Wikileaks documenten #19: Langzaam het nieuwe jaar in

quote:

The US fears that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest crude oil exporter, may not have enough reserves to prevent oil prices escalating, confidential cables from its embassy in Riyadh show.

The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels – nearly 40%.

The revelation comes as the oil price has soared in recent weeks to more than $100 a barrel on global demand and tensions in the Middle East. Many analysts expect that the Saudis and their Opec cartel partners would pump more oil if rising prices threatened to choke off demand.

However, Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, met the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached.

According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then – possibly as early as 2012 – global oil production would have hit its highest point. This crunch point is known as "peak oil".

Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap.

One cable said: "According to al-Husseini, the crux of the issue is twofold. First, it is possible that Saudi reserves are not as bountiful as sometimes described, and the timeline for their production not as unrestrained as Aramco and energy optimists would like to portray."

It went on: "In a presentation, Abdallah al-Saif, current Aramco senior vice-president for exploration, reported that Aramco has 716bn barrels of total reserves, of which 51% are recoverable, and that in 20 years Aramco will have 900bn barrels of reserves.

"Al-Husseini disagrees with this analysis, believing Aramco's reserves are overstated by as much as 300bn barrels. In his view once 50% of original proven reserves has been reached … a steady output in decline will ensue and no amount of effort will be able to stop it. He believes that what will result is a plateau in total output that will last approximately 15 years followed by decreasing output."

The US consul then told Washington: "While al-Husseini fundamentally contradicts the Aramco company line, he is no doomsday theorist. His pedigree, experience and outlook demand that his predictions be thoughtfully considered."

Seven months later, the US embassy in Riyadh went further in two more cables. "Our mission now questions how much the Saudis can now substantively influence the crude markets over the long term. Clearly they can drive prices up, but we question whether they any longer have the power to drive prices down for a prolonged period."

A fourth cable, in October 2009, claimed that escalating electricity demand by Saudi Arabia may further constrain Saudi oil exports. "Demand [for electricity] is expected to grow 10% a year over the next decade as a result of population and economic growth. As a result it will need to double its generation capacity to 68,000MW in 2018," it said.

It also reported major project delays and accidents as "evidence that the Saudi Aramco is having to run harder to stay in place – to replace the decline in existing production." While fears of premature "peak oil" and Saudi production problems had been expressed before, no US official has come close to saying this in public.

In the last two years, other senior energy analysts have backed Husseini. Fatih Birol, chief economist to the International Energy Agency, told the Guardian last year that conventional crude output could plateau in 2020, a development that was "not good news" for a world still heavily dependent on petroleum.

Jeremy Leggett, convenor of the UK Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security, said: "We are asleep at the wheel here: choosing to ignore a threat to the global economy that is quite as bad as the credit crunch, quite possibly worse."

quote:

Recently released U.S. embassy cables paint a portrait of an Egyptian military led by a sycophantic defense minster with little interest in economic or political reform. In recent weeks, that official, Mohamed Tantawi, has been on the phone regularly with U.S. military officials, who view the Egyptian army as a crucial conduit for change and continued stability.

quote:

After a tip from Crowdleaks.org, The Tech Herald has learned that HBGary Federal, as well as two other data intelligence firms, worked to develop a strategic plan of attack against WikiLeaks. The plan included pressing a journalist in order to disrupt his support of the organization, cyber attacks, disinformation, and other potential proactive tactics.

The tip from Crowdleaks.org is directly related to the highly public attack on HBGary, after Anonymous responded to research performed by HBGary Federal COO, Aaron Barr. Part of Anonymous’ response included releasing more than 50,000 internal emails to the public. For more information, the initial coverage is here.

What was pointed out by Crowdleaks is a proposal titled “The WikiLeaks Threat” and an email chain between three data intelligence firms. The proposal was quickly developed by Palantir Technologies, HBGary Federal, and Berico Technologies, after a request from Hunton and Williams, a law firm that currently counts Bank of America as a client.

The law firm had a meeting with Bank of America on December 3. To prepare, the firm emailed Palantir and the others asking for “…five to six slides on Wikileaks - who they are, how they operate and how this group may help this bank.”

Hunton and Williams were recommended to Bank of America’s general council by the Department of Justice, according to the email chain viewed by The Tech Herald. The law firm was using the meeting to pitch Bank of America on retaining them for an internal investigation surrounding WikiLeaks.

“They basically want to sue them to put an injunction on releasing any data,” an email between the three data intelligence firms said. “They want to present to the bank a team capable of doing a comprehensive investigation into the data leak.”

Hunton and Williams would act as outside council on retainer, while Palantir would take care of network and insider threat investigations. For their part, Berico Technologies and HBGary Federal would analyze WikiLeaks.

“Apparently if they can show that WikiLeaks is hosting data in certain countries it will make prosecution easier,” the email added.

In less than 24-hours, the three analytical companies created a presentation filled with publically available information and ideas on how the firms could be “deployed” against WikiLeaks “as a unified and cohesive investigative analysis cell.”

On January 2, The New York Times wrote about a late night conference call held by Bank of America executives on November 30. The reason for the call was to deal with a statement given by WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange on November 29, where he said that he intended to “take down” a major American bank. The country’s third largest financial institution needed to get the jump on WikiLeaks, so they started scouring thousands of documents, and auditing physical assets.

Shortly after the late night conference call, the email from Hunton and Williams was sent. Booz Allen Hamilton, according to the Times, was the firm brought in to help manage the bank’s internal review.

A month after the proposal for the initial December meeting on WikiLeaks was created, email messages from HBGary Federal show plans for a meeting with Booz Allen Hamilton. The meeting was set after Barr emailed Hunton and Williams about information he was gathering on WikiLeaks and Anonymous. Later, this information would be the direct cause of Anonymous’ attack on HBGary.

On page two you will find an overview of the proposal developed by the three data intelligence firms.

quote:

The US provided officers from the Egyptian secret police with training at the FBI, despite allegations that they routinely tortured detainees and suppressed political opposition.

According to leaked diplomatic cables, the head of the Egyptian state security and investigative service (SSIS) thanked the US for “training opportunities” at the FBI academy in Quantico, Virginia. The SSIS has been repeatedly accused of using violence and brutality to help prop up the regime of President Hosni Mubarak. In April, 2009, the US ambassador in Cairo stated that “Egypt’s police and domestic security services continue to be dogged by persistent, credible allegations of abuse of detainees.

“The Interior Ministry uses SSIS to monitor and sometimes infiltrate the political opposition and civil society. SSIS suppresses political opposition through arrests, harassment and intimidation.”

In October, 2009, “credible” human rights lawyers representing alleged Hizbollah detainees provided details of the techniques employed by the SSIS. The cable states: “The lawyers told us in mid-October that they have compiled accounts from several defendants of GOE [Government of Egypt] torture by electric shocks, sleep deprivation, and stripping them naked for extended periods.

“The lawyers believe the accounts to be credible.”

A dispatch in January, 2010, states: “While the GOE and its supporters claim that police brutality is unusual, human rights lawyers believe it continues to be a pervasive, daily occurrence in prisons, police station and interior ministry state security headquarters.”

quote:

AMSTERDAM - De spanningen over een wapenwedloop tussen de Verenigde Staten en China zijn de afgelopen jaren zo hoog opgelopen dat Washington op een bepaald moment met militair ingrijpen dreigde. Dat blijkt uit nieuwe Wikileaks-documenten, waarover de Britse krant de Daily Telegraph bericht.

De sfeer tussen beide landen verslechterde toen China in januari 2007 - tot verbijstering van de VS - een eigen weersatelliet uit de ruimte schoot. De satelliet cirkelde op dat moment zijn rondjes op 830 kilometer boven de aarde. De actie voedde de vrees dat China in staat zou zijn ook Amerikaanse satellieten aan te vallen.

Woede groot
Dat de woede over de Chinese actie groot was, blijkt uit het officiële protest dat een medewerker van de toenmalig minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Condoleezza Rice naar Peking stuurde. Daarin staat: 'Een Chinese aanval op een satelliet door middel van een wapen dat gelanceerd is vanaf een ballistische raket, dreigt de ruimtesystemen te vernietigen die de Verenigde Staten en andere landen gebruiken voor de commercie en nationale veiligheid. Het vernietigen van satellieten brengt volken in gevaar.'

'Elke doelbewuste inmenging met Amerikaanse ruimtesystemen zal door de Verenigde Staten worden geïnterpreteerd als een schending van haar rechten en worden beschouwd als een esclatie van een crisis of een conflict.'

'De Verenigde Staten behouden zich het recht voor, in overeenstemming met het VN-charter en internationaal recht, zijn ruimtesystemen te verdedigen en te beschermen met een groot aantal opties, van diplomatieke tot militaire.'

Amerikaanse actie
Een jaar later, in februari 2008, schoten ook de VS een eigen satelliet uit de lucht. De Amerikanen beweren echter dat dit geen militaire oefening was, maar noodzaak omdat de satelliet kapot was en de giftige benzinetank een gevaar voor de gezondheid zou kunnen vormen. De Chinezen geloofden deze uitleg niet. Andere Wikileaks-documenten lijken aan te tonen dat deze actie wel degelijk militair van aard was.

Na deze Amerikaanse actie volgden maanden van intensieve gesprekken. De Chinezen zijn bang voor de Amerikaanse plannen om raketdefensieradars te plaatsen in Japan. De Amerikanen zouden daarmee raketten uit de lucht willen kunnen schieten, zelfs als ze zich nog boven Chinees soeverein gebied bevinden.

De laatste cable stamt uit januari 2010. Daarin staat dat de Chinezen hun anti-satelliet- en raketdefensiesystemen nog altijd uitbreiden.

quote:

WikiLeaks row intensifies as US makes 'privacy' move against Twitter

The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, praised the role of social networks such as Twitter in promoting freedom – at the same time as the US government was in court seeking to invade the privacy of Twitter users.

Lawyers for civil rights organisations appeared before a judge in Alexandria, Virginia, battling against a US government order to disclose the details of private Twitter accounts in the WikiLeaks row, including that of the Icelandic MP Birgitta Jonsdottir, below.

The move against Twitter has turned into a constitutional clash over the protection of individual rights to privacy in the digital age.

Clinton, in a speech in Washington, cited the positive role that Twitter, Facebook and other social networks played in uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. In a stirring defence of the internet, she spoke of the "freedom to connect".

The irony of the Clinton speech coming on the day of the court case was not lost on the constitutional lawyers battling against the government in Alexandria. The lawyers also cited the Tunisian and Egyptian examples. Aden Fine, who represents the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the leading civil rights groups in the country, said: "It is very alarming that the government is trying to get this information about individuals' communications. But, also, above all, they should not be able to do this in secret."

The court case, which is turning into a cause celebre in the US, centres round the release of tens of thousands of Pentagon and state department classified documents by WikiLeaks. Outraged by the leaks, the US has set up a grand jury in secret, based in Alexandria, to investigate whether grounds can be found for a criminal case against WikiLeaks' founder, Julian Assange. As part of that investigation the grand jury ordered Twitter to disclose the details of the accounts of WikiLeaks and three people said to be linked to the organisation.

The investigation also covers Bradley Manning, the US soldier who was based in Iraq and is suspected of being behind the leak. He is being held in jail in Virginia.

Clinton tried to reconcile the US administration's support for the internet as a motor for change in the Middle East, China and elsewhere with its fury over WikiLeaks. She said: "Liberty and security. Transparency and confidentiality. Freedom of expression and tolerance. There are times when these principles will raise tensions and pose challenges, but we do not have to choose among them. And we shouldn't. Together they comprise the foundation of a free and open internet."

She added that the US backed internet freedom and encouraged other countries to do the same: "Leaders worldwide have a choice to make. They can let the internet in their countries flourish, and take the risk that the freedoms it enables will lead to a greater demand for political rights. Or they can constrict the internet, choke the freedoms it naturally sustains—and risk losing all the economic and social benefits that come from a networked society."

In courtroom 500 in Alexandria, the lawyers were arguing that the government orders be declared unlawful and that they should also be made public. One of the lawyers, John Keker, told the court it was "ironic" that the case was being heard against the backdrop of the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings. He argued that if the government request was successful it would allow the government to intrude into the lives of individuals previously protected by constitutional rights. "This is something brand new," he said.

He added that Twitter, as a US company, was protected by the constitution. "The fact that some non-US citizens use Twitter does not make the constitution go away," Keker said.

Manning is almost certain to face trial in the US later this year but so far the US justice department has failed to find grounds for a criminal case against Assange, who is currently in the UK.

The court hearing broke up without any ruling by the judge.

quote:

The irony of the Clinton speech coming on the day of the court case was not lost on the constitutional lawyers battling against the government in Alexandria.

quote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/18/wikileaks-assange-extradition-sweden-australia
Australian ambassador to Sweden seeks assurances that WikiLeaks founder will be treated fairly

The Australian ambassador to Sweden has written to the country's justice minister seeking assurances that Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, would be treated justly under Swedish and international law, should he be extradited there.

Assange, an Australian citizen, is currently fighting extradition from Britain to Sweden over allegations of rape, sexual assault and sexual molestation made by two women in August last year, which he denies. He will learn within days whether his attempt to resist the European arrest warrant has been successful.

His letter to Sweden's minister for justice, Beatrice Ask, ambassador Paul Stephens writes, is to convey the Australian government's "expectation that, should Mr Assange be brought into Swedish jurisdiction, his case would proceed in accordance with due process and the provisions prescribed under Swedish law, as well as applicable European and international laws, including relevant human rights norms".

He does not state what reasons, if any, Australia might have for seeking such assurances.

Assange's lawyers argue that the conduct of the Swedish prosecutor has been "illegal and/or corrupt" in confirming his identity to the press against Swedish custom for accused sex offenders, and issuing a warrant without charge. The Swedish custom of hearing evidence in sex abuse cases in private is, they say, "a flagrant denial of justice".

They also argue that extraditing the Australian to Sweden would be a breach of his human rights, suggesting this would make more likely his onward extradition to the US, where a number of politicians have called for his imprisonment, or worse, over WikiLeaks' publication of leaked US embassy cables. Such a move would carry a "real risk" of Assange being confined in Guantánamo Bay or facing the death penalty, according to a skeleton argument released last month by his legal team.

Assange will learn his fate on Thursday, when chief magistrate Howard Riddle will deliver his judgment on the extradition warrant. The magistrate has already spoken of the strong likelihood of an appeal from one side or the other, whatever his judgment.

Earlier this month Assange, who is currently on bail in the UK, appealed to the Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard, to "bring me home". "There have been outrageous and illegal calls to have me and my staff killed, clear cases of incitement to violence," he said in a video message to supporters in Melbourne. "Yet the Australian government has condoned this behaviour by its diplomatic silence."

The Swedish justice ministry declined to comment on the Australian ambassador's letter, saying only that the judiciary is independent and the established norm is that ministers never comment on ongoing court cases.

Speaking to the Guardian earlier this month, Ask said there had been no political influence on any of the decisions taken by Swedish prosecutors in the Assange case. "Meeting the law, each one of us is worth as much as one another. That's the whole principle of justice, that the law works in the same way whoever breaks it."

The government had had no discussions with the US regarding Assange's case, she said, but she did not believe that the conduct of WikiLeaks in leaking the cables had been contrary to Swedish law. "People can have opinions about what is in the information, but Swedish regulations on freedom of speech and press are very liberal … the publisher is not liable."

quote:

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/buffett-closes-out-his-bank-of-america-stake/?scp=2&sq=hbgary&st=cse

Berkshire Hathaway, the investment company run by Warren E. Buffett, sold off its remaining five million shares of Bank of America in the fourth quarter.

quote:

Robert Charleston
San Francisco, CA
February 15th, 2011
6:47 am

I wonder if the is just in time.....is he anticipating the Wikileaks information about BofA coming out soon? With all the drama this past weekend involving HBGary, BofA and Anonymous, it is only a matter of time until BofA faces some serious public backlash. How does Buffet always stay one step ahead?

quote:

http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/03/09TRIPOLI208.html

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 TRIPOLI 000208

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR NEA/MAG, INR/NESA
E.O. 12958: DECL: 3/4/2019
TAGS: PGOV PREL KCOR ECON MARR MASS PHUM PINR LY
SUBJECT: LIBYA'S SUCCESSION MUDDLED AS THE AL-QADHAFI CHILDREN CONDUCT INTERNECINE WARFARE
REF: A) 08 TRIPOLI 564, B) 08 TRIPOLI 592, C) TRIPOLI 198, D) 08 TRIPOLI 870 , E) 08 TRIPOLI 679, F) 08 TRIPOLI 494, G) TRIPOLI 196, H) TRIPOLI 134, I) 0 8 TRIPOLI 227

CLASSIFIED BY: Gene A. Cretz, Ambassador, U.S. Embassy - Tripoli, U.S. Dept of State. REASON: 1.4 (b), (d) 1. (C) Summary: A series of events since last summer suggest that tension between various children of Muammar al-Qadhafi has increased, XXXXXXXXXXXX. Much of the tension appears to stem from resentment of Saif al-Islam's high-profile as the public face of the regime; however, deeper tension about contradictions between Saif al-Islam's proposed political-economic reforms, XXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXX also play an important role. The arrest and intimidation of a number of Saif al-Islam allies since last summer, on the one hand, and moves to circumscribe Muatassim's role in military equipment procurement, on the other, suggest that the current level of discord among al-Qadhafi's children is acute. While internecine strife is nothing new for the famously fractious al-Qadhafi family, the recent escalation of tension comes during a particularly momentous period. Amid turmoil related to the 40th anniversary of the revolution, Muammar al-Qadhafi's recent election as African Union chairman, proposed political-economic reforms and persistent rumors about al-Qadhafi's health and the absence of a viable mechanism to orchestrate a succession, the sharp rivalry between the al-Qadhafi children could play an important, if not determinative role, in whether the family is able to hold on to power after the author of the revolution exits the political scene. End summary.

XXXXXXXXXXXX

¶3. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX the arrest of Hannibal al-Qadhafi, a son of Muammar al-Qadhafi, in Geneva in mid-July (ref B subsequent) and a visit to Rome by Saadi al-Qadhafi, a son of Muammar al-Qadhafi, against his father's express wishes in early August. Hannibal and Saadi both have checkered histories of unseemly behavior and public scuffles with authorities in Europe and elsewhere. Although Muammar al-Qadhafi was reportedly fed a carefully vetted version of the events attendant to Hannibal's arrest to help minimize the perception that Hannibal was to blame, the elder al-Qadhafi was reportedly vexed that Libya, for reasons of protecting the first family's pride, had to engage in a bilateral spat with Switzerland at a time when it was trying to move ahead with negotiations for a framework agreement with the European Union. XXXXXXXXXXXX

... PROMPT AN AL-QADHAFI FAMILY MEETING

¶4. (C) The upshot of Muatassim's solicitation of funds, Hannibal's arrest and Saadi's jaunt was an al-Qadhafi family meeting in mid-August. Al-Qadhafi reportedly decided to reduce Sanussi's role as a minder for the most troublesome children (he is still a key adviser to Saif al-Islam al-Qadhafi) and to

TRIPOLI 00000208 002 OF 005

instead assign his daughter, Aisha al-Qadhafi, the task of monitoring the activities of ne'er-do-wells Saadi, Hannibal and Saif al-Arab. (Note: The latter is the least publicly know of al-Qadhafi's children; he lives in Munich, where he pursues ill-defined business interests and spends much time partying. At the meeting, Saadi reportedly criticized his father for having ignored him, and specifically cited the fact that his (Saadi's) efforts to establish an Export Free Trade Zone near the western Libyan town of Zuwara had not enjoyed the kind of support that Muatassim's activities as National Security Adviser or Saif al-Islam's high-profile efforts under the Qadhafi Development Foundation and Libya Youth Forum. As reported ref C, Muammar al-Qadhafi subsequently made an unusual visit to Zuwara last September and significant work on the development project began within a few days of his visit. Although the Zuwara Free Trade Zone is an ambitious and expensive project, XXXXXXXXXXXX

¶5. XXXXXXXXXXXX have told us that Aisha played a strong role in urging a hardline Libyan position with respect to the Swiss-Libyan contretemps over Hannibal's arrest. Separately, the Swiss Ambassador told us that Aisha's less than accurate rendering to her father of the events surrounding Hannibal's arrest and treatment by Swiss authorities helped stoke Muammar al-Qadhafi's anger, limiting the extent to which Libyan and Swiss officials could maneuver to find an acceptable compromise. The Swiss have told us that in the most recent effort between the two sides to resolve the issue in Davos, Saif had approved an agreement that had the Swiss literally bending over backwards to assuage Libyan demands. After making a phone call (to either Aisha or the leader), Saif returned somewhat chastened after several minutes to rescind the aproval. The Swiss crisis, together with other points of intra-family tension, has reportedly brought Aisha, who enjoys closer relations with Hannibal than with her other brothers, together with Hannibal, Saadi and, to a lesser extent, Saif al-Arab. Muatassim reportedly agreed with the hardline approach vis a vis the Swiss and has been closer to Aisha's end of the spectrum than to that of Saif al-Islam, who urged a more moderate approach. Muhammad al-Qadhafi (the eldest son, but by al-Qadhafis' first wife) and Khamis al-Qadhafi (fifth son by al-Qadhafi's second wife and the well-respected commander of a special forces unit that effectively serves as a regime protection unit) have remained neutral. XXXXXXXXXXXX expressed frustration XXXXXXXXXXXX that Saif al-Islam had persisted in his hard-partying, womanizing ways, a source of concern in a socially conservative country like Libya.

INCREASED TENSION BETWEEN SAIF AL-ISLAM AND MUATASSIM

¶6. (C) Against that backdrop of tension, competition between Saif al-Islam, whom most still regard as the heir-apparent, and Muatassim, whose viability as a potential alternative successor has risen since his appointment as National Security Adviser, has increased since last fall. XXXXXXXXXXXX Saif reportedly bridled at the fact that Muatassim accompanied Muammar al-Qadhafi on the latter's visit to Moscow, Minsk and Kiev last year (ref D), and played a key role in negotiating potential weapons contracts. Muatassim (who flew back early) and his older brother Muhammad greeted Muammar al-Qadhafi at the airport upon the latter's return to Tripoli; Saif, who was in town, was pointedly absent. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX It was further determined that Khamis al-Qadhafi would play a larger role in military procurement, since his Khamis Regiment (the 32nd Brigade) had demonstrated some success in procurement. Muatassim, whom the Serbian Ambassador described as "a bloody man" and "not terribly bright", XXXXXXXXXXXX

¶7. (C) Saif al-Islam's highly-publicized visit to the U.S. last November-December exacerbated tension with his siblings, particularly Muatassim, who viewed it as grandstanding. Saif al-Islam's high-profile role as the public face of the regime to the West has been a mixed blessing for him. While it has bolstered his image (he is probably the most publicly-recognized figure in Libya other than Muammar al-Qadhafi), many Libyans view him as self-aggrandizing and too eager to please foreigners at the expense of Libyans' interest. His role in the denouement of the Bulgarian nurses' case, in which he acknowledged in media interviews that the nurses had been tortured and the investigation into their alleged injection of the AIDS virus into Libyan children bungled, badly damaged his reputation. The fact that his recent visit to the U.S. came not long after his August 2008 Youth Forum address - in which he strongly criticized the existing Jamahiriya system of governance, XXXXXXXXXXXX said that most of his proposed reforms had already been achieved, and declared his intention to withdraw from political life to focus solely on civil society issues (ref E) - reportedly irritated his siblings. XXXXXXXXXXXX have suggested to us that Muatassim's desire to visit Washington this spring and his seemingly overweaning focus on having meetings with senior USG officials and signing a number of agreements are driven at least in part by a strong sense of competition with Saif al-Islam.

THE KNIVES COME OUT

¶8. (C) Recent events have fueled speculation that inter-sibling rivalries, and those of the more conservative regime elements they represent, have been increasing. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX

TRIPOLI 00000208 004 OF 005

¶9. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX

1 XXXXXXXXXXXX

¶11. (C) Comment: While internecine strife is nothing new for the famously fractious al-Qadhafi family, the recent escalation of tension between Saif al-Islam and Muatassim, Aisha, Hannibal and Saadi, comes during a particularly momentous period in the Jamahiriya's history. The 40th anniversary of the revolution on September 1, 2009, together with Muammar al-Qadhafi's recent election as Chairman of the AU (ref H), proposed political-economic reforms, consideration of a constitution, and rumored elections, have contributed to a sense that Libya is in the midst of a period of particular political turbulence. XXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXXXXX that a draft constitution had been finished and submitted to the General People's Committee (cabinet-equivalent) for approval, and that it could be submitted to the General People's Congress for ratification sometime this year. The UN Resident Representative recently told the Ambassador that Saif al-Islam had established a super-committee under the auspices of the Economic and Development Board to draw up plans to implement wealth distribution and privatization/government restructuring advocated by Muammar al-Qadhafi last March (ref I). XXXXXXXXXXXX Saif al-Islam's recent announcement of a regional organization that would publicly identify specific individuals who perpetrate human rights abuses and target them for sanctions has been interpreted by some local observers as a manifestation of his frustration with the slow pace of reforms

TRIPOLI 00000208 005 OF 005

and as a threat to conservative regime elements, many of whom personally played a part in the most serious transgressions of the late 1970's and 1980's.

¶12. (C) Comment (continued): Persistent rumors about Muammar al-Qadhafi's declining health have lent particular urgency to questions about succession scenarios, throwing into stark relief the fact that, absent a constitution, there is no legal mechanism by which to orchestrate such an endeavor and seemingly increasing the stakes for the sibling rivalry. XXXXXXXXXXXX As Libya lurches forward with the effort to balance badly needed economic reform with the appearance of some political re-structuring - all against the backdrop of looming succession issues - the sharp rivalry between the al-Qadhafi children could play an important, if not determinative role, in whether the al-Qadhafi family is able to hold on to power after Muammar al-Qadhafi exits (one way or another) the political scene. End comment. CRETZ

quote:

(CNN) -- WikiLeaks could have one foot in the online grave.

It's been months since its last major leak, and its staff members -- former and current -- say it's so thinly staffed and broke that it can't dissect a massive file a whistle-blower handed over, allegedly naming rich and influential global players guilty of tax crimes.

Founder Julian Assange, described as a megalomaniac in a tell-all book by the group's former spokesman, is facing extradition to Sweden on sex crime charges. Many observers predict he'll face extradition to the United States next.

quote:

So, if WikiLeaks wilts, what will grow in its place?

Several leak-loving sites claim to be WikiLeaks' heir apparent. Greenleaks.org and GreenLeaks are battling to become the top site for whistle-blowers with dirt on environmental issues.

WikiLeaks' ex-spokesman and Assange's former right-hand man, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, has launched OpenLeaks, a secret information catch-all.

quote:

But perhaps the most controversial incarnation of the WikiLeaks model comes from Anonymous, the hacker collective globally infamous for disrupting the websites of MasterCard, Visa and PayPal in December.

The hackers said the attacks were revenge after the companies cut ties to WikiLeaks. Since then, Anonymous has grown more sophisticated, and experts say it's reasonable to fear that they could do more than wait for someone to give them secret documents. They could hack into highly sensitive military and corporate computer systems themselves.

This month, Anonymous launched anonleaks.ru, a site that features a searchable database of what appear to be tens of thousands of internal e-mails from a U.S.-based internet security firm whose website was also defaced.

quote:

The thought of an army of prankster hackers breaking into your e-mails, credit card records or business is disturbing. But it would be a mistake to portray members of Anonymous as cackling evil-doers, Ridder and Zittrain said.

Instead, Ridder said, Anonymous is driving Web culture. "They are making a significant mark on what it means to put information online."

quote:

Julian Assange to be extradited to Sweden
24 Feb 2011: WikiLeaks founder handed verdict at Belmarsh magistrates court

quote:

San Francisco, CA – The online payment provider PayPal has frozen the account of Courage to Resist, which in collaboration with the Bradley Manning Support Network is currently raising funds in support of U.S. Army Pfc. Bradley Manning. PayPal was one way people--especially international residents--were able to contribute to the grassroots effort supporting the accused WikiLeaks whistleblower. “We’ve been in discussions with PayPal for weeks, and by their own admission there’s no legal obligation for them to close down our account,” noted Loraine Reitman of the Bradley Manning Support Network (Support Network). “This was an internal policy decision by PayPal.”

“We exchanged numerous emails and phone calls with the legal department and the office of executive escalations of PayPal,” explained Jeff Paterson. “They said they would not unrestrict our account unless we authorized PayPal to withdraw funds from our organization’s checking account by default. Our accounting does not allow for this type of direct access by a third party, nor do I trust PayPal as a business entity with this responsibility given their punitive actions against WikiLeaks—an entity not charged with any crime by any government on Earth.”

The Support Network repeatedly requested and was refused formal documentation from PayPal describing their policies in this matter.

PayPal is a private company and thus under no legal obligation to provide Courage to Resist, the Bradley Manning Support Network, or anyone else with services. This was something made very clear to the Support Network by PayPal representatives.

“They opted to apply an exceptional hurdle for us to clear in order to continue as a customer, whereas we have clearly provided the legally required information and verification. I think our dealings with PayPal should be a cautionary tale for any possibly controversial not-for-profit entity with a PayPal account,” Paterson said, “While there may be no legal obligation to provide services, there is an ethical obligation. By shutting out legitimate nonprofit activity, PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.”

quote:

https://www.wepay.com
WePay makes it easy to collect and manage money online. Unlike competitors, WePay allows users to keep their group's money in a dedicated account, and to share this account with their group. The service is great for roommates, clubs, organizations, fantasy leagues, teams, and much more. WePay was founded by Bill Clerico and Rich Aberman in Boston in 2008. The company is located in Palo Alto, CA and has 14 employees.

quote:

http://www.myce.com/news/(...)mpaign=related_posts

The United States Department of Justice’s (DOJ) handling of the Wikileaks investigation is drawing criticism not only from Anonymous, a vigilante activist group that has been fighting against censorship involving the leak of US diplomatic cables, but also from an 85 member European Parliament group known as the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.

The European politicians organized a protest on Wednesday against the DOJ’s attempt to obtain private information from Twitter about close Wikileaks supporters including Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Jacob Appelbaum, and Iceland Parliament member Birgitta Jónsdóttir. They planned to call upon the EU to request clarifications from the US government about the Twitter subpoenas.

The United States Department of Justice’s (DOJ) handling of the Wikileaks investigation is drawing criticism not only from Anonymous, a vigilante activist group that has been fighting against censorship involving the leak of US diplomatic cables, but also from an 85 member European Parliament group known as the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.

The European politicians organized a protest on Wednesday against the DOJ’s attempt to obtain private information from Twitter about close Wikileaks supporters including Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Jacob Appelbaum, and Iceland Parliament member Birgitta Jónsdóttir. They planned to call upon the EU to request clarifications from the US government about the Twitter subpoenas.

“[Our group defends] the right to offend which is an essential part of freedom of expression, and we will stand with those who come under pressure to freely express their views,” said German European Parliament Member Alexander Lambsdorff at an event back in July which hosted both Assange and Jónsdóttir.

Meanwhile, Anonymous released a new video on their blog Wednesday which announces global protests to take place on Saturday January 15th “in defense of Wikileaks and freedom of expression”. That video contained the following message:

“Beneath this mask there is an idea, and ideas are bulletproof. We believe that free speech is non-negotiable. The quality of an idea matters more than its authorship and the radical notion that information should be free. We are done waiting for someone to save us from tyranny and censorship. The internet needs champions and we will rise. We didn’t start this to destroy a cult. We took on a cult to defend free speech. Tens of thousands strong, we lie in wait as the real battle approaches. We are Anonymous, and so are you. Stand up and fight. Every city, everywhere, January 15th. Expect us.”

All of this comes as worry grows that Wikileaks’ founding member Julian Assange may face the death penalty in the US if Swedish officials are successful in extraditing Assange to their country where he faces allegations of raping two woman. Assange’s defense attorney, Mark Stephens, outlined his concerns in a 35-page legal document released on Tuesday.

“It is submitted that there is a real risk that, if extradited to Sweden, the U.S. will seek his extradition and/or illegal rendition to the USA, where there will be a real risk of him being detained at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere, in conditions which would breach Article 3 of the ECHR,” Stephens states in the document. ”Indeed, if Mr. Assange were rendered to the USA, without assurances that the death penalty would not be carried out, there is a real risk that he could be made subject to the death penalty. It is well-known that prominent figures have implied, if not stated outright, that Mr. Assange should be executed.”

Lately, I have been talking with others in my local community about Wikileaks events and how the case should be handled, and the responses have been quite mixed. Some believe that the information contained in the leaked diplomatic cables should be openly published and that the government should learn a lesson about transparency from the situation. Others believe that the cables represent stolen property and should never have see the light of day. The situation is dividing not only Americans, but citizens around the world on views of government control and freedom of expression.

My personal feelings are mixed on the matter. While I believe that the actual theft of the cables is wrong, I don’t necessarily agree with the US government’s response on the matter. Since the cables were already out, I believe that government officials should have taken the opportunity to assist Wikileaks in redacting personal information contained in the cables before they were published, rather than taking the hard stance which caused cables to be published with information intact that has put some of the people involved in grave danger. Should Assange be severely punished? Is the US treatment of PVC Bradley Manning wrong? These are questions that I’m having difficulty answering.

What are your views on the Wikileaks situation? Let your opinion be heard in the comments.

quote:

http://www.rawstory.com/r(...)st-twitter-accounts/
WASHINGTON – A US judge is to hear arguments next week about the US government's efforts to get Twitter to hand over information on the accounts of three people connected with WikiLeaks.

The hearing is scheduled to be held on February 15 in a federal court in Alexandria, Virgina, according to court documents unsealed on Tuesday.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and others have challenged the government's bid to get Twitter to turn over information about the Twitter accounts of the three WikiLeaks supporters.

The three are Icelandic parliamentarian Birgitta Jonsdottir, Jacob Appelbaum, a US computer researcher, and Rop Gonggrijp, a Dutch volunteer for WikiLeaks.

The EFF, ACLU and lawyers for the trio are seeking to overturn a court order the government obtained on December 14 requiring Twitter to provide the account information.

The court order was confidential, but a judge unsealed it allowing Twitter to notify the users and give them a chance to appeal.

"Twitter is a publication and communication service, so the information sought by the government relates to what these individuals said and where they were when they said it," EFF legal director Cindy Cohn said.

"It is especially troubling since the request seeks information about all statements made by these people, regardless of whether their speech relates to WikiLeaks," Cohn said.

Iceland's foreign ministry last month summoned the US ambassador in Reykjavik to express "serious concern" about the bid to obtain personal information about Jonsdottir, the Icelandic MP.

Jonsdottir, an early WikiLeaks supporter who distanced herself from the site a few months ago, is an active promoter of freedom of information and a member of the Icelandic parliament's foreign affairs committee.

The US Department of Justice has been pursuing a criminal investigation of WikiLeaks, which has obtained and published hundreds of thousands of secret US military reports and diplomatic cables

quote:

Julian Assange police investigator a friend of sex assault accuser

The police investigator who first interviewed two Swedish women about allegations of rape and sexual assault against Julian Assange is a friend and political associate of one of the women, a Swedish newspaper has claimed.

The female officer became friends with the woman referred to in court as Miss A through Sweden's Social Democratic party, in which both are involved, according to Expressen. The pair corresponded on the internet 16 months before the allegations were made against Assange.

Miss A commented on a Facebook update on the police officer's page as recently as 10 February, the paper said, and Miss A links to the officer's private blog from her personal page.

The paper said the officer had made anti-Assange comments on the internet.

The WikiLeaks founder is appealing against a British magistrate's decision last month to extradite him to Sweden to answer the accusations, which include an allegation of rape against another woman, Miss B. Miss A alleges Assange had sex with her without a condom, against her wishes. He has not been charged with any offence.

His legal team has argued that the Swedish judicial process is unfair and a number of those involved in the prosecution are politically motivated.

According to Expressen, Miss A and the police interrogator had internet contact in April 2009, when Miss A wrote a blog about white men "who take the right to decide what is not abusive". The officer commented that the author "puts her finger on the bottom line and speaks out", to which Miss A replied: "Hello! Thanks for the compliment. And like you say, white men must always defend the right to use abusive words. Then they of course deny that these very words are part of a system that keeps their group at the top of the social ladder."

The paper said that when another newspaper, Aftonbladet, hosted a recent webchat with Assange, the officer commented "What the heck is this! Judgment zero!" The previous day she had commented on the same page: "Way to go, Claes Borgstrom!" Borgstrom is the lawyer representing the women and a former SDP politician, who Assange's team has argued is acting from political motives.

The paper says the officer had just started her shift at Klara police station in Stockholm on 20 August when Miss A and Miss B arrived to make a complaint against Assange. It says she did not declare a conflict of interest. The police say that the officer in question did not interview Miss A and she played no further part in the investigation. On the basis of the interrogations, duty prosecutor Maria Häljebo Kjellstrand ordered Assange's arrest, a decision overturned by a more senior prosecutor. Borgstrom appealed against that decision and the case was reinstated by prosecutor Marianne Ny.Mark Stephens, Assange's lawyer, said they had been aware of the relationship, which had informed their arguments in court last month that the Swedish judicial process had been improper.

"There are a whole raft of issues like this which should cause reasonable people a bit of concern," he said. "I'm delighted that the Swedes, who objected so strongly to our criticisms of the case, have started to acknowledge that there are systemic problems in their judicial process which allow this sort of thing to happen."

Police superintendent Ulf Göranzon told Expressen he was not aware of any relationship between the two women, and would not comment on rumours.

The Swedish prosecutor's office also declined to comment, citing the ongoing extradition process in the UK.

quote:

Op vrijdag 11 maart 2011 11:54 schreef Sloggi het volgende:
Er komen niet veel nieuwe leaks bij, of wel?

quote:

Twitter must give user info in WikiLeaks probe

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) -- A federal magistrate ruled Friday that prosecutors can demand Twitter account information of certain users in their criminal probe into the disclosure of classified documents on WikiLeaks.

The prosecutors' reasons for seeking the records remain secret and it's unknown how important they are to the investigation of the largest leak ever of classified American documents.

The Twitter users argued that the government was on a fishing expedition that amounted to an unconstitutional violation of their freedoms of speech and association.

But in a ruling issued Friday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan said the government's request was reasonable and did nothing to hamper the Twitter users' free speech rights.

"The freedom of association does not shield members from cooperating with legitimate government investigations," Buchanan wrote in her 20-page opinion.

The efforts by the Twitter users marked the first legal skirmish in the Justice Department's criminal investigation of the WikiLeaks disclosures, but is unlikely to be the last. The Twitter users' lawyers, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have said they will appeal.

Cindy Cohn, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's legal director, said she was troubled by several aspects of Buchanan's ruling, including a technical ruling that the Twitter users lack legal standing to challenge the judge's order at all and a ruling that keeps much of the case under seal.

"What we don't know is who else they're trying to get information from," Cohn said.

Prosecutors have said little about their case, though Attorney General Eric Holder has said that the leaks jeopardized national security and promised to prosecute anyone who violated U.S. law.

Prosecutors submitted their rationale for seeking the Twitter accounts to Buchanan, but that submission remains secret. In her ruling Buchanan said only that she "remains convinced that the application stated 'specific and articulable' facts sufficient to issue" the order.

Steven Aftergood, who works on government secrecy policy for the Federation of American Scientists, said the government's aggressive pursuit of the Twitter accounts reflects one of two possibilities.

"Either the government is being extremely diligent in crossing every 't' and dotting every 'i'. Or the other possibility is that they have no case whatsoever and they're tallying up all conceivable leads," he said. "The information they're going to get from Twitter is indirect evidence at best."

A federal law - the Stored Communications Act - allows prosecutors to obtain certain electronic data without a search warrant or a demonstration of probable cause. Instead, the government must only show that it has a reasonable belief that the records it seeks are relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation.

Prosecutors said the law is used routinely in criminal investigations, and that the WikiLeaks investigation is no different from any other criminal probe.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, which is investigating the WikiLeaks case, declined comment after Friday's hearing.

Buchanan agreed with prosecutors, and said the Twitter users had no reason to expect that the information sought by prosecutors would be kept private. The order does not seek the content of the tweets themselves, which are already publicly disseminated. Instead, it seeks certain "non-content" information, like billing records and IP addresses associated with the accounts.

"The Twitter Order does not seek to control or direct the content of petitioners' speech or association," Buchanan wrote.

Lawyers for the Twitter users had argued that people would be less likely to speak freely if they knew that doing so could result in their being subjected to a government investigation.

Twitter issued a statement Friday saying its policy "is designed to allow users to defend their own rights. As such, Twitter will continue to let the judicial process run its course."

The original order issued by Buchanan in December 2010 at prosecutors' request sought account information from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is being held at Quantico Marine Corps Base amid allegations that he leaked classified documents about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to WikiLeaks.

Three other accounts belonging to American Jacob Appelbaum, Dutch citizen Rop Gonggrijp and Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of Iceland's parliament, were also targeted. Those three challenged the court order. Assange has contended that, as an Australian citizen, he is not subject to American law.

Buchanan also rejected a request that would have required the government to disclose whether it sought similar records from other social networking sites like Facebook.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

quote:

http://www.volkskrant.nl/(...)eaks-verdachte.dhtml

WASHINGTON - J.P. Crowley is opgestapt als woordvoerder van het Amerikaanse ministerie van buitenlandse zaken vanwege zijn opmerkingen over de behandeling van de Amerikaanse militair die verdacht wordt van het doorspelen van geheime informatie aan Wikileaks.

'Belachelijk' en 'stom' noemde Crowley de wijze waarop de verdachte, Bradley Manning, wordt vastgehouden. President Barack Obama zei vrijdag nog dat het Pentagon hem had verzekerd dat Manning 'gepast' behandeld wordt.

Manning zit 23 uur per dag in eenzame opsluiting in een militair detentiecentrum. Iedere nacht moet hij zijn kleren inleveren en krijgt hij een dwangbuis om te voorkomen dat hij zelfmoord pleeft. Het licht in zijn cel gaat nooit uit.

Crowley liet zondag in een verklaring weten de verantwoordelijkheid te nemen voor zijn opmerkingen en zei dat hij zijn ontslag heeft ingediend bij minister van buitenlandse zaken Hillary Clinton.

quote:

US ambassador to Mexico resigns over WikiLeaks embassy cables

The US ambassador to Mexico has resigned amid a furore over a leaked diplomatic cable in which he complained about inefficiency and infighting among Mexican security forces in the campaign against drug cartels.

Hillary Clinton said Carlos Pascual's decision to step down was "based upon his personal desire to ensure the strong relationship between our two countries and to avert issues" raised by the Mexican president, Felipe Calderón.

The US secretary of state was not specific, but a furious Calderón has publicly criticised Pascual's criticisms, divulged as part of the US embassy cables by WikiLeaks.

Pascual's resignation appears to be the biggest fallout yet from the release of thousands of sensitive US diplomatic cables from around the world. It is the first such public departure by a US ambassador during the Obama administration.

Clinton went to lengths to praise Pascual's work in Mexico and said the Obama administration never lost confidence in him. Clinton said Pascual's work with Mexico to build institutions capable of fighting drug traffickers "will serve both our nations for decades".

She was "particularly grateful to Carlos for his efforts to sustain the morale and security of American personnel after tragic shootings in Mexico" that killed a US employee and three other people tied to the consulate in the border city of Ciudad Juarez last year.

"It is with great reluctance that President Obama and I have acceded to Carlos's request" to step down, Clinton said in a statement.

The ambassador's resignation laid bare how difficult relations between the US embassy and the Mexican government had become since the release of the cable in December. Calderón has made no secret of his personal anger at Pascual.

"I will not accept or tolerate any type of intervention," Calderón said in an interview with the newspaper El Universal in late February. "But that man's ignorance translates into a distortion of what is happening in Mexico and affects things and creates ill feeling within our own team."

There was no immediate reaction from the Mexican government, although an official from Calderón's office said it was preparing a response.

Pascual may have ruffled feathers in the Mexican government and Calderón's National Action party by dating the daughter of Francisco Rojas, the congressional leader of the former longtime ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party. Mexican officials and the U.S. Embassy have declined to comment on that matter.

One of the leaked diplomatic cables that most angered Calderón referred to friction between Mexico's army and navy while detailing an operation that led to the death of drug lord Arturo Beltran Leyva.

Pascual said the US, which had information locating Beltran Leyva, originally took it to the army, which refused to move quickly. Beltran Leyva was eventually brought down in a shootout with Mexican marines, who have since taken the lead in other operations against cartel capos.

Other cables reported jealousies and a lack of co-ordination between various Mexican security forces.

quote:

Op maandag 21 maart 2011 12:46 schreef Schanulleke het volgende:

[..]

Ik vind de vraag die gesteld wordt voorafgaand aan die van Assange veel pijnlijker voor Gillard. De interviewer weet ook niet wat hij hoort als ze haar antwoord geeft.

quote:

I have no regrets, says PJ Crowley after state department resignation

The former US state department spokesman who resigned over the treatment of Bradley Manning has said he has no regrets about his comments criticising the manner of the soldier's detention, saying it has undermined the investigation into his role as the alleged source for WikiLeaks.

PJ Crowley resigned this month after calling the Pentagon's treatment of Manning "ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid".

His remarks, made during a speech at MIT, were first reported by blogger Phillpa Thomas.

In an interview with the BBC, his first since the resignation, Crowley said he had recently been asked why the US was torturing Manning.

"The United States is doing no such thing, but I understand why the question was asked," Crowley said. "I thought the treatment of Bradley Manning - the fact that he had to sleep naked and stand in a jail cell naked - was counter-productive to our broader effort of appropriately prosecuting someone who has violated his oath of office," he told Hardtalk.

Crowley said he was a believer in "something like strategic narratives", saying: "The United States, as an exceptional country in the world, has to be seen as practising what we preach."

Asked if he had realised the effect his comments would have, Crowley said: "Well, I realised that I was challenging another agency of government. Quite honestly I didn't necessarily think the controversy would go as far as it did.

"But I don't regret saying what I said."

Since June last year Manning has been kept in solitary confinement at a Marine Corps prison near Washington awaiting trial on suspicion of giving classified material to WikiLeaks. Earlier this month it was revealed that he is forced to sleep naked in his cell.

His lawyers said his clothes were taken after he made sarcastic comments about using his underwear to commit suicide. The US authorities confirmed Manning was made to relinquish his boxer shorts for about seven hours due to a "situationally driven" event.

Barack Obama has said he has asked Pentagon officials about aspects of Manning's confinement and been assured that they were appropriate.

Asked about Obama's comments, Crowley said: "Again, I can only offer you my view, which is that it is one thing that actions can be legal and it is another thing that actions can be smart. I do think that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is legitimate and necessary.

"The release of 251,000 cables has damaged US interests around the world and more importantly has put the lives of activists who help us understand what's going on around the world in jeopardy. "But I felt his treatment undermines the credibility of the ongoing investigation and prosecution. I spoke my mind and I haven't changed my view."

quote:

It should be easier to stop an abuse of power. It shouldn't cost you your job or your friends.

We should live in a place where people who blow the whistle are recognised for the heroes they are. However we don't live there. Not yet.

So rather than wait until we do, the IrishLeaks project will provide a system that will help whistleblowers who shed light on abuses of power within the Republic of Ireland remain anonymous.

We hope this will encourage a fairer, more honest society in which openness and transparency become something to be valued, not something that will demonise you in the eyes of your peers.

quote:

http://www.volkskrant.nl/(...)bassadeurs-uit.dhtml

De Verenigde Staten en Ecuador hebben elkaars ambassadeurs uitgewezen. Dat gebeurde na de publicatie van documenten door de klokkenluiderssite WikiLeaks.

De regering van Ecuador verklaarde gisteren als eerste de ambassadeur van de VS tot persona non grata. Als tegenmaatregel deed Washington donderdag hetzelfde met de ambassadeur van Ecuador. Beide ambassadeurs moeten zo snel mogelijk terug naar eigen land.

Heather Hodges, die de diplomatieke missie van de VS in Ecuador leidt, had in 2009 een bericht gestuurd naar haar bazen in Washington, waarin stond dat de Ecuadoraanse president Rafael Correa akkoord was gegaan met de benoeming van een zeer corrupte politiechef. Correa zou op de hoogte zijn geweest van de criminele praktijken van de topambtenaar.

Ricardo Patino, de minister van Buitenlandse Zaken in Ecuador, maakte bekend dat Hodges zo snel mogelijk moet vertrekken, zo meldden Amerikaanse media dinsdag (lokale tijd). Washington noemde het besluit van de regering in Quito 'ongerechtvaardigd'.

quote:

Julian Assange claims WikiLeaks is more accountable than governments

WikiLeaks founder defends organisation in his first formal public appearance since being arrested over sexual assault allegations

WikiLeaks is more accountable than democratically elected governments because it accepts donations from members of the public, Julian Assange has claimed, in his first formal public appearance since being arrested in December following accusations of rape and sexual assault.

Questioned at a public debate about the whistleblowing organisation's own transparency, Assange told an audience of 700 people, many of them supporters: "We are directly supported on a week-to-week basis by you. You vote with your wallets every week if you believe that our work is worthwhile or not. If you believe we have erred, you do not support us. If you believe we need to be protected in our work, you keep us strong.

"That dynamic feedback, I say, is more responsive than a government that is elected after sourcing money from big business every four years."

The WikiLeaks founder, who is currently appealing against his extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault, told the audience at a packed debate organised by the New Statesman and the Frontline Club that whistleblowing was essential in a democracy because "the only way we can know whether information is legitimately kept secret is when it is revealed".

He cited the examples of Vietnam and "the disaster that was the Iraq war", saying that if whistleblowers had had the courage to speak up earlier about both conflicts, "bloodbaths" could have been avoided.

He said he "could speak for hours" about the impact of the publication of leaked US embassy cables, much of it through the Guardian, and that leak's positive impact.

The Hindu newspaper had in recent weeks published 21 front pages based on so-called "cablegate" revelations, he said, leading to the Indian government walking out four times and a growing anti-corruption movement in the country.

But the political commentator Douglas Murray, director of the centre for social cohesion, challenged Assange over the website's sources of funding, its staffing and connections with the Holocaust denier Israel Shamir, who has worked with the site.

"What gives you the right to decide what should be known or not? Governments are elected. You, Mr Assange are not."

Murray also challenged the WikiLeaks founder over an account in a book by Guardian writers David Leigh and Luke Harding, in which the authors quote him suggesting that if informants were to be killed following publication of the leaks, they "had it coming to them".

Assange repeated an earlier assertion that the website "is in the process of suing the Guardian" over the assertion, and asked if Murray would like to "join the queue" of organisations he was suing.

The Guardian has not received any notification of such action from WikiLeaks or its lawyers.

Jason Cowley, the editor of the New Statesman and chair of the debate, interjected to ask: "How can the great champion of open society be using our libel laws to challenge the press?"

The WikiLeaks founder was obliged to leave before responding to all the questions in order to comply with the curfew conditions of his bail.

WikiLeaks' lawyer Mark Stephens could not be reached for comment. Asked after the debate whether he could shed any light on the supposed legal action, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristin Hrafnsson said "not really".

quote:

New arrest over Anonymous' pro-WikiLeaks attacks

Police have made a sixth arrest in their investigation of Anonymous, the online activist collective that launched a series of cyber attacks on major firms it saw as anti-WikiLeaks.

The new suspect, a 22-year-old man from Cleveland, was questioned by specialist computer crime detectives at a local police station on Wednesday last week. He was bailed until 26 May pending further enquiries.

The five original suspects - three teenage boys and two men - have also all been bailed again in the last 48 hours, to reappear at police stations in June.

They were arrested at addresses in the West Midlands, Northamptonshire, Hertfordshire, Surrey and London in coordinated dawn operations on 27 January.

They are suspected of involvement in cyber attacks on the websites of Amazon, Bank of America, Mastercard, PayPal and Visa in December. Deliberately causing such disruption is an offence under the Computer Misuse Act and carries a sentence of up to 10 years' imprisonment.

The firms were targeted after they cut off services to WikiLeaks, amid controversy over its release of classified US diplomatic cables.

Anonymous saw the moves as an affront to free speech online, and in chatrooms planned Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks in revenge.

Members downloaded a specially-developed piece of software - dubbed the Low Orbit Ion Cannon - to participate in "Operation Avenge Assange". The software was designed to effectively shut down the websites by bombarding their servers with requests for data.

But the impact was limited: while Amazon’s heavy duty infrastructure withstood Anonymous’ attack, the Mastercard and Visa websites were temporarily disrupted. Yet credit card payment systems themselves were mostly unaffected.

Since the attacks international law enforcement agencies have been cooperating on an investigation that has also led to the arrest of alleged Anonymous members in France, the Netherlands, and the US.

The collective had already caught the attention of British authorities before its WikiLeaks-related attacks, however.

Scotland Yard's Police Central e-Crime Unit began inquiries after similar DDoS attacks by Anonymous in September, on organisations connected to the entertainment industry. Its targets included the BPI and ACS:Law, a London-based law firm that had controversially accused thousands of internet users of copyright piracy.

Anonymous, which emerged more than three years ago from the anarchic web forum 4Chan.org, is also battling other attempts to unmask its members.

In February it hacked into HBGary Federal, a government computer security contractor that claimed to have identified its leaders. The firm's chief executive was forced to step down after the hackers stole his emails and published them online.

And recently a group claiming to be made up of disgruntled former Anonymous members has published a dossier its says contains the true identities of senior figures. Several are listed as living in Britain.

quote:

‘VS financieren oppositie Syrië’

De Verenigde Staten hebben in het geheim Syrische oppositiegroepen gesteund, blijkt uit diplomatieke correspondentie, gepubliceerd door Wikileaks en ingezien door The Washington Post.

Volgens die krant zouden de VS sinds 2006 zo’n zes miljoen dollar naar een groep Syrische bannelingen hebben gesluisd, om onder meer vanuit Londen een satellietzender te beginnen, Barada TV. Bovendien werden met het geld actitiveiten binnen Syrië gefinancierd.

Barada TV begon in 2009, maar is met de afgelopen maand begonnen massaprotesten in Syrië steeds actiever geworden..

Financiering begon onder George W. Bush

De financiering voor Syrische oppositiegroepen is begonnen onder president George W. Bush, nadat de diplomatieke banden met Damascus werden afgesneden in 2005, zo meldt de krant. De steun is voortgezet door president Obama, ook terwijl zijn kabinet probeert de banden met de Syrische president Bashar al-Assad wat aan te halen. In januari is voor het eerst in zes jaar weer een Amerikaanse ambassadeur in Damascus geïnstalleerd.

Volgens The Washington Post is het onduidelijk of de financiering nu nog altijd wordt voortgezet, maar de ‘cables’ van Wikileaks maken duidelijk dat er in elk geval tot in september 2010 nog geld apart werd gezet voor dit doel.

quote:

http://www.citizenvox.org(...)orate-whistleblower/

In The Insider, Russell Crowe stars as a tobacco industry scientist turned corporate whistleblower. The Hollywood thriller was based on the true story of Jeffrey Wigand. While not always quite so dramatic, there are real risks to “doing the right thing.” Ralph Nader experienced this firsthand when he was targeted by automaker giant GE in 1965. Though decades have passed since GE hired a private investigator to unearth unflattering information about Nader, standing up to corporate power continues to take courage. Most recently, Public Citizen President Robert Weissman was profiled on a powerpoint presentation by the HBGary Group, a firm of computer hacks paid by the federal government with tax payer dollars to develop cyber spying mechanisms, which they in turn proffered to the law firm of the Chamber of Commerce to use against groups like Public Citizen. See DailyKos.

The Government Accountability Project (GAP) has just released, The Corporate Whistleblower’s Survival Guide. The guide details key strategies for effectively blowing the whistle, common “pitfall” practices to avoid, and key survival tips when considering exposing wrongdoing at a company.

This evening, April 21, GAP and Georgetown University’s Law School will be hosting an online event featuring a discussion between the authors and noted whistleblowers. Among those participating will be Wendell Potter, noted health insurance company whistleblower who authored Deadly Spin and exposed health care insurance strategies in putting profit over people’s lives. Additionally, Dr. Janet Chandler, who earned a Supreme Court landmark victory against hospital fraud with help from her then-lawyer Barack Obama, and Larry King, Three Mile Island cleanup whistleblower, will speak.

The event can be watched live by clicking here, starting at 5:15 p.m. EDT this Thursday, April 21. Call-in questions will be taken from around the country for this event. To call in to the event, dial 1-888-757-2790 (password: 871514).

quote:

WikiLeaks-documenten over Guantánamo-gevangenen

Verschillende kranten hebben afgelopen nacht gepubliceerd over geheime documenten over de (ex-)gevangenen in de Guantánamo Bay-gevangenis. De Amerikaanse regering is ongelukkig met de publicatie.

De zevenhonderd bestanden, waar WikiLeaks gisteren beschikking over kreeg en waar onder meer The Washington Post onmiddellijk over publiceerde, bevatten nieuwe informatie over gevangenen in Guantanamo Bay.

Informatie over gevangenen

De bestanden, zogenaamde DAB’s (Detainee Assessment Briefs) beschrijven de mate waarin een gevangene over waardevolle informatie beschikt en of die gevangene een gevaar voor de Verenigde Staten zou vormen als diegene zou worden vrijgelaten.

Tot op dit moment zijn er 604 gevangenen vrijgelaten uit Guantánamo Bay, terwijl er nog 172 vastzitten. Hoewel de informatie in de DAB’s wellicht munitie kan vormen voor mensenrechtenorganisaties die altijd hebben beweerd dat er mensen met gebrek aan bewijs in ‘Gitmo’ worden vastgehouden, blijkt toch vooral dat een aantal gevangenen veel gevaarlijker is dan tot nu toe door verschillende media werd aangenomen.

Brein achter 9/11

De bestanden bevatten onder meer informatie over Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, naar wordt aangenomen het brein achter de terroristische aanslagen op 11 september 2001, en over Abd al-Rhim al-Nashiri, die in de documenten opschept dat hij inmiddels als gevaarlijker werd gezien dan Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

NRC-correspondent Titia Ketelaar in Londen schreef veelvuldig over Guantánamo Bay. Volgens haar versterkt de vrijgekomen informatie het beeld dat we al hadden van de situatie.

Sommige gevangenen zitten daar al sinds februari 2002 vast, zonder rechtszaak. De weinige informatie die we tot nu toe hadden kwam bijvoorbeeld uit FBI-dossiers die een paar jaar geleden lekten. Daaruit bleek vooral hoe de gevangenen werden behandeld. Verder heeft persbureau AP in 2006 via de rechter voor elkaar gekregen dat de namen van de gevangenen bekend werden gemaakt. Sindsdien is wel gezegd wie er zijn opgepakt, maar niet wie er werd vrijgelaten: daar hebben we nu ook een beter beeld van.

quote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-files-lift-lid-prison

• Innocent people interrogated for years on slimmest pretexts
• Children, elderly and mentally ill among those wrongfully held
• 172 prisoners remain, some with no prospect of trial or release
• Read the original documents

More than 700 leaked secret files on the Guantánamo detainees lay bare the inner workings of America's controversial prison camp in Cuba.

The US military dossiers, obtained by the New York Times and the Guardian, reveal how, alongside the so-called "worst of the worst", many prisoners were flown to the Guantánamo cages and held captive for years on the flimsiest grounds, or on the basis of lurid confessions extracted by maltreatment.

The 759 Guantánamo files, classified "secret", cover almost every inmate since the camp was opened in 2002. More than two years after President Obama ordered the closure of the prison, 172 are still held there.

The files depict a system often focused less on containing dangerous terrorists or enemy fighters, than on extracting intelligence. Among inmates who proved harmless were an 89-year-old Afghan villager, suffering from senile dementia, and a 14-year-old boy who had been an innocent kidnap victim.

The old man was transported to Cuba to interrogate him about "suspicious phone numbers" found in his compound. The 14-year-old was shipped out merely because of "his possible knowledge of Taliban...local leaders"

The documents also reveal:

• US authorities listed the main Pakistani intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), as a terrorist organisation alongside groups such as al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iranian intelligence.

Interrogators were told to regard links to any of these as an indication of terrorist or insurgent activity.

• Almost 100 of the inmates who passed through Guantánamo are listed by their captors as having had depressive or psychotic illnesses. Many went on hunger strike or attempted suicide.

• A number of British nationals and residents were held for years even though US authorities knew they were not Taliban or al-Qaida members. One Briton, Jamal al-Harith, was rendered to Guantánamo simply because he had been held in a Taliban prison and was thought to have knowledge of their interrogation techniques. The US military tried to hang on to another Briton, Binyam Mohamed, even after charges had been dropped and evidence emerged he had been tortured.

• US authorities relied heavily on information obtained from a small number of detainees under torture. They continued to maintain this testimony was reliable even after admitting that the prisoners who provided it had been mistreated.

The files also show that a large number of the detainees who have left Guantanamo were designated "high risk" by the camp authorities before their release or transfer to other countries.

The leaked files include guidance for US interrogators on how to decide whether to hold or release detainees, and how to spot al-Qaida cover stories. One warns interrogators: "Travel to Afghanistan for any reason after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 is likely a total fabrication with the true intentions being to support Usama Bin Laden through direct hostilities against the US forces."

Another 17-page file, titled "GTMO matrix of threat indicators for enemy combatants", advises interrogators to look out for signs of terrorist activity ranging from links to a number of mosques around the world, including two in London, to ownership of a particular model of Casio watch.

"The Casio was known to be given to the students at al-Qaida bombmaking training courses in Afghanistan," it states.

The inclusion of association with the ISI as a "threat indicator" in this document is likely to pour fuel on the flames of Washington's already strained relationship with its key regional ally.A number of the detainee files also contain references, apparently based on intelligence reporting, to the ISI supporting, co-ordinating and protecting insurgents fighting coalition forces in Afghanistan, or even assisting al-Qaida.

Obama's inability to shut Guantánamo has been one of the White House's most internationally embarrassing policy failures. The files offer an insight into why the administration has been unable to transfer many of the 172 existing prisoners from the island prison where they remain outside the protection of the US courts or the prisoner-of-war provisions of the Geneva conventions.

The range of those still held captive includes detainees who have been admittedly tortured so badly they can never be successfully tried, informers who must be protected from reprisals, and a group of Chinese Muslims from the Uighur minority who have nowhere to go.

One of those officially admitted to have been so maltreated that it amounted to torture is prisoner No 63, Maad al-Qahtani. He was captured more than nine years ago, fleeing from the site of Osama bin Laden's last stand in the mountain caves of Tora Bora in 2001. The report says Qahtani, allegedly one of the "Dirty 30" who were Bin Laden's bodyguards, must not be released: "HIGH risk, as he is likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests and allies." The report's military authors admit his admissions were obtained by what they call "harsh interrogation techniques in the early stages of detention". But otherwise the files make little mention of the widely-condemned techniques that were employed to obtain "intelligence" and "confessions" from detainees such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation and prolonged exposure to cold and loud music.

The files also detail how many innocents or marginal figures swept up by the Guantánamo dragnet because US forces thought they might be of some intelligence value.

One man was transferred to the facility "because he was a mullah, who led prayers at Manu mosque in Kandahar province, Afghanistan … which placed him in a position to have special knowledge of the Taliban". US authorities eventually released him after more than a year's captivity, deciding he had no intelligence value.

Another prisoner was shipped to the base "because of his general knowledge of activities in the areas of Khowst and Kabul based as a result of his frequent travels through the region as a taxi driver".

The files also reveal that an al-Jazeera journalist was held at Guantánamo for six years, partly in order to be interrogated about the Arabic news network.

His dossier states that one of the reasons was "to provide information on … the al-Jazeera news network's training programme, telecommunications equipment, and newsgathering operations in Chechnya, Kosovo and Afghanistan, including the network's acquisition of a video of UBL [Osama bin Laden] and a subsequent interview with UBL".

The Guantánamo files are among hundreds of thousands of documents US soldier Bradley Manning is accused of having turned over to the WikiLeaks website more than a year ago.

The documents were obtained by the New York Times and shared with the Guardian and National Public Radio, which is publishing extracts, having redacted information which might identify informants.

A Pentagon spokesperson said: "Naturally we would prefer that no legitimately classified information be released into the public domain, as by definition it can be expected to cause damage to US national security. The situation with the Guantánamo detention facility is exceptionally complex and releasing any records will further complicate ongoing actions."

quote:

Guantánamo files: US agencies fought internal war over handling of detainees

Professional investigators who deplored torture were repeatedly sidelined as CIA and soldiers with little training took harsh steps

One of the biggest and most explosive clashes at Guantánamo Bay has been fought not between guards and prisoners but between US interrogators, the leaked files reveal.

It was a fundamental clash of cultures: between those who stuck rigidly to US law and those who, in the frightening post-9/11 world, adopted techniques from a US manual detailing psychological and physical torture used by China during the Korean war.

In theory there was – and still is – a simple command structure at Guantánamo, run by the commander of the Joint Task Force Guantánamo (JTF GTMO in military jargon). But in reality there were lots of agencies at the naval base in Cuba, sometimes working together but more often at odds and at times barely speaking to one another.

On the ground alongside the JTF GTMO interrogators were the Criminal Investigative Task Force (CITF), an elite unit, many of whose members had a law enforcement background and opposed the use of harsh methods.

Also in the mix was the CIA, which George Bush made the lead agency in spite of its failure to stop 9/11. Jostling for a piece of the action were the FBI and the Behavioural Science Consultation Team, a group of psychiatrists and psychologists set up by the defence department.

The files confirm that interrogators were also present from foreign intelligence services.

The battles being fought on the ground mirrored the debate and power plays in Washington, as figures such as Bush, his vice-president Dick Cheney, defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and secretary of state Colin Powell argued over the ethics and legality of what was happening at the naval base.

The first detainees arrived at Guantánamo on 11 January 2002. Rumsfeld ordered the US Southern Command – based in Miami and responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean – to take responsibility for guarding the detainees and oversee interrogation. Southern Command on 16 February gave this role to JTF-170, which eventually became JTF GTMO.

Evidence of the in-fighting among the agencies can be found towards the end of the detainee reports, in which the camp commander assesses the risk posed by a prisoner and his intelligence value. The commander makes a recommendation whether to release, keep in detention or send to another government for imprisonment.

The final paragraph deals with "co-ordination" between the agencies and it is here that the friction surfaces. The commander often reports that CITF "defers" to JTF GTMO. "Defers" sounds dull and bureaucratic but it is a loaded word in the context of Guantánamo, reflecting a profound difference in interrogation techniques and conclusions.

Typical is a report on Saleh Abdall al-Oshan, a Saudi who was among the first to arrive at Guantanamo, in 21 January 2002. The JTF GTMO assessment, written in 2004, was that "this detainee is a member of al-Qaida and/or its global terrorist network". But the commander added: "CITF assessed the detainee as a low risk on 22 March 2004. In the interest of national security and pursuant to an agreement between the CITF and JTF GTMO Commanders, CITF will defer to JTF GTMO's assessment that the detainee poses a medium to high risk."

Time and time again CITF is at odds with JTF GTMO but forced to defer.

CITF, whose members are drawn from the army, navy and air force, is part of the defence department and is based at Fort Belvoir, near Washington. Its approach to interrogation was to try to befriend prisoners, chat to them over tea, win their confidence and build up information gradually. Some members of the team eventually went public, in television interviews and Senate hearings, saying that harsh interrogation techniques made cases unprosecutable and were counterproductive in any case, pushing detainees into cocoons of silence.

By contrast, JTF GTMO is made up of troops from a traditional military background. They saw their mission as primarily intelligence-gathering rather than constructing a legal case. Again, in the case of Oshan, the commander's report emphasises he was transferred to Guantánamo in hopes of providing intelligence. "Detainee may provide information on the refugee camp outside Spin Buldok, AF(Afghanistan), and Islamic presence in the Philippines," the report says.

Over and over again the stress in the reports is on intelligence-gathering.

Some of the troops transferred to JTF Guantánamo had no background in interrogation. Among the first were a group from Fort Huachuca, Arizona. They had had six weeks of training in how to withstand torture – very different from conducting interrogations.

The military used harsh techniques abhorred by the CITF and the CIA went even further. It was responsible for one of the most notorious cases at Guantánamo, the waterboarding of the self-confessed al-Qaida leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The CIA had relative independence. It ran a secret camp, Camp Seven, whose existence only became public late on, in 2008.

Also operating on the island was the FBI, which approached interrogations in much the same way as the CITF and opposed waterboarding and similar methods. Jane Mayer, in her book The Dark Side, records one interrogation in which the FBI claimed to have been getting "phenomenal" information, only to be pushed out by a CIA team. The FBI, fearful of being implicated in something potentially illegal, fled the scene.

The role of psychologists and psychiatrists has raised medical ethical questions, given that some participated in interrogations. One of the files shows a behavioural science team winning a rare victory over the JTF GTMO in December 2003. The behavioural team assessed a detainee as "high threat" while the JTF GTMO had him as "medium threat". JTF GTMO deferred to the behavioural team.

As if the mix was not volatile enough, also on the island base at various times were intelligence officers from other countries. One of the files records that "from 3 to 10 August 2002 Pakistani intelligence officers interrogated" a detainee. Adding to the confusion, another file claims that another detainee, described by JTF GTMO as a "high risk", was also a Pakistani intelligence agent.

The early JTF GTMO commanders included Major General Michael Dunlavey and Major General Geoffrey Miller, whose names appear at the bottom of many of the detainee reports. They came under a lot of pressure from Washington to produce results after a first year that yielded little intelligence.

Miller is controversial, having served at Guantánamo from November 2002 to August 2003 before being was transferred to run prisons in Iraq. He has been accused of introducing tactics used at Guantánamo to Iraq, blurring the line between guard duties and interrogation, a move that could have contributed to the Abu Ghraib scandal.

The chain of command from Guantánamo to Washington is illustrated by a request sent by Miller's predecessor Dunlavey in 2002 which, according to a Senate investigation, asked for authorisation to use harsher interrogation techniques. It went first to General James Hill, the commander of US Southern Command, the recipient of the detainee reports. Hill forwarded it to General Richard Myers, who was chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. The chairman of the joint chefs is the highest-ranking military officer in the US and advises the president and defence secretary.

There was some resistance to such requests in Washington, from figures such as Powell and, to a lesser extent, Rice. But the dominant mood was in favour of harsh methods. Cheney is unrepentant: in a rare public foray he made a speech in 2008 in Washington denying that waterboarding constituted torture and insisting that the information obtained from interrogations saved lives. That line is repeated by Rumsfeld in his autobiography published this year, and Bush in his in November.

"No doubt the procedure was tough but medical experts assured the CIA that it did no lasting harm," Bush wrote.

quote:

Bradley Manning's jail conditions improve dramatically after protest campaign

Switch of WikiLeaks whistleblower suspect from maximum security jail means more rights and liberties in runup to trial

The conditions under which the WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning is being detained in military prison have vastly improved in the wake of a sustained campaign against his earlier treatment, which some said amounted to torture.

Since Manning was transferred from the Quantico marine base in Virginia to Fort Leavenworth on 20 April his detention regime has changed dramatically.

He has been switched from maximum security to medium custody, which affords him many more rights and liberties, and he is no longer being held under a prevention of injury watch that imposed harsh conditions.

The new regime has been revealed in a blog post from Manning's lawyer, David Coombs, who is handling the US soldier's forthcoming court martial.

The prisoner, who worked as an army intelligence specialist in Iraq, has been charged with multiple counts relating to the leaking of a huge trove of state secrets to the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.

Under the old prevention order, Manning was forced to strip naked and wear just a smock at night, he had no bedding and was not permitted any personal items in his cell. He was kept locked up in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day in a windowless cell, and allowed only to walk in a yard on his own for that final hour.

In Fort Leavenworth, by contrast, he has a large window that lets in natural light. He has a normal mattress and bedding and his clothes are not removed at night.

Manning can have personal objects in his cell, including books and letters from family and friends, as well as legal documents relating to his case. He can write whenever he wants.

His new life of detention is also considerably less lonely. There are five other pretrial prisoners and Manning spends much of the day in their company. His cell is connected to a common area used by four of the detainees with a television and exercise machine, table and shower area.

The improvement in Manning's prison life is testament to the power of a sustained campaign by his supporters and politicians to end what was deemed virtual torture against him.

The Pentagon had been flooded with emails and lobbied by representatives such as Dennis Kucinich, a Democratic congressman from Ohio who took up Manning's cause.

The UK embassy in Washington has also been involved after the Guardian revealed that Manning is a British citizen by dint of his mother being Welsh.

Kucinich said the lawyer's account of Manning's new conditions revealed a dramatic change "that can only be attributed to the public campaign that brought great pressure on the department of defence".

But Manning's more relaxed treatment also raises serious questions about why he was treated so brutally for the nine months in which he was held at Quantico. When Barack Obama was asked about the case in March, he said he had been assured by the Pentagon that Manning's treatment was appropriate.

Kucinich said he would continue to press through Congress for answers to a number of questions: "Why was Manning treated the way he was in Quantico that was similar to torture? Who was responsible for that treatment, and what's going to be done to ensure those individuals are held to account?"

quote:

Julian Assange krijgt zelfde vredesprijs als Mandela en Dalai Lama

WikiLeaksoprichter Julian Assange heeft vandaag een prestigieuze onderscheiding ontvangen tijdens een ceremonie in Londen. De Australiër kreeg de gouden medaille van de Sydney Peace Foundation, een vredesprijs die de afgelopen veertien jaar pas vier keer werd uitgereikt.

Onder eerdere prijswinnaars waren de Zuid-Afrikaanse oud-president en anti-apartheidsactivist Nelson Mandela en de geestelijke leider in ballingschap van Tibet, de Dalai Lama.

Assange verzet zich op dit moment tegen een uitleveringsverzoek, dat is ingediend door Zweden in verband met een zedenzaak in dat land, waarin hij is aangemerkt als verdachte. De Verenigde Staten willen Assange ook, wegens de publicatie van honderdduizenden geheime overheidsdocumenten. Sommige Amerikaanse politici hebben ervoor gepleit dat WikiLeaks de status krijgt van een internationale terroristische organisatie.


Uitdaging
De jury prijst Assange en WikiLeaks juist omdat zij een uitdaging vormen voor 'eeuwenoude praktijken van geheimhouding door overheden' en door op te komen voor het recht van mensen om hier kennis van te nemen. 'Wij denken dat jij en WikiLeaks iets hebben voortgebracht, dat een waterscheiding inhoudt voor de journalistiek en in de vrijheid van informatie en in potentie van de politiek', zei professor Stuart Rees, directeur van de Sydney Peace Foundation, tegen Assange. De stichting wordt gesteund door de universiteit van Sydney en door het gemeentebestuur van deze miljoenenstad.

Rees uitte harde kritiek op de Australische regering en op Amerikaanse politici. Australië zou Washington steun geven terwijl de Amerikanen zich zouden gedragen als een 'totalitaire staat'. De jury van de vredesprijs is 'ontzet over het gewelddadige gedrag van belangrijke politici in de VS'.

quote:

Op donderdag 12 mei 2011 10:15 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:
Assange wordt gekker en gekker:

[..]

quote:

Why I blew the whistle about Palestine

Israel's attack on Gaza and the disastrous 'peace talks' compelled me to leak what I knew

Ziyad Clot
The Guardian, Saturday 14 May 2011

In Palestine, the time has come for national reconciliation. On the eve of the 63rd
commemoration of the Nakba – the uprooting of Palestinians that accompanied the creation of Israel in 1948 – this is a long-awaited and hopeful moment. Earlier this year the release by al-Jazeera and the Guardian of 1,600 documents related to the so-called peace process caused deep consternation among Palestinians and in the Arab world. Covering more than 10 years of talks (from 1999 to 2010) between Israel and the PLO, the Palestine papers illustrated the tragic consequences of an inequitable and destructive political process which had been based on the assumption that the Palestinians could in effect negotiate their rights and achieve self-determination while enduring the hardship of the Israeli occupation.

My name has been circulated as one of the possible sources of these leaks. I would like to clarify here the extent of my involvement in these revelations and explain my motives. I have always acted in the best interest of the Palestinian people, in its entirety, and to the full extent of my capacity.

My own experience with the "peace process" started in Ramallah, in January 2008, after I was recruited as an adviser for the negotiation support unit (NSU) of the PLO, specifically in charge of the Palestinian refugee file. That was a few weeks after a goal had been set at the Annapolis conference: the creation of the Palestinian state by the end of 2008. Only 11 months into my job, in November of that year, I resigned. By December 2008, instead of the establishment of a state in Palestine, I witnessed on TV the killing of more than 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza by the Israeli army.

My strong motives for leaving my position with the NSU and my assessment of the "peace process" were clearly detailed to Palestinian negotiators in my resignation letter dated of 9th November 2008.

The "peace negotiations" were a deceptive farce whereby biased terms were unilaterally imposed by Israel and systematically endorsed by the US and EU. Far from enabling a negotiated and fair end to the conflict, the pursuit of the Oslo process deepened Israeli segregationist policies and justified the tightening of the security control imposed on the Palestinian population, as well as its geographical fragmentation. Far from preserving the land on which to build a state, it has tolerated the intensification of the colonisation of the Palestinian territory. Far from maintaining a national cohesion, the process I participated in, albeit briefly, was instrumental in creating and aggravating divisions among Palestinians. In its most recent developments, it became a cruel enterprise from which the Palestinians of Gaza have suffered the most. Last but not least, these negotiations excluded for the most part the great majority of the Palestinian people: the seven million Palestinian refugees. My experience over those 11 months in Ramallah confirmed that the PLO, given its structure, was not in a position to represent all Palestinian rights and interests.

Tragically, the Palestinians were left uninformed of the fate of their individual and collective rights in the negotiations, and their divided political leaderships were not held accountable for their decisions or inaction. After I resigned, I believed I had a duty to inform the public.

Shortly after the Gaza war I started to write about my experience in Ramallah. In my 2010 book, Il n'y aura pas d'Etat Palestinien (There will be no Palestinian State), I concluded: "The peace process is a spectacle, a farce, played to the detriment of Palestinian reconciliation, at the cost of the bloodshed in Gaza." In full conscience, and acting independently, I later agreed to share some information with al-Jazeera specifically with regard to the fate of Palestinian refugee rights in the 2008 talks. Other sources did the same, although I am unaware of their identity. Taking these tragic developments of the "peace process" to a wider Arab and western audience was justified because it was in the public interest of the Palestinian people. I had – and still have – no doubt that I had a moral, legal and political obligation to proceed accordingly.

Today, I am relieved that this first-hand information is available to Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, in Israel and in exile. In a way, Palestinian rights are back in their holders' possession and the people are now in a position to make enlightened decisions about the future of their struggle. I am also glad that international stakeholders to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can access these documents. The world can no longer overlook that while Palestinians' strong commitment to peace is genuine, the fruitless pursuit of a "peace process" framed according to the exclusive conditions of the occupying power leads to compromises which would be unacceptable in any other region of the globe.

Finally, I feel reassured that the people of Palestine overwhelmingly realise that the reconciliation between all their constituents must be the first step towards national liberation. The Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians in Israel and the Palestinians living in exile have a common future. The path to Palestinian self-determination will require the participation of all in a renewed political platform.

quote:

Twitter users and the courts go to war over footballer's injunction


Social networks accused of making 'an ass of the law' as injunction spirals into online battle over freedom of speech

Attempts to identify a famous footballer hiding behind a privacy injunction have spiralled into an online battle over freedom of speech, as internet users responded to high court action by repeatedly naming him on Twitter.

The high court granted a search order against the US-based microblogging site on Friday as the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, warned that "modern technology was totally out of control" and called for those who "peddle lies" on the internet to be fined. The attempt to compel Twitter to identify those responsible for the breaches comes after a number of its users earlier this month purported to reveal the name of the player who allegedly had an affair with the model Imogen Thomas.

The footballer's legal team began its action in London on Wednesday. There is a suspicion that a media company may be linked to the postings on Twitter, which were put up nearly two weeks ago.

But the name of the footballer was spreading even more rapidly across Twitter in defiance of the court injunction, setting the stage for a confrontation between the judiciary and cyberspace.

Earlier Lord Judge – welcoming a juridical report on superinjunctions – said readers placed greater trust in the content of traditional media than those "who peddle lies" on websites.

He urged that ways be found to curtail the "misuse of modern technology", in the same way that those involved with online child pornography were pursued by the police.

"Are you really going to say that someone who has a true claim for protection perfectly well made has to be at the mercy of modern technology?" he asked.

The lawsuit lists the defendants as "Twitter Inc and persons unknown".

The "persons unknown" are described as those "responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accounts".

Lawyers have applied for a court order that could force Twitter to hand over the name, email address and IP address of the person behind the account, the Guardian understands.

The orders – known as a Norwich Pharmacal orders – are commonly used in illegal filesharing cases.

The Guardian understands that the claim form, filed to the high court by the footballer's legal team, will not be made public until next week. Earlier this month, an unknown person or individuals published on a Twitter account the names of various people who had allegedly taken out gagging orders to conceal sexual indiscretions.

The account rapidly attracted more than 100,000 followers.

Twitter said: "We are unable to comment." The London-based law firm representing the footballer had also not responded to a request for comment at time of publication.

Twitter and other social networks were accused of making "an ass of the law" by the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, and politicians after a number of celebrities with injunctions were allegedly exposed online.

The socialite Jemima Khan was among those alleged on Twitter to have obtained an injunction.

Khan described as a "bloody nightmare" rumours suggesting falsely that she had obtained a gagging order to prevent publication of "intimate photos" of herself and the TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson.

Twitter has in the past said that it "strive[s] not to remove tweets on the basis of their content", but that it would remove "illegal tweets and spam".

Previous defamation claims against the search engine Google failed on the grounds that it is not a publisher and not responsible for the contents of the blogs and articles listed in its search results.

Richard Hillgrove, the owner of Hillgrove PR, which provides advice to celebrities, said that Twitter needed to be made as accountable as any other medium.

"It has gone from 'the back bedroom' to mainstream medium.

"Celebrities are being held to account if they Tweet commercial interests. It works both ways," he said.

quote:

US put pressure on Saudi Arabia to let women drive, leaked cables reveal

Documents given to WikiLeaks show Obama administration pushed Saudis to give female citizens more rights

The Obama administration has been quietly putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to allow women to drive, according to leaked US embassy cables.

But the jailing of woman protester Manal al-Sharif after she posted an online video of herself at the wheel of a car in Khobar reveals the extent of US diplomatic failure regarding the ban.

The cables, part of the trove allegedly given to WikiLeaks by the US soldier Bradley Manning, reveal previously unreported clashes over women's rights.

Dispatches from Riyadh describe Saudi Arabia as "the world's largest women's prison". Those words are a quote from one female campaigner US diplomats have been in contact with, Wajeha al-Huwaider.

She too posted a video on YouTube in 2008 of herself driving. Saying millions of Saudi women were prisoners in their homes, she challenged male control over work and travel.

She regularly tries to take a taxi to neighbouring Bahrain: "Al-Huwaider is divorced which means under Saudi law her ex-husband or her father or a brother would need to give her permission to leave the country.

"Although she holds a valid passport, every time she tries to leave ... she is stopped at the border to Bahrain and turned around."

The billionaire tycoon Prince Waleed, a Saudi royal, assured a visiting Democrat congressman in July 2009 that King Abdullah did support women's rights, the embassy noted optimistically. The driving ban was reportedly about to be overturned.

Speaking at his 99-storey Kingdom Tower in Riyadh, Waleed said the ban was merely a "demeaning" tribal custom and that he "relished relating his run-ins with the kingdom's religious conservatives. He was involved with the first public showings of films in the kingdom in many years. His wife has openly requested that women be allowed to drive. He supports French president Sarkozy's campaign against women wearing coverings hiding their faces."

Abdullah appointed the country's first woman deputy minister in 2009 and opened "with much fanfare" a mixed-sex science university, in front of foreign dignitaries including Prince Andrew.

The embassy noted approvingly "several subtle, symbolic gestures ... Saudi men and women, many of whom did not wear the face-covering niqab, mingled freely with international attendees throughout the ceremony. Male and female students stood side by side on stage for an emotive reading of a poem. The ceremony was interspaced with a movie showing (uncovered) young girls and boys studying together".

But there was an immediate backlash. Saad Nasser al-Shithri, a cleric from the council of senior scholars, appeared on the Saudi religious TV channel to defy the king.

He denounced "mixing of the sexes" and "the teaching of deviant ideas such as evolution".

Abdullah was forced to sack him, but embassy contacts warned privately that Al-Shithri was being regarded as a hero by unemployed young Saudis, who resented foreign students getting advantages, and by reactionary clerics who feared a plot to impose western values.

Another cleric, Sheikh Salman al-Duwaysh, publicly attacked "mixing with women on the basis of claiming to educate them and to open the field for them to undertake jobs for which they were not created".

He said such women had "abandoned their basic duties such as housekeeping, bringing up children ... and replaced this by beautifying themselves and wantonness".

The embassy was refused consent for a US "rhythm and oratory duo" called Teasley and Williams to play to a mixed audience at the university.

But the duo did appear at the Riyadh literary society before "an unprecedented mixed-gender audience (mixed by Saudi standards – the handful of women who attended sat in a screened-off block of seats across the aisle from the men). Nonetheless, the fact that women were even invited to a musical performance with men in Riyadh is remarkable".

Obama's envoy, Richard Erdman, privately scolded Saudi ministers to little effect.

He "pointedly" told the notoriously reactionary interior minister, Prince Naif, that "no nation could prosper without the intellectual contributions and talent of all its citizens ... (ie women)".

He said the same to the deputy foreign minister, who responded wryly that "customs were a hard nut to crack".

In a dispatch headed Women Need Not Apply, US diplomats recorded that US-educated Prince Mansur, the minister of municipal affairs, firmly rejected the notion that political development required the participation of women saying issues such as women driving were "not fundamental to our society".

According to the US diplomats, the driving ban is in fact something of a charade which "dates from a 1991 fatwa issued by the late grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Baz. The grand mufti claimed that allowing women to drive would result in public 'mixing' of men and women, put women into dangerous situations because they could be alone in cars, and therefore result in social chaos".

The cable continued: "Women drive anyway: there are, in fact, many instances in which Saudi women defy the prohibition.

"Women drive on private property such as desert farms or residential compounds beyond reach of police.

"Embassy contacts and media report that in rural areas women routinely drive out of necessity, without being stopped.

"Al-Hayat newspaper reported 16 February ... a woman driving in some Saudi villages is considered normal."

quote:

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW! The “Wikileaks Truck Driver” Clark Stoeckley – Creator of “Wikileaks Top Secret Mobile Collection Unit”

– Artist, Activist, Entertainer and Wiki-Prankster

“Though I am not connected to Wikileaks, I believe we are all Wikileaks.”

Wikileaks Top Secret Mobile Information Collection Unit

quote:

Assange leeft als 'een gekooid dier' (video)

Julian Assange leeft een sober en gecontroleerd bestaan. Hij wordt behandeld als een veroordeelde crimineel, vinden zijn sympathisanten. Zij maakten een video van zijn eerste half jaar onder huisarrest: 191 dagen zonder aanklacht.

Assange staat momenteel onder huisarrest in Groot-Brittannië. Daar buigt een rechter zich over een Zweeds uitleveringsverzoek. Justitie in Zweden verdenkt Assange van seksueel misbruik van twee vrouwen. Omdat hij geen vast adres in Groot-Brittanië had, nam de WikiLeaks-oprichter zijn intrek bij Vaughan Smith, een excentrieke Engelsman met een groot landhuis. Hij moet zich iedere dag melden bij het politiebureau in Norfolk nabij het landhuis, heeft dikke enkelbanden om die zijn bewegingen monitoren en hij moet iedere dag voor 22.00 uur terug in het huis zijn.

Impact
In een 5 minuten durende video, die de Britse krant The Telegraph gisteren publiceerde, is te zien hoeveel impact het op het leven van Assange heeft. Zijn assistente Sarah Harrison zegt: 'Ik ben Brits, en ben altijd trots geweest op ons rechtssysteem. Maar dit is gewoon verkeerd. Deze man is niet eens officieel aangeklaagd en wordt behandeld als een gekooid dier.' Joseph Farrell, ook betrokken bij WikiLeaks, zegt: 'Hij wordt behandeld als een veroordeelde crimineel.'

Op een gegeven moment willen ze filmen als het bedrijf dat de elektronische enkelbanden komt controleren. Hierop vertrekken de werknemers omdat ze niet willen worden gefilmd, en krijgt Assange meteen een waarschuwing via zijn advocaat.

Ook zijn er volgens Vaughan Smith nummerplaatcamera's bij de drie ingangen van zijn landhuis geplaatst, die er eerst nog niet waren.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange releases video blog of his house arrest

quote:

Op dinsdag 21 juni 2011 17:28 schreef -Strawberry- het volgende:
Waarom komt wikileaks nooit meer in het nieuws? Er zou toch nog heel veel gelekt worden?

quote:

Haiti: WikiLeaks reveals contractor 'gold rush' after quake

Disaster capitalists flocked to Haiti in a “gold rush” for contracts to rebuild the country after the January 12, 2010 earthquake, wrote the current US ambassador Kenneth Merten in a secret Febuary 1, 2010 cable obtained by WikiLeaks and reviewed by Haiti Liberte.

“THE GOLD RUSH IS ON!” Merten headlined a section of his 6pm situation report ― or Sitrep ― back to Washington.

“As Haiti digs out from the earthquake, different [US] companies are moving in to sell their concepts, products and services,” he wrote. “President [Rene] Preval met with Gen Wesley Clark Saturday [on January 30] and received a sales presentation on a hurricane/earthquake resistant foam core house designed for low income residents.”

quote:

One of WikiLeaks' greatest achievements has been to expose the exorbitant amount of influence that multinational corporations have over Washington's diplomacy.

quote:

Haiti: Leaked Cables Expose U.S. Suppression of Min. Wage, Election Doubts and Elite’s Private Army

Drawing on almost 2,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables on Haiti released by WikiLeaks, a partnership between The Nation magazine and the Haitian weekly, Haïti Liberté, exposes new details on how Fruit of the Loom, Hanes and Levi’s worked with the United States to block an increase in the minimum wage in the hemisphere’s poorest nation, how business owners and members of the country’s elite used Haiti’s police force as their own private army after the 2004 U.S.-backed coup that ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, and how the United States, the European Union and the United Nations supported Haiti’s recent presidential and parliamentary elections, despite concerns over the exclusion of Haiti’s largest opposition party, Lavalas, the party of Aristide. We speak with the reports’ authors, longtime Haiti correspondent Dan Coughlin and Haïti Liberté editor, Kim Ives. [includes rush transcript]

quote:

Climate of Fear: Jim Risen v. the Obama administration

The Obama DOJ's effort to force New York Times investigative journalist Jim Risen to testify in a whistleblower prosecution and reveal his source is really remarkable and revealing in several ways; it should be receiving much more attention than it is. On its own, the whistleblower prosecution and accompanying targeting of Risen are pernicious, but more importantly, it underscores the menacing attempt by the Obama administration -- as Risen yesterday pointed out -- to threaten and intimidate whistleblowers, journalists and activists who meaningfully challenge what the government does in secret.

quote:

2011-06-25 WikiLeaks Notes: Latest News on #Cablegate Releases, #WikiLeaks & More

This is a "WikiLeaks News Update," constantly updated throughout each day. The blog tracks stories that are obviously related to WikiLeaks but also follows stories related to freedom of information, transparency, cybersecurity, freedom of expression, and sometimes the national security establishment of the United States because each issue/topic helps one further understand WikiLeaks and vice versa. All the times are GMT.

quote:

http://wlcentral.org/node/1962

02:20 AM 'What Wikileaks Reveals about Canadian and U.S. Efforts in Suppression and Surveillance of Indigenous Communities': a comprehensive selection of articles.

quote:

WikiLeaks Intends To Sue Visa And MasterCard For Blocking Payment

WikiLeaks and its credit card processing partner Datacell have just announced their intent to file suit in the EU against credit card companies Visa and Mastercard for blocking donations to the service last year.

In early December the two payments companies cut off all payments to the relatively quiet as of late organization, with Mastercard citing that its “rules prohibit customers from directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal.” The legality of WikiLeaks itself is still a matter of debate.

However, Visa and Mastercard were not alone in withdrawing their support, as both PayPal and Amazon also pulled their services from WikiLeaks, which facilitates anonymous leaks of sensitive information including hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables. WikiLeaks does not mention Amazon or PayPal in the suit.

WikiLeaks is holding that the PayPal and Visa blocks count as “anti-competitive” and violate Article 101 (1) and 102 of the EU competition laws, seeking to file a complaint in the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court. As of yet, according to the release, that complaint has not been filed.

quote:

Here’s The Legal Complaint WikiLeaks Is Threatening To File Against Visa, MasterCard

More than six months have passed since Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, and others cut WikiLeaks’ purse strings. And if that blockade lasts six more days, the secret-spilling group plans to take its financial fight to the courtroom.

If Visa Europe and MasterCard Europe haven’t re-opened payment WikiLeaks by next Thursday, the group and its payment provider DataCell plan to file a complaint with the E.U. Commission against the two companies as well as the Danish payment processor Teller, according to Sveinn Andri Sveinsson, the Icelandic lawyer for WikiLeaks and DataCell.

“They’re boycotting Datacell and Wikileaks without any objective justification,” says Sveinsson. “This is clearly an abuse of their market dominance.”

According to Sveinsson, the following complaint was sent to the two companies earlier this month, and will be filed with the E.U. Commission at an appointment Thursday if the situation isn’t resolved by then.

[Document te zien op de site]

The complaint argues that the three payment firms have violated Articles 101 and 102 of the E.U. Treaty, which deal with competition among businesses and forbid the creation of anti-competitive cartels. Article 101 prevents firms from creating partnerships for the purposes of price fixing, and Article 102 forbids firms in a “dominant position” from abusing that position.

Both Visa and MasterCard have claimed that payments to WikiLeaks and DataCell were suspended because they potentially violate the companies’ terms of service. MasterCard has gone as far explaining that it prohibits “customers from directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal.” Visa has stated that it is investigating “the nature of [WikiLeaks] business and whether it contravenes Visa operating rules.”

A Visa spokesperson told me earlier this month that the company would “respond in due course” to WikiLeaks’ threat of legal action. I’ve put out requests to both companies for further comment but haven’t yet heard back.

Teller has already completed an investigation into WikiLeaks’ legality, and in January stated in a report to Visa that it could find no proof that WikiLeaks had broken any laws.

WikiLeaks’ and DataCell’s complaint makes no specific claims of monetary damages. But a video released by WikiLeaks earlier this week implied that the termination of credit card payments to WikiLeaks has cost it $15 million.

quote:

Cablegate: Visa and MasterCard face legal problems over WikiLeaks blockade

After more than six months of preparation, WikiLeaks and DataCell are moving forward with a lawsuit, looking to end the financial blockade brought by Visa and MasterCard. According to WikiLeaks, Visa Europe, MasterCard Europe, and Teller are the three businesses highlighted by the complaint.

“…U.S. influenced, financial blockade…”

On December 7, 2010, DataCell announced to the world that Visa Europe suspended their accounts due to them processing donations to WikiLeaks. They were asked to stop processing donations in exchange for service restoration, but DataCell refused, explaining that the request to do so was based on untrue and unverified accusations.

A day later, DataCell’s payment processor, Teller, started suspending all Visa transactions through DataCell, on the request of Visa Europe. The reasoning behind Visa Europe’s request was to “investigate the case in order to protect the Visa brand name; and to make sure neither payment processor nor Visa Europe is doing illegitimate transactions to fund the WikiLeaks website.”

For those same reasons, Teller suspended DataCell’s MasterCard account as well. The block on DataCell has prevented them from collecting WikiLeaks-related donations, as well as collecting payments via credit card for other services, including their primary business as a data center and hosting provider.

“… [Visa] is clearly an attempt trying to undermine WikiLeaks through financial mean. This is not about the Visa brand name. This is about politics. Visa should not be involved in it (sic),” DataCell said in a statement.

In March, Teller said that they found nothing wrong with DataCell’s processes within the legal framework governing the credit transactions. They asked that Visa Europe, as well as MasterCard Europe, allow them to reopen DataCell’s accounts. Visa Europe refused, and MasterCard’s stance is unknown, but it is understood that they were working with Teller on the matter.

However, the fact that DataCell was still unable to process payments led them to announce the hiring of a legal team in Iceland, Denmark, and U.K. “…to present our case in the courts.”

“Our goal is to get the justice fulfilled. We believe it's our right to conduct businesses in a legal way just like any other companies. The legal opinion we have got from our law firms and legal professors around the western world is, simply, Visa behaves like the worst kind of mafia with their behaviour…It's not in the hands of Visa to decide what is illegal and what's not.”

When speaking to Icelandic media, DataCell’s founder, Olaf Sigurvinsson, added to his company’s statements.

“…I can support Al-Qaeda, the Ku Klux Klan, buy me a weapon, drugs and all kinds of porn with a Visa card…while I can not support human rights organization which campaigns for freedom of expression.”

quote:

is a different type of Distributed Denial-of-Service attack

In each example, the financial giants revoked access due to something that has never been proven in any court of law. To this day, most of the public and media has ignored the irony:

The moment they revoked financial access to WikiLeaks, these five organizations were starting their own DDoS attack against WikiLeaks.

This DDoS attack impacts the way WikiLeaks can collect donations, and like other forms of DDoS, it denies innocent consumers the ability spend their money as they wish. Given the freedom stripped from consumers, one would think this would be a rather large issue, but its gone ignored for the most part. Perhaps that is because WikiLeaks supporters are in the minority.

The issue is one of financial freedom. The world over, consumers will find it hard to use a debit or credit card issued from a bank without it coming from MasterCard or Visa. Unfortunately, when one signs the customer agreement forms, they agree to abide by the credit card companys terms. This means if Visa, MasterCard, or banks like BoA, wish to restrict how you can spend your money - as is the case here - they are well within their rights to do so. It is all in the fine print. The question is, do you as a consumer think this is fair?

Its a holiday weekend in the U.S., and spokespersons from the EU were unavailable at the time this story was written. Well update with new information on the lawsuit and any comments as we get them.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2011 14:58 schreef Sloggi het volgende:
Leeft Julien Assange nog?

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2011 15:00 schreef Sloggi het volgende:
Hoe zit het met die aanklacht tegen hem? Loopt die nog of is die een stille dood gestorven?

quote:

Navy medic detained for refusing training over WikiLeaks claims

Michael Lyons sentenced to seven months' detention after developing moral objections to Afghanistan conflict

A Royal Navy medic has been sentenced to seven months' detention for refusing rifle training prior to deployment in Afghanistan after developing moral objections, following revelations made by WikiLeaks.

Michael Lyons, 25, was found guilty of wilful disobedience of a lawful order at a military hearing in Plymouth on Tuesday. He had served in the navy since 2005 as a medial assistant submariner. He was demoted to the rank of able seaman and dismissed from the service.

Lyons's case was the first heard by the Advisory Committee on Conscientious Objectors, which considers appeals to resign or retire on moral grounds from serving forces personnel, since 1996, and was one of only 37 cases considered by the committee in its 41-year life. The committee rejected Lyons's appeal for conscientious objector status in December 2010, leading to Tuesday's hearing.

The court martial, at HMS Nelson in Portsmouth, heard that on 20 September 2010, Lyons refused to train in the use of an SA80 assault rifle as part of pre-deployment training, repeatedly requesting to be assigned to a non-combat role.

Speaking in court, Lyons confirmed he had no physical or mental impairment preventing him following orders, but had chosen to disobey orders based on his personal convictions.

"My initial objections started with Afghanistan and I wanted to investigate the reasons why we were at war. At the time WikiLeaks came along and mentioned Iraq and Afghanistan. The reports said there had been some civilian casualties that nobody knew about and they were being covered up," he said. "After a lot of deliberation I decided I was a conscientious objector."

Lyons claimed he was told he would be barred from treating Afghan civilians, and this formed part of his objection.

He said: "We were put into scenarios and in one of these a family had been walking for two days to our base. The child had a birth defect that was causing it pain and the instructor asked us whether they would get treatment. I said we would offer them whatever we could, but I was shouted down by an officer who said it was a waste of resources."

Warrant Officer Robert Bainbridge, who issued the training order, told the court he spent several hours discussing Lyons's ethical objections.

"We spent six hours in my office talking about the issue. I told him that as a medic he is in a combative and non-combative role and had an inherent right to self-defence. He briefed me that he felt that the war in Afghanistan was unjust, but I told him I was not sending him to war, I was training him how to use a rifle."

Lyons was unable to speak publicly about his case, but his wife Lillian wrote in the Guardian that she felt Lyons's appeal for conscientious objector status was damaged because of his lack of religious belief.

"[Michael] was ordered to see a chaplain, even though Michael is an atheist, and the chaplain's statement implied Michael had a slight political reservation, not a moral objection," she said. "If Michael had been dishonest and said he was a committed Christian, and because of his faith he could not be part of war on moral grounds, perhaps this would have been over in an instant."

Emma Sangster, co-ordinator of pressure group Forces Watch, which has offered support to Lyons through his case, said Lyons's treatment highlighted a need for reform of the law around conscientious objection.

"The simple injustice of Michael's treatment illustrates how the government and the Ministry of Defence repeatedly fail to recognise conscientious objection in practice," she said. "We urge MPs to uphold the human rights of forces personnel by clarifying and strengthening the right to conscientious objection, and the procedures for it in the armed forces bill currently going through parliament."

The Ministry of Defence declined to comment on the case

quote:

Sex, lies, no videotape and more lies. False accusations in the Assange case

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.

A “ducktest” is a method to try to figure out the true nature of an entity by studying its identifiable character traits. A simple method to reveal that a subject is not what it purports to be.

Allegations of sexual abuse that bear all the signs of being fake and lacking credibility is almost certainly false.

In the Assange case it is obvious that a “ducktest” has not yet been made by police and prosecutors. It is easy to see. For had it been done it could be seen that one of the plaintiff’s, charges, Anna Ardin’s, against Julian Assange are almost certainly false.

The Assange case was handled strangely from the beginning. The lack of quality in the investigation is evident. What is perhaps most disturbing is that since September 1, 2010 the matter was handled by a “highly qualified investigative unit” under the direction of the superior prosecutor Marianne Ny. If this is the best that Sweden has to offer with regard to investigations of sexual abuse, we have a huge problem with getting justice for victims of sexual abuse. If police and prosecutors cannot distinguish between true and false reports, it becomes very difficult to prosecute the real perpetrators.

An aide to false allegations?

The Assange case brings another important issue into focus. What is the complainant’s counsel (“målsägarbiträde”, non prosecution lawyer representing and supporting complainants) task during the process? If a complainant’s counsel reasonably assumes that the plaintiff’s allegations of sexual abuse are false, what is that counsel supposed to do? It cannot be that a complainant’s counsel’s mission is to support a plaintiff’s false accusations and to help ensure that an innocent person is tried and possibly convicted. If the complainant’s counsel helps a plaintiff to make false accusations what is the responsibility of that counsel? Abetting false accusation is what it is. And it should of course be punished. But what does the law say? Is it a crime? And what does the Bar’s disciplinary body say? Claes Borgström’s conduct in the Assange case must be thoroughly examined.