), and I also filtered for just the results from the past day (might wanna change that if you're reading this post after tomorrow), resulting in this query:

http://news.google.com/news/search?cf=all&ned=uk&hl=en&q=assange+belmarsh&as_qdr=d&cf=all&as_drrb=q

... which still returns only Spanish articles, and a Guardian blog-post from this sunday (despite I told Google to filter) that just happens to mention the two terms.

So, basically, yeah, nothing much is going on and if other media is going to write about it, it will be tomorrow (it was late evening in the UK when they posted that tweet).

Additionally whoever wrote that first Spanish article that everybody copied from, is an idiot. And the people that blindly copied it, even more so.

Now why do I suspect a connection between the article and the Daily Beast?

[The Johnny]

Through the Twitter account of Wikileaks, the site confirmed that the british justice decided to transfer the case of Assange to the court of Belmarsh, known to deal with terrorism cases.

Simple as that.

[Cainad (dec.)]

Very brief un-re-jack (apologies):

I highly recommend Columbine by Dave Cullen for a very readable, exhaustively researched account of the Columbine High School massacre. It's a story that was so poisoned and muddied by media sensationalism, panicked suburban parents, and evangelical horseshit that it took about 9 years of research for something this close to the truth to come out.

[Adios]

The White House is telling US agencies to create "insider threat" programmes to ferret out disgruntled workers who may leak state secrets, reports say.

The move follows the leaking of thousands of secret US cables to the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

An 11-page memo by US intelligence officials detailing the advice has been published by US broadcaster NBC.

Correspondents say the Obama administration is trying to prevent more embarrassing disclosures.

Agency officials are being urged to find ways to "detect behavioural changes" among those employees who might have access to secret documents.

The memo suggests the use of psychiatrists and sociologists to measure the "relative happiness" of workers or their "despondence and grumpiness" as a way to assess their trustworthiness.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12117113

Please tell me this was a leak to NBC. 

[Fujikoma]

The White House is telling US agencies to create "insider threat" programmes to ferret out disgruntled workers who may leak state secrets, reports say.

The move follows the leaking of thousands of secret US cables to the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

An 11-page memo by US intelligence officials detailing the advice has been published by US broadcaster NBC.

Correspondents say the Obama administration is trying to prevent more embarrassing disclosures.

Agency officials are being urged to find ways to "detect behavioural changes" among those employees who might have access to secret documents.

The memo suggests the use of psychiatrists and sociologists to measure the "relative happiness" of workers or their "despondence and grumpiness" as a way to assess their trustworthiness.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12117113

Please tell me this was a leak to NBC. 

Unhappiness working for the government? Never! Not with all those happy busywork forms they have you fill out every time you want to scratch your butt or pick your nose. And don't forget about the petty powermonger supervisors, sure to bring a little sunshine into anyone's day.

[Cramulus]

this one came out on Jan 1st. Pretty heavy...

This cable documents a conversation with Saddam Hussein in July 1990, about a month before the US began the Persian Gulf War.


http://213.251.145.96/cable/1990/07/90BAGHDAD4237.html

SUMMARY: SADDAM TOLD THE AMBASSADOR JULY 25
THAT MUBARAK HAS ARRANGED FOR KUWAITI AND IRAQI
DELEGATIONS TO MEET IN RIYADH, AND THEN ON
JULY 28, 29 OR 30, THE KUWAITI CROWN PRINCE WILL
COME TO BAGHDAD FOR SERIOUS NEGOTIATIONS. "NOTHING
WILL HAPPEN" BEFORE THEN, SADDAM HAD PROMISED
MUBARAK.

--SADDAM WISHED TO CONVEY AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO
PRESIDENT BUSH: IRAQ WANTS FRIENDSHIP, BUT DOES
THE USG? IRAQ SUFFERED 100,000'S OF CASUALTIES
AND IS NOW SO POOR THAT WAR ORPHAN PENSIONS WILL
SOON BE CUT; YET RICH KUWAIT WILL NOT EVEN ACCEPT
OPEC DISCIPLINE. IRAQ IS SICK OF WAR, BUT KUWAIT
HAS IGNORED DIPLOMACY. USG MANEUVERS WITH THE UAE
WILL ENCOURAGE THE UAE AND KUWAIT TO IGNORE
CONVENTIONAL DIPLOMACY. IF IRAQ IS PUBLICLY
HUMILIATED BY THE USG, IT WILL HAVE NO CHOICE
BUT TO "RESPOND," HOWEVER ILLOGICAL AND SELF
DESTRUCTIVE THAT WOULD PROVE.

--ALTHOUGH NOT QUITE EXPLICIT, SADDAM'S MESSAGE
TO US SEEMED TO BE THAT HE WILL MAKE A MAJOR PUSH
TO COOPERATE WITH MUBARAK'S DIPLOMACY, BUT WE MUST
TRY TO UNDERSTAND KUWAITI/UAE "SELFISHNESS" IS
UNBEARABLE. AMBASSADOR MADE CLEAR THAT WE CAN
NEVER EXCUSE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES BY OTHER THAN
PEACEFUL MEANS. END SUMMARY.





some notable excerpts:


SADDAM, WHOSE MANNER WAS CORDIAL,
REASONABLE AND EVEN WARM THROUGHOUT THE ENSUING
TWO HOURS, SAID HE WISHED THE AMBASSADOR TO
CONVEY A MESSAGE TO PRESIDENT BUSH. SADDAM
THEN RECALLED IN DETAIL THE HISTORY OF IRAQ'S
DECISION TO REESTABLISH DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS
AND ITS POSTPONING IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT
DECISION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR, RATHER THAN BE
THOUGHT WEAK AND NEEDY. HE THEN SPOKE ABOUT THE
MANY "BLOWS" OUR RELATIONS HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO
SINCE 1984, CHIEF AMONG THEM IRANGATE. IT WAS
AFTER THE FAW VICTORY, SADDAM SAID, THAT IRAQI
MISAPPREHENSIONS ABOUT USG PURPOSES BEGAN TO
SURFACE AGAIN, I.E., SUSPICIONS THAT THE U.S. WAS
NOT HAPPY TO SEE THE WAR END.

¶5. PICKING HIS WORDS WITH CARE, SADDAM SAID
THAT THERE ARE "SOME CIRCLES" IN THE USG,
INCLUDING IN CIA AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT,
BUT EMPHATICALLY EXCLUDING THE PRESIDENT AND
SECRETARY BAKER, WHO ARE NOT FRIENDLY TOWARD
IRAQ-U.S. RELATIONS. HE THEN LISTED WHAT HE
SEEMED TO REGARD AS FACTS TO SUPPORT THIS
CONCLUSION: "SOME CIRCLES ARE GATHERING
INFORMATION ON WHO MIGHT BE SADDAM HUSAYN'S
SUCCESSOR;" THEY KEPT UP CONTACTS IN THE GULF
WARNING AGAINST IRAQ; THEY WORKED TO ENSURE
NO HELP WOULD GO TO IRAQ (READ EXIM AND CCC).







¶8. DESPITE ALL THESE BLOWS, SADDAM SAID, AND
ALTHOUGH "WE WERE SOMEWHAT ANNOYED," WE STILL
HOPED THAT WE COULD DEVELOP A GOOD RELATIONSHIP.
BUT THOSE WHO FORCE OIL PRICES DOWN ARE ENGAGING
IN ECONOMIC WARFARE AND IRAQ CANNOT ACCEPT SUCH
A TRESPASS ON ITS DIGNITY AND PROSPERITY.





¶12. SADDAM SAID HE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE USG IS
DETERMINED TO KEEP THE OIL FLOWING AND TO
MAINTAIN ITS FRIENDSHIPS IN THE GULF. WHAT HE
CANNOT UNDERSTAND IS WHY WE ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO
ARE DAMAGING IRAQ, WHICH IS WHAT OUR GULF MANEUVERS
WILL DO.

¶13. SADDAM SAID HE FULLY BELIEVES THE USG WANTS
PEACE, AND THAT IS GOOD. BUT DO NOT, HE ASKED,
USE METHODS WHICH YOU SAY YOU DO NOT LIKE,
METHODS LIKE ARM-TWISTING-

¶14. AT THIS POINT SADDAM SPOKE AT LENGTH ABOUT
PRIDE OF IRAQIS, WHO BELIEVE IN "LIBERTY OR DEATH."
IRAQ WILL HAVE TO RESPOND IF THE U.S. USES THESE
METHODS. IRAQ KNOWS THE USG CAN SEND PLANES AND
ROCKETS AND HURT IRAQ DEEPLY. SADDAM ASKS THAT
THE USG NOT FORCE IRAQ TO THE POINT OF HUMILIATION
AT WHICH LOGIC MUST BE DISREGARDED. IRAQ DOES NOT
CONSIDER THE U.S. AN ENEMY AND HAS TRIED TO BE
FRIENDS.





¶24. AMBASSADOR SAID THERE WERE MANY ISSUES HE
HAD RAISED SHE WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON, BUT
SHE WISHED TO USE HER LIMITED TIME WITH THE
PRESIDENT TO STRESS FIRST PRESIDENT BUSH'S DESIRE
FOR FRIENDSHIP AND, SECOND, HIS STRONG DESIRE, SHARED
WE ASSUME BY IRAQ, FOR PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE MID
EAST. IS IT NOT REASONABLE FOR US TO BE CONCERNED
WHEN THE PRESIDENT AND THE FOREIGN MINISTER BOTH
SAY PUBLICLY THAT KUWAITI ACTIONS ARE THE
EQUIVALENT OF MILITARY AGGRESSION, AND THEN WE
LEARN THAT MANY UNITS OF THE REPUBLICAN GUARD
HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE BORDER? IS IT NOT REASONABLE
FOR US TO ASK, IN THE SPIRIT OF FRIENDSHIP, NOT
CONFRONTATION, THE SIMPLE QUESTION: WHAT ARE YOUR
INTENTIONS?

¶25. SADDAM SAID THAT WAS INDEED A REASONABLE
QUESTION. HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT WE SHOULD BE
CONCERNED FOR REGIONAL PEACE, IN FACT IT IS OUR
DUTY AS A SUPERPOWER. "BUT HOW CAN WE MAKE THEM
(KUWAIT AND UAE) UNDERSTAND HOW DEEPLY WE ARE
SUFFERING." THE FINANCIAL SITUATION IS SUCH THAT
THE PENSIONS FOR WIDOWS AND ORPHANS WILL HAVE
TO BE CUT. AT THIS POINT, THE INTERPRETER AND
ONE OF THE NOTETAKERS BROKE DOWN AND WEPT.

[Cramulus]

check this one out: http://213.251.145.96/cable/2010/02/10BAKU98.html

He who Got Slapped
------------------

¶2. (S) According to source, President Ahmedinejad surprised
other SNSC members by taking a surprisingly liberal posture
during a mid January post-Ashura meeting of the SNSC called
to discuss next steps on dealing with opposition protests.
Source said that Ahmedinejad claimed that "people feel
suffocated," and mused that to defuse the situation it may be
necessary to allow more personal and social freedoms,
including more freedom of the press.

¶3. (S) According to source, Ahmedinejad's statements
infuriated Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali
Jafari, who exclaimed "You are wrong! (In fact) it is YOU
who created this mess! And now you say give more freedom to
the press?!" Source said that Jafarli then slapped
Ahmedinejad in the face, causing an uproar and an immediate
call for a break in the meeting, which was never resumed.
Source said that SNSC did not meet again for another two
weeks, after Ayatollah Janati succesfully acted as a
"peacemaker" between Jafarli and Ahmedinejad. Source added
that the break in the SNSC meeting, but not the slap that
caused it, has made its way on to some Iranian blogs.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The White House is telling US agencies to create "insider threat" programmes to ferret out disgruntled workers who may leak state secrets, reports say.

They're gonna create more leaks than they'll know what to do with.

RAW was right, sonofabitch.   

[Adios]

The White House is telling US agencies to create "insider threat" programmes to ferret out disgruntled workers who may leak state secrets, reports say.

They're gonna create more leaks than they'll know what to do with.

RAW was right, sonofabitch.   

Drugs = clarity?

[Epimetheus]

The White House is telling US agencies to create "insider threat" programmes to ferret out disgruntled workers who may leak state secrets, reports say.

Ofuck.


I LOVE BIG BROTHER

[Cain]

http://feeds.salon.com/~r/salon/greenwald/~3/yqnkf5-uzbM/twitter

Last night, Birgitta Jónsdóttir -- a former WikiLeaks volunteer and current member of the Icelandic Parliament -- announced (on Twitter) that she had been notified by Twitter that the DOJ had served a Subpoena demanding information "about all my tweets and more since November 1st 2009."  Several news outlets, including The Guardian, wrote about Jónsdóttir's announcement.   

What hasn't been reported is that the Subpoena served on Twitter -- which is actually an Order from a federal court that the DOJ requested -- seeks the same information for numerous other individuals currently or formerly associated with WikiLeaks, including Jacob Appelbaum, Rop Gonggrijp, and Julian Assange.  It also seeks the same information for Bradley Manning and for WikiLeaks' Twitter account.

The information demanded by the DOJ is sweeping in scope.  It includes all mailing addresses and billing information known for the user, all connection records and session times, all IP addresses used to access Twitter, all known email accounts, as well as the "means and source of payment," including banking records and credit cards.  It seeks all of that information for the period beginning November 1, 2009, through the present.  A copy of the Order served on Twitter is here.

The Order was signed by a federal Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, Theresa Buchanan, and served on Twitter by the DOJ division for that district.  It states that there is "reasonable ground to believe that the records or other information sought are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation," the language required by the relevant statute.  It was issued on December 14 and ordered sealed -- i.e., kept secret from the targets of the Order.  It gave Twitter three days to respond and barred the company from notifying anyone, including the users, of the existence of the Order.  On January 5, the same judge directed that the Order be unsealed at Twitter's request in order to inform the users and give them 10 days to object; had Twitter not so requested, it would have been compelled to turn over this information without the knowledge of its users.  A copy of the unsealing order is here.

Jónsdóttir told me that as "a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee [of Iceland's Parliament] and the NATO parliamentary assembly," she intends to "call for a meeting at the Committee early next week and ask for the ambassador to meet" her to protest the DOJ's subpoena for her records.  The other individuals named in the subpoena were unwilling to publicly comment until speaking with their lawyer. 

I'll have much more on the implications of this tomorrow.  Suffice to say, this is a serious escalation of the DOJ's efforts to probe, harass and intimidate anyone having to do with WikiLeaks.  Previously, Appelbaum as well as Bradley Manning supporter David House -- both American citizens -- had their laptops and other electronic equipment seized at the border by Homeland Security agents when attempting to re-enter the U.S.



UPDATE:  Three other points:  first, the three named producers of the "Collateral Murder" video -- depicting and commenting on the U.S. Apache helicopter attack on journalists and civilians in Baghdad -- were Assange, Jónsdóttir, and Gonggrijp (whose name is misspelled in the DOJ's documents).  Since Gonggrijp has had no connection to WikiLeaks for several months and Jónsdóttir's association has diminished substantially over time, it seems clear that they were selected due to their involvement in the release of that film.  Second, the unsealing order does not name either Assange or Manning, which means either that Twitter did not request permission to notify them of the Subpoena or that they did request it but the court denied it (then again, neither "Julian Assange" nor "Bradley Manning" are names of Twitter accounts, and the company has no way of knowing with certainty which accounts are theirs, so perhaps Twitter only sought an unsealing order for actual Twitter accounts named in the Order).  Finally, WikiLeaks and Assange intend to contest this Order. 



UPDATE II:  It's worth recalling -- and I hope journalists writing about this story remind themselves -- that all of this extraordinary probing and "criminal" investigating is stemming from WikiLeaks' doing nothing more than publishing classified information showing what the U.S. Government is doing:  something investigative journalists, by definition, do all the time.

And the key question now is this:  did other Internet and social network companies (Google, Facebook, etc.) receive similar Orders and then quietly comply?  It's difficult to imagine why the DOJ would want information only from Twitter; if anything, given the limited information it has about users, Twitter would seem one of the least fruitful avenues to pursue.  But if other companies did receive and quietly comply with these orders, it will be a long time before we know, if we ever do, given the prohibition in these orders on disclosing even its existence to anyone.

[Adios]

Let the witch hunt begin.

[the last yatto]

http://www.truth-out.org/bradley-manning-and-case-against-solitary-confinement66626

"In the Walnut Street Jail, no windows would distract the prisoners with street life; no conversation would disturb their penitence. Alone with God, they would be rehabilitated."

Hey it works for monks right 

"There was a small problem. Many of the prisoners went insane. The Walnut Street Jail was shut down in 1835."