[Below is a news release put out by the Institute for Public Accuracy, co-signed by Daniel Ellsberg]
Ex-Intelligence Officers, Others See Plusses in WikiLeaks Disclosures
WASHINGTON – December 7 – The following statement was released today, signed by Daniel Ellsberg, Frank Grevil, Katharine Gun, David MacMichael, Ray McGovern, Craig Murray, Coleen Rowley and Larry Wilkerson; all are associated with Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence.
WikiLeaks has teased the genie of transparency out of a very opaque bottle, and powerful forces in America, who thrive on secrecy, are trying desperately to stuff the genie back in. The people listed below this release would be pleased to shed light on these exciting new developments. [More. . .]
[Below is a news release put out by the Institute for Public Accuracy, co-signed by Daniel Ellsberg]
Ex-Intelligence Officers, Others See Plusses in WikiLeaks Disclosures
WASHINGTON – December 7 – The following statement was released today, signed by Daniel Ellsberg, Frank Grevil, Katharine Gun, David MacMichael, Ray McGovern, Craig Murray, Coleen Rowley and Larry Wilkerson; all are associated with Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence.
WikiLeaks has teased the genie of transparency out of a very opaque bottle, and powerful forces in America, who thrive on secrecy, are trying desperately to stuff the genie back in. The people listed below this release would be pleased to shed light on these exciting new developments.
How far down the U.S. has slid can be seen, ironically enough, in a recent commentary in Pravda (that’s right, Russia’s Pravda): “What WikiLeaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic … After all, the evils committed by those in power can be suffocating, and the sense of powerlessness that erupts can be paralyzing, especially when … government evildoers almost always get away with their crimes. …”
So shame on Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and all those who spew platitudes about integrity, justice and accountability while allowing war criminals and torturers to walk freely upon the earth. … the American people should be outraged that their government has transformed a nation with a reputation for freedom, justice, tolerance and respect for human rights into a backwater that revels in its criminality, cover-ups, injustices and hypocrisies.
Odd, isn’t it, that it takes a Pravda commentator to drive home the point that the Obama administration is on the wrong side of history. Most of our own media are demanding that WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange be hunted down — with some of the more bloodthirsty politicians calling for his murder. The corporate-and-government dominated media are apprehensive over the challenge that WikiLeaks presents. Perhaps deep down they know, as Dickens put it, “There is nothing so strong … as the simple truth.”
As part of their attempt to blacken WikiLeaks and Assange, pundit commentary over the weekend has tried to portray Assange’s exposure of classified materials as very different from — and far less laudable than — what Daniel Ellsberg did in releasing the Pentagon Papers in 1971. Ellsberg strongly rejects the mantra “Pentagon Papers good; WikiLeaks material bad.” He continues: “That’s just a cover for people who don’t want to admit that they oppose any and all exposure of even the most misguided, secretive foreign policy. The truth is that EVERY attack now made on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was made against me and the release of the Pentagon Papers at the time.”
Motivation? WikiLeaks’ reported source, Army Pvt. Bradley Manning, having watched Iraqi police abuses, and having read of similar and worse incidents in official messages, reportedly concluded, “I was actively involved in something that I was completely against.” Rather than simply go with the flow, Manning wrote: “I want people to see the truth … because without information you cannot make informed decisions as a public,” adding that he hoped to provoke worldwide discussion, debates, and reform.
There is nothing to suggest that WikiLeaks/Assange’s motives were any different. Granted, mothers are not the most impartial observers. Yet, given what we have seen of Assange’s behavior, there was the ring of truth in Assange’s mother’s recent remarks in an interview with an Australian newspaper. She put it this way: “Living by what you believe in and standing up for something is a good thing. … He sees what he is doing as a good thing in the world, fighting baddies, if you like.”
That may sound a bit quixotic, but Assange and his associates appear the opposite of benighted. Still, with the Pentagon PR man Geoff Morrell and even Attorney General Eric Holder making thinly disguised threats of extrajudicial steps, Assange may be in personal danger.
The media: again, the media is key. No one has said it better than Monseñor Romero of El Salvador, who just before he was assassinated 25 years ago warned, “The corruption of the press is part of our sad reality, and it reveals the complicity of the oligarchy.” Sadly, that is also true of the media situation in America today.
The big question is not whether Americans can “handle the truth.” We believe they can. The challenge is to make the truth available to them in a straightforward way so they can draw their own conclusions — an uphill battle given the dominance of the mainstream media, most of which have mounted a hateful campaign to discredit Assange and WikiLeaks.
So far, the question of whether Americans can “handle the truth” has been an academic rather than an experience-based one, because Americans have had very little access to the truth. Now, however, with the WikiLeaks disclosures, they do. Indeed, the classified messages from the Army and the State Department released by WikiLeaks are, quite literally, “ground truth.”
How to inform American citizens? As a step in that direction, on October 23 we “Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence” (see below) presented our annual award for integrity to Julian Assange. He accepted the honor “on behalf of our sources, without which WikiLeaks’ contributions are of no significance.” In presenting the award, we noted that many around the world are deeply indebted to truth-tellers like WikiLeaks and its sources.
Here is a brief footnote: Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) is a group of former CIA colleagues and other admirers of former intelligence analyst Sam Adams, who hold up his example as a model for those who would aspire to the courage to speak truth to power. (For more, please see here.)
Sam did speak truth to power on Vietnam, and in honoring his memory, SAAII confers an award each year to a truth-teller exemplifying Sam Adams’ courage, persistence, and devotion to truth — no matter the consequences. Previous recipients include:
-Coleen Rowley of the FBI
-Katharine Gun of British Intelligence
-Sibel Edmonds of the FBI
-Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan
-Sam Provance, former Sgt., US Army
-Frank Grevil, Maj., Danish Army Intelligence
-Larry Wilkerson, Col., US Army (ret.)
-Julian Assange, WikiLeaks
-Katharine Gun of British Intelligence
-Sibel Edmonds of the FBI
-Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan
-Sam Provance, former Sgt., US Army
-Frank Grevil, Maj., Danish Army Intelligence
-Larry Wilkerson, Col., US Army (ret.)
-Julian Assange, WikiLeaks
“There is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, nothing hidden that will not be made known. Everything you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight; what you have whispered in locked rooms will be proclaimed from the rooftops.”
– Luke 12:2-3
– Luke 12:2-3
The following former awardees and other associates have signed the above statement; some are available for interviews:
DANIEL ELLSBERG
A former government analyst, Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret government history of the Vietnam War to the New York Times and other newspapers in 1971. He was an admirer of Sam Adams when they were both working on Vietnam and in March 1968 disclosed to the New York Times some of Adams’ accurate analysis, helping head off reinforcement of 206,000 additional troops into South Vietnam and a widening of the war at that time to neighboring countries.
A former government analyst, Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret government history of the Vietnam War to the New York Times and other newspapers in 1971. He was an admirer of Sam Adams when they were both working on Vietnam and in March 1968 disclosed to the New York Times some of Adams’ accurate analysis, helping head off reinforcement of 206,000 additional troops into South Vietnam and a widening of the war at that time to neighboring countries.
FRANK GREVIL
Grevil, a former Danish intelligence analyst, was imprisoned for giving the Danish press documents showing that Denmark’s Prime Minister (now NATO Secretary General) disregarded warnings that there was no authentic evidence of WMD in Iraq; in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Grevil, a former Danish intelligence analyst, was imprisoned for giving the Danish press documents showing that Denmark’s Prime Minister (now NATO Secretary General) disregarded warnings that there was no authentic evidence of WMD in Iraq; in Copenhagen, Denmark.
KATHARINE GUN
Gun is a former British government employee who faced two years imprisonment in England for leaking a U.S. intelligence memo before the invasion of Iraq. The memo indicated that the U.S. had mounted a spying “surge” against U.N. Security Council delegations in early 2003 in an effort to win approval for an Iraq war resolution. The leaked memo — published by the British newspaper The Observer on March 2, 2003 — was big news in parts of the world, but almost ignored in the United States. The U.S. government then failed to obtain a U.N. resolution approving war, but still proceeded with the invasion.
Gun is a former British government employee who faced two years imprisonment in England for leaking a U.S. intelligence memo before the invasion of Iraq. The memo indicated that the U.S. had mounted a spying “surge” against U.N. Security Council delegations in early 2003 in an effort to win approval for an Iraq war resolution. The leaked memo — published by the British newspaper The Observer on March 2, 2003 — was big news in parts of the world, but almost ignored in the United States. The U.S. government then failed to obtain a U.N. resolution approving war, but still proceeded with the invasion.
DAVID MacMICHAEL
MacMichael is a former CIA analyst. He resigned in the 1980s when he came to the conclusion that the CIA was slanting intelligence on Central America for political reasons. He is a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
MacMichael is a former CIA analyst. He resigned in the 1980s when he came to the conclusion that the CIA was slanting intelligence on Central America for political reasons. He is a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
RAY McGOVERN
McGovern was a CIA analyst for 27 years, whose duties included preparing and briefing the President’s Daily Brief and chairing National Intelligence Estimates. He is on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
McGovern was a CIA analyst for 27 years, whose duties included preparing and briefing the President’s Daily Brief and chairing National Intelligence Estimates. He is on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
CRAIG MURRAY
Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, was fired from his job when he objected to Uzbeks being tortured to gain “intelligence” on “terrorists.” Upon receiving his Sam Adams award, Murray said, “I would rather die than let someone be tortured in an attempt to give me some increment of security.” Observers have noted that Murray was subjected to similar character assassination techniques as Julian Assange is now encountering to discredit him.
Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, was fired from his job when he objected to Uzbeks being tortured to gain “intelligence” on “terrorists.” Upon receiving his Sam Adams award, Murray said, “I would rather die than let someone be tortured in an attempt to give me some increment of security.” Observers have noted that Murray was subjected to similar character assassination techniques as Julian Assange is now encountering to discredit him.
COLEEN ROWLEY
Rowley, a former FBI Special Agent and Division Counsel whose May 2002 memo described some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of Time Magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002. She recently co-wrote a Los Angeles Times op-ed titled, “WikiLeaks and 9/11: What if? Frustrated investigators might have chosen to leak information that their superiors bottled up, perhaps averting the terrorism attacks.”
Rowley, a former FBI Special Agent and Division Counsel whose May 2002 memo described some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of Time Magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002. She recently co-wrote a Los Angeles Times op-ed titled, “WikiLeaks and 9/11: What if? Frustrated investigators might have chosen to leak information that their superiors bottled up, perhaps averting the terrorism attacks.”
LARRY WILKERSON
Wilkerson, Col., U.S. Army (ret.), former chief of staff to Secretary Colin Powell at the State Department, who criticized what he called the “Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal.” See recent interviews
Wilkerson, Col., U.S. Army (ret.), former chief of staff to Secretary Colin Powell at the State Department, who criticized what he called the “Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal.” See recent interviews
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
{ 42 trackbacks }
December 8, 2010 at 1:52 pm
December 8, 2010 at 3:11 pm
December 8, 2010 at 3:37 pm
December 8, 2010 at 3:41 pm
December 8, 2010 at 3:59 pm
December 8, 2010 at 4:38 pm
December 8, 2010 at 4:56 pm
December 8, 2010 at 6:22 pm
December 8, 2010 at 7:05 pm
December 8, 2010 at 8:25 pm
December 8, 2010 at 9:21 pm
December 8, 2010 at 9:26 pm
December 8, 2010 at 9:31 pm
December 8, 2010 at 10:21 pm
December 8, 2010 at 11:04 pm
December 8, 2010 at 11:41 pm
December 9, 2010 at 12:08 am
December 9, 2010 at 12:17 am
December 9, 2010 at 12:35 am
December 9, 2010 at 12:42 am
December 9, 2010 at 1:47 am
December 9, 2010 at 2:11 am
December 9, 2010 at 2:30 am
December 9, 2010 at 2:39 am
December 9, 2010 at 3:03 am
December 9, 2010 at 3:26 am
December 9, 2010 at 3:36 am
December 9, 2010 at 6:00 am
December 9, 2010 at 6:17 am
December 9, 2010 at 6:27 am
December 9, 2010 at 9:39 am
December 9, 2010 at 9:44 am
December 9, 2010 at 10:33 am
December 9, 2010 at 12:20 pm
December 9, 2010 at 1:37 pm
December 9, 2010 at 2:23 pm
December 9, 2010 at 2:23 pm
December 9, 2010 at 4:25 pm
December 9, 2010 at 4:39 pm
December 9, 2010 at 9:36 pm
December 9, 2010 at 10:16 pm
December 9, 2010 at 11:29 pm
I’ll will give credit to Mr. Ellsberg for continuing to be a voice of sanity in all of this hype. Even when the MSM is screaming for Assange to be killed, he continues to keep his cool and try to respond rationally to this changing situation.
Good for you.
While everyone can still post their opinions here, here are some responses to earlier points:
Wikileaks doesn’t need to release documents- If that’s true, then I suggest you look at the corporate MSM. Are any of them doing their job? Back in the days of Woodstein, journalists actually did the footwork for stories. Now, can you name one that’s still doing it (aside from Seymour Hersh)? I can’t.
Which means we don’t have a “free press” in the States anymore. Watch any news program. I defy you to see any deviation from the Consultant’s Formula (it must always be a man and a woman anchor team. Except for the top dog anchors which are two women and 1 guy). The content is almost identical. Why? Because the corporate CEO wants it that way. Do you seriously think that Brian Williams could openly criticize GE and NOT get sacked? Not a chance. Same thing for the other 2 (ABC is owned by Disney and Viacom owns CBS).
Print media is corporate owned. They’re not doing their job. Cable news isn’t doing their job. Which means if Wikileaks doesn’t do this, nobody else will.
How come millions of people Stateside say they support Wikileaks? Because (a) they agree with the previous paragraph. Also (b), in the States protest has effectively been outsourced to Wikileaks. It’s their job to save us from the evil neocons. Most average people say I don’t have time to “protest”. What they don’t stop to consider is that there are many ways to protest other than marching in the streets and getting arrested. Porgressive media isnt doing it because of egos and in-fighting (Pacifica being one ongoing example).
Frankly, is Assange ego tripping on all of this free endless global publicity that others would kill for? To a degree, yes. Does he deserve a fair trail? Again, yes.
However, it bothers me when Wikileaks asks for donations and I have no idea where the money’s going. Assange says he has to stay on the move all the time and be secretive about his background to avoid getting nailed by the authorities. I find that hard to believe after a point for a few reasons. The last time I looked online, it’s not exactly easy or cheap for foreigners with no job to live in various European countries. Even many EU states are stricter about their immigration controls. If I donate, am I paying for actual good being done? Or, am I funding Assange’s nomad lifestyle (apprently now complete with various groupies all over the world)? I’ve asked Wikileaks this question many times, and I’ve never gotten a response.
If Assange is such a threat, then how come U.K. immigration didn’t pick him up when he entered the country? “We were waiting for the proper Interpol paperwork”. Translation: we’re playing all the political angles because we don’t want massive uprisings in the street. So we’ll wait and do what the States tell us to do.
Some predictions:
Assange will be extradited to Sweden. Then the States will push really hard to have him brought here for trial.
Officially, Cameron is against the EU Charter of Human Rights. Now though, he’s going to support it to protect Assange against Obama?
If Assange stays ine U.K., how long can he be held in detention? He’s not a declared “terrorist” threat. What justification can the U.K. (or other govts.) use to hold him?
Assange will be extradited to Sweden. Then the States will push really hard to have him brought here for trial.
Officially, Cameron is against the EU Charter of Human Rights. Now though, he’s going to support it to protect Assange against Obama?
If Assange stays ine U.K., how long can he be held in detention? He’s not a declared “terrorist” threat. What justification can the U.K. (or other govts.) use to hold him?
Before I posted this, I found the main tool that Anonymous is using to attack various sites. This site says it’s freeware. But since it’s being used to cyberattack, does this mean that they’re guilty of Wikileaks’ “terrorist” activities and should be shut down? Or, do Obama and the DOJ say screw that. We’ll score bigger political points by going after Assange?
The truth is the People in Power could care less what you think. Do you really think that “The Perfect President” Obama (to some for some strange reason) really cares about what the average person thinks? He’s a consitutional attorney who went to Harvard Law School. He thinks that torture is ok and killing American citizens abroad who he designates as “terrorists” is also ok.
Why? Because many Inside the Beltway will say grow the **** up. That’s how the “real world” works. Everybody else does it (Russia, Mossad and various others).
Despite all the evidence that Wikileaks has put in front of the public, what’s happened? Has any significant change happened as a result of this? No. If “The Doomsday File” is released, will anything happen then? At this point, I have serious doubts that it will. Which means in all of this Wikileaks Mania, nobody’s stopping to ask these questions.
So I will.
Respect to you all.
Daniel, you don’t seem to get that Assange isn’t you and nothing in the leaked State Department documents rises to the level of the Pentagon Papers. Even worse, by openly publishing private opinions by diplomats, Assange has intentionally harmed diplomatic relations and slowed down any possibility of peaceful solutions.
However, the biggest problem is your whine about Amazon, PayPal, Mastercard, et al. Government censorship is wrong, but that’s not what’s happened. The US didn’t order anything. Everyone can choose to publish what they want or do business with whom they wish. The Left and Right both have long histories of boycotts to push their views.
That companies decided to self censor is no more “wrong” then a company deciding it doesn’t want to publish your next book because the publisher thinks it’s dreck.
Due to the nature of the internet, there’s no way, as you’ve seen, of Amazon shutting down Wikileaks. They’ve just decided it doesn’t belong on their servers. That’s not censorship, it’s choice.
What’s funny is all these “open information” people who won’t disclose who they are, who’s funding Assange, who’s been protecting him or otherwise be open himself. Well, those folks and the oxymoronic groups of anarchists who attack Amazon and other sites, doing intentional damage, claiming to be for freedom and openness but punishing others for making choices the anonymous hackers don’t like.
Assange is no villian and he’s no hero, he’s just a self-aggrandizing ego who’s having his 15 minutes of fame.
I doubt you’ll publish this because what I am going to say isn’t something you or your followers are going to want to read.
Julian Assange is a tool. Instead of having Wikileaks publish certain information that may shine light on his cause (whatever it is, I haven’t been able to gleam one yet from his actions) he releases everything. Such a disorienting deluge of information takes quite some time to sift through.
Julian is like a kid with a gun. He knows its dangerous, he knows he can get what he wants with it, but he doesn’t know how to wield it properly. That will ultimately be his and Wikileaks downfall. Reckless, childish behavior, and just plain stupidity.
He may think he is doing a lot of good but in the long run he isn’t. The government will become even more secretive than it already is and worse still he has brought quite a bit of attention to freedom of speech. Of course this assumes he actually has a motive that seeks to benefit someone other than himself.
Personally I’d say he’s an attention whore who saw an opportunity for everlasting attention and he seized it.
Bottom line how is any of this helping to make the world a better place?
Most people miss the real issue here. It is not about the WHAT of Wikileaks it is about the WHO.
Had Dr Ellsberg leaked the “Ho Chi Minh Papers” instead of the “Pentagon Papers”, he would have been a hero. Instead you were arrested, tired under a bizarre law, and freed largely due to even greater incompetence and skullduggery by the Government.
If the current leaks were about N Korea or Burma, the US would be extending a White House invitation to Assange, he would cited as a hero and a “great fighter for freedom” and would win the Nobel Peace Prize.
Stop the hypocrisy and focus on the real issue – systematic lying by the US government, and many other governments. Encourage MORE leaks, not fewer ones, from other countries as well. The US is strong enough (and essentially decent enough) to come through all this; Saudi Arabia and other hypocrites are not.
Had Dr Ellsberg leaked the “Ho Chi Minh Papers” instead of the “Pentagon Papers”, he would have been a hero. Instead you were arrested, tired under a bizarre law, and freed largely due to even greater incompetence and skullduggery by the Government.
If the current leaks were about N Korea or Burma, the US would be extending a White House invitation to Assange, he would cited as a hero and a “great fighter for freedom” and would win the Nobel Peace Prize.
Stop the hypocrisy and focus on the real issue – systematic lying by the US government, and many other governments. Encourage MORE leaks, not fewer ones, from other countries as well. The US is strong enough (and essentially decent enough) to come through all this; Saudi Arabia and other hypocrites are not.
Well said.
The governments of the world are out of control. You don’t have to have a masters degree in shutting people up to see these charges are nothing more than a thinly veiled message to Wikileaks to STFU. I wish they would just release the file that they claim to be keeping for last resort. Just expose all these politicians and their banking buddies for what they are, frauds and thieves.
Here’s a link to the “Pravda” article mentioned – it’s really worth a read:
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-12-2010/116041-valerie_plame_wikileaks-0/
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-12-2010/116041-valerie_plame_wikileaks-0/
Agreed that WikiLeaks is critical. WikiLeaks and a free press help with preserving society not corrupting it as some now claim. Anarchy is a result of citizens of a society no longer living under a common set of boundaries and “norms” typically defined by law. If government, any government, sets an example of regularly violating the law .. if corporate leaders or intellectual leaders scoff at the law or act unethically .. if a military does not abide by rules of engagement or treaties formulated with other nations .. what exactly would you expect average citizenry to eventually notice? What sort of example has been set at the high ground? How many have already become disappointed with the integrity of govt, the unethical behavior of corporate leaders, the unprofessional behavior of some intellectuals, and disgusted over certain military activities? And how many of you have noticed a growing disgust and distrust from the general citizenry which is fact causing this gravitation to extreme sentiments? These vile actions on the part of govt and powers running these states are fueling their own fire! It is important to bring violations against humanity and society to light to let these powers know and reassure average citizens of this world that that no one should operate above the law against people of other nations or people of their own nation. To allow illegal, unethical or inhumane actions to continue within the highest tiers of society IS TO INVITE ANARCHY everywhere! The “free” press does not appear to be capable of this most critical service of making information available to a free society anymore. This is WHY WikiLeaks is so critical.
Thanks for writing one of the most important and insightful things I’ve ever read.
Please nominate Julian Assange for the World Press Freedom Prize, to be held in 2011 in Washington, DC.
great article. Suggestion: put links at the bottom to allow readers to share/post your articles to their facebook, tumblr, twitter, etc. you are a patriot. thanks.
Thank you for this essay. It’s nice to see that Ron Paul (of all people) is not the only public figure to voice the support knowing the truth and freedom of information. We need more sunlight and accountability from the frauds who have run things with money and guns for far too long.
Since you want all information to be open, please, by all means, post your SSN, full name, address, cell number, email addresses, and the same for all members of your family.
Since you don’t want ANY government information to be secret, well, there you go. The SSN is a government number. Let’s go. be a man. Post it, publically, for the world to see, and use.
Not scared are ya?
As I see it there are secrets worth revealing and there are secrets that are just stupid from one point or another.
And revealing secrets shall also be done with some discrimination because there is little value in revealing personal opinions that diplomats has in most cases. It’s just a publicity stunt. And that has been recognized by most people. The few people that would really suffers are members of totalitarian regimes where no bad words ever shall appear unless the great leader approves.
It is fully valid to have secrets for any country, but not everything is worth to be kept as a secret. And even revealed secrets may not be the real secret – it may be information that was dismissed during the process and is effectively useless or completely opposite to the reality.
But some secrets are worth to reveal since politicians needs to be aware that they may be caught with their pants down in an inconvenient moment. That is the only way that politics can be kept sane. Hidden agendas will eventually be revealed.
Don’t forget that governments and government agencies has a tendency to overuse the “secret” classification just to cover their behinds. A secret classification may for many cases delay due process, sometimes so that the statute of limitation is exceeded.
Beautiful…
I really happy to see that there are still honest people in the world.
Great and very risky job you have done !
Congratulations to all of you.
This only show that the workd is only ruled by secret agencies and all presidents are only puppets.
I really happy to see that there are still honest people in the world.
Great and very risky job you have done !
Congratulations to all of you.
This only show that the workd is only ruled by secret agencies and all presidents are only puppets.
I THINK IT’S TIME WE ALL TAKE ACTION. WE WILL NOT BE SHUT DOWN; WE WILL NOT BE MADE SILLENT. WE DESERVE FREEDOM OF SPEACH AND WE DESERVE TO KNOW THE TRUTH. IN THE END, ALL THIS WORLD IS MADE ON OUR BACKS SO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S IN IT…EVERYTHING THAT IS IN IT. LET’S STOP TAKING AND CHATTING AND MAKE THIS HAPPEN. WIKILEAKS IS YOU AND ME…
Great article
@SpiegS the article is here http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-12-2010/116041-valerie_plame_wikileaks-0/
As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with Sarah Palin. She recently said that Assange should be “hunted down like Osama bin Laden.” I agree — ten years from now he should still be a free man.
Why doesn’t it strike people, that if military privates, the AP, the LA times, the New York Times, former CIA dudes, the ACLU, “old grizzled servicemen,” and Ellsberg are willing to be in harm’s way for the Truth, they better perk up? I just don’t want to wake up tomorrow, and Assange is dead. Why aren’t more people furious that Visa and Mastercard cut them off from choice? I will never shop Amazon or Paypal again. What else can I do? Suggestions? I’ve donated snail mail. Do you think it will arrive?
…I wish the new world order will come to an end consequent to wilileaks cable expose. I wish mandarins wherever wherenever will now acknowledge that times up for fiddling with information, that there is need for a paradigm shift in the philosophies that defines their world outlook. That the scenarios for the future is truthful information to the public, that personnal and clique agendas are vestigial, ….and that the past will stop, that they must brace for a future for relevance, and that the future is truth nothing but the truth…
I, for one, am very pleased that these dedicated folks have let this slew of cats out of their respective sacks. I felt the same when Daniel Ellsberg opened his sack many years ago.
Too bad the idiots in powerful positions didn’t learn their lesson then.
Too bad they won’t learn a lesson now.
Too bad they won’t learn a lesson now.
Here’s a link to the Pravada newspaper article. It is worth a read.
Take note US …… Those who protest the loudest have the most to hide. If anything should happen to Julian Assange he will be a martyr for freedom and democracy.
Yes, great job, Mr Assange. History shall obsolve you!
Thank you for all you have done for democracy and peace over the years. The Pentagon Papers release was a defining moment in my young life in the war against the propagandists. Truth thrives in the daylight, and like what you did, WikiLeaks is giving us a glimpse of it. Democracy without disclosures such as these is mere manipulation by those in power. Our corporate media has failed us, for the most part. Wonderful piece here – went straight to my FaceBook page! Carry on.
Thank you.
Kudos
Kudos
XOXOXOXOX
Reply to Tom.
It doesnt take nerve to stand up against someone as weak as Obama, just the inclination.
My fear is that the australian government, and those others you mentioned, genuinely don’t have the inclination.
As an Australian Admirer, I’ve always wanted to say you did your country proud Mr Ellesberg, and by supporting Mr Assange and the young patriot Bradley Manning, you are continuing to do so.
Information wants to be free, because its the only way we the people can police our damn governments.
I have a concrete suggestion for a campaign idea.
The Australian Parliament, for example, could reserve for itself the
right to impose a “freedom tax” on payment services like PayPal,
MasterCard and Visa.
right to impose a “freedom tax” on payment services like PayPal,
MasterCard and Visa.
The tax rate would be set at 0% as a gesture of good will. However, if
they fail to reverse their decision or ever act in this way again, the
Parliament could choose to alter the rate to some non-zero
percentage.
they fail to reverse their decision or ever act in this way again, the
Parliament could choose to alter the rate to some non-zero
percentage.
The collected tax would be either returned to the consumer or to a
media organisation of the consumers &/or the Parliament’s choice.
media organisation of the consumers &/or the Parliament’s choice.
This would serve to take payment services out of the political arena
or provide a useful source of revenue to fund investigative journalism
and other freedom preserving projects.
or provide a useful source of revenue to fund investigative journalism
and other freedom preserving projects.
Once the idea of taxing payment services is accepted, payment services
will rue they day they abandoned the rule of law to exercise political
muscle.
will rue they day they abandoned the rule of law to exercise political
muscle.
I would like to read the “Pravda” article You where referencing to, but unfortunately I couldn’t finde any reference to it in Your article. At least when quickly browsing it.
great read, even Paypal has a voice now
Please explain this to me.
Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd says that Assange isn’t “legally liable” for the Wikileaks releases. Instead, “those who provided the information are liable”. Also, the Prime Minister says that the govt. continues to investigate Assange and Wikileaks to see if any laws were broken.
Now, what he DIDN’T say was anything about the pending rape charges and possible extradition to Sweden. Also, nothing about the current U.S/Swedish discussions to extradite him to the States.
Will Australia, the U.K. and Sweden have the nerve to stand up to Obama?
Who’s in charge in Canberra?
Thanks for speaking up. I remember the thunderbolt that was the Pentagon Papers, and was grateful then. I was never again so naive. We need that same spirit now.
As an Australian, and world observer, I am both honoured to share origin with Assange, and am in awe at the immediate impact, and clear definition of real-world results, that WikiLeaks brings with each and ever whistle they blow.
The idea that he, as a messenger for the truth, is in some way, shape or form responsible is absurd. Assange doesn’t go in and yank these documents for himself, they’re handed over by people of equal mettle; people who’ve clearly seen enough, and need to buck failing or corrupt systems.
This piece is a clear and concise analysis of the most recent events, and I applaud the author and supporters in putting it together.
First Amendment Law Prof blogs on US grad and law schools warning students NOT to access Wikileaks docs:
Series: US embassy cables: the documents
US embassy cables: browse the database
Use our interactive guide to discover what has been revealed in the leak of 250,000 US diplomatic cables. Mouse over the map below to find key stories and a selection of original documents by country, subject or people. Click on red dots for latest storiesUS embassy cables: the documents
US diplomats intervened to try to amend draft law so that it would not 'disadvantage' US credit card firms, cable says
Wikileaks: Julian Assange v Sweden's broad sexual laws
Julian Assange is in custody until an extradition hearing on 14 December
Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, is fighting against extradition from Britain to Sweden where he faces allegations of rape and coercing women into having sex - accusations which his defenders say are part of a conspiracy to silence him. Stephen Evans reports from Stockholm on how Swedish law may prove difficult for the Wikileaks founder.
Everybody you talk to in Sweden involved in the Julian Assange affair asserts - often with some irritation - that: "There Is No Conspiracy."
The Swedish authorities are not acting at the behest of the CIA or the American embassy in Stockholm when they make life difficult for the founder of Wikileaks.
Tough laws
The lawyer for the two women who have accused Mr Assange of coercing them sexually told the BBC it was not part of some wider, global plot.
"Absolutely not," said Claes Borgstrom. "I represent two women who have experienced something that many thousands of women both in Sweden and in other countries have experienced."
Sweden has one of the toughest laws on sexual crime in the world - lawyers sometimes joke that men need written permission first.
As Mr Borgstrom put it: "It is not necessary to have a lot of violence. That is what people usually think, but in practice if you force someone to have sex with you against their consent you don't have to use much violence at all. Or you can take advantage of a difficult situation for the woman in question."
He says Mr Assange knows that this case is simply a matter of what happened with the two women rather than a bigger conspiracy.
"I'm very much critical of Julian Assange himself because he knows that that is not the case. He should say it has nothing to do with his engagement with Wikileaks," said Mr Borgstrom. Continue reading the main story
The sexual allegations
· 'Unlawful coercion' against Miss A - pinning her down
· 'Sexual molestation' by refusing to wear a condom with Miss A
· 'Deliberate molestation' of Miss A
· 'Rape' of Miss W: had sex with her while she was sleeping and without a condom
Source: Gemma Lindfield, lawyer acting for the Swedish authorities
Under Swedish law, there are legal gradations of the definition of rape.
There is the most serious kind, involving major violence.
But below that there is the concept of 'regular rape', still involving violence but not violence of the utmost horror.
And below that there is the idea of 'unlawful coercion'. Talking generally, and not about the Assange case, this might involve putting emotional pressure on someone.
The three categories involve prison sentences of 10, six and four years respectively.
The lawyer for the two women who have complained against Mr Assange will not spell out the details because he says that would give too much away to the accused man.
Reported rape offences in Europe 2007
| Country | Cases* |
| SOURCE: EUROPEAN SOURCE BOOK OF CRIME AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS, 2010 | |
| Sweden | 53 |
| Iceland | 42 |
| United Kingdom | 24 |
| Norway | 23 |
| France | 16 |
| Germany | 9 |
| Ireland | 9 |
| Poland | 5 |
| Russia | 5 |
| Croatia | 3 |
| Greece | 2 |
| Turkey | 1 |
| Armenia | 0 |
| *Cases per 100,000 population | |
But he does indicate that it is a four-year sentence that Mr Assange could expect, indicating that he is suspected of this third, less serious category.
Questions to answer
The case may turn on if or when consensual sex turned into non-consensual sex - is a male decision not to use a condom a case of that, for example?
Under Swedish law, Mr Assange has not been formally charged. He has merely been accused and told he has questions to answer.
The process is for the prosecutor to question him to see if a formal criminal accusation should then be laid before a court.
There would then be a hearing in front of some lay people to see if that formal charge should go to a formal trial.
The attitude towards rape in Sweden - informed by a strong sense of women's rights - means that it is more likely to be reported to police.
Some 53 rape offences are reported per 100,000 people, the highest rate in Europe.
The figures may reflect a higher number of actual rapes committed but it seems more likely that tough attitudes and a broader definition of the crime are more significant factors.
Is the mountain of Wikileaks news distorting your perception of reality? Let us break it down for you.
WHERE IT STANDS RIGHT NOW
From CBS "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been denied bail by a judge after surrendering to British authorities over a Swedish arrest warrant Thursday. Assange vowed in court to fight extradition to Sweden, where authorities are hoping to question him over a sexual molestation case. Assange was arrested at 9:30 a.m local time Tuesday and appeared before Westminster Magistrate's Court. He surrendered Tuesday under an agreement reached between his own lawyers and the police."
LAST NIGHT, HE SAID
Hours after his arrest The Australian published an Assange-penned op ed in which he systematically defends Wikileaks' right to seek and publish information that will promote transparency in Government and serve the greater good of society. Assange notes that while respected international broadsheets such as The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel have published the same redacted cables as Wikileaks, none but Wikileaks have warranted investigation. He also cites the Queensland government (pre-Fitzgerald inquiry) as an example of how complacency begets corruption. Other key take aways? Assange calls Jula Gillard's reluctance to help him "disgraceful pandering" and claims that despite possible compromises to the safety of civilians and troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, "not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed" as a result of Wikileaks' actions. On Twitter, Dom Knight perceptively points out the error in that statement: "Assange's editorial is wrong. Wikileaks' disclosures have indisputably harmed at least one person. Assange."
SWEDEN'S DEFINITION OF CONSENSUAL SEX
After the brouhaha of Assange's capture died down, attention turned to the cause of his arrest. As it stands, Assange faces sex charges stemming from two one night stands that took place in Sweden last August. Those charges - one count of unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation and one count of rape - stem, according to Assange's lawyer Mark Stephens, from a "dispute over consensual but unprotected sex". In short, one woman claims Assange continued to have sex with her after his condom broke and the other claims he refused to put a condom on to begin with. This is cognitively jarring to EVERYONE because how can consensual sex result in rape charges, right? More on that later.
First, despite the impotence of those charges, I must say that the accusers, two Swedish women known as "Jessica" and "Sarah", have been subjected to woeful amounts of conjecture and defamation online. Yes, the timing is convenient and the accusations flimsy but as Kate Harding over at Slate points out "we just don't know anything right now.". Exactly. Save the finger pointing til we know all of the facts. In light of the David Jones scandal, it's alarming how willing we are, without an iota of formal evidence, to dismiss alleged victims of sexual abuse as opportunistic or worse, machiavellian. Why is this the default reaction to alleged victims of sexual abuse? Why are their motivations questioned before any facts are presented?
Sure, they may have been coerced by the CIA (maybe?) or reacted out of jealousy or false pride but the majority of "facts" pertaining to the alleged victims comes from one source, a Daily Mail story (so treat it with all due skepticism) that posits the alleged victims as feminist radicals who may or may not have acted at the behest of the American government. It's alarming how many people are willing to believe those claims with little to no evidence. Says The Daily Mail of "Sarah": "An attractive blonde, Sarah was already a well-known ‘radical feminist'. In her 30s, she had travelled the world following various fashionable causes.While a research assistant at a local university she had not only been the protegee of a militant feminist academic, but held the post of ‘campus sexual equity officer'. Fighting male discrimination in all forms, including sexual harassment, was her forte. Other sites have since claimed she possesses "ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups".
It could well be true of course, but nobody knows for sure. If it is, Naomi Wolf totally owned Interpol on The Huffington Post. But yeah, nobody knows for sure yet. Cool? Now back to the sexual assualt charges. Question: How can one be accused of rape when the sex is obsetnsibly consensual? Easy, the sex is consensual to begin with. Assange's charges relate to the withdrawal of consent, that is, when two consenting adults agree to have protected sex (ie. with a condom) and that condom should happen to break, the conditions under which they agreed to have sex in the first place becomes comprimised. It's sexual intercourse with a proviso and it's hard to associate with rape because it starts off consensual but changes after penetration. Sound murky and confusing? Jezebeloffers some thoughts on "sex by surprise".
MEANWHILE, BACK HOME...
ABC op-ed site The Drum have penned an open letter to Julia Gillard calling for increased Government assistance (that would be any assistance at all!) and a sterner approach to the bureaucratic line they've held thus far. More specifically the letter demands that Gillard: "provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness.". A fair request since conservative American pundits have called for Assange's assassination and consider his actions tantamount to terrorism. The letter has amassed over 4000 signatures thus far including Noam Chomsky, Senator Bob Brown and legions of Australian editors, journalists and lawyers. You can pledge support too by signing your name in the comments section.
To coincide with International Human Rights Day protests against Assange's arrest will be held nationwide this Friday, December 10th. Brisbane's takes place noon at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 295 Ann Street, City. Sydney's from 1pm at Town Hall (facebook event link here) . And Melbourne's from 4:30pm at the State Library lawns (facebook event link here).
ELSEWHERE...
Slate suggests one reason Assange's arrest could benefit his cause: "From his jail cell, Assange becomes something he wasn't yesterday: a martyr." You know who loves martyrs? Undecided fence sitters, that's who.
Online vigilante group Anonymous (the tech savvy members of notorious internet board 4chan) have officially commenced Operation Avenge Assange, launching distributed denial-of-service attacks (the same attacks used to take down Wikileaks) against PayPal, Swiss bank PostFinance and other companies that have abandoned services to Wikileaks. Next on their list is Twitter for allegedly disallowing #wikileaks to trend worldwide and the Swedish prosecutors in Assange's sexual misconduct trial. Also, Anonymous are apparently fighting off DDoS attacks on 4chan from an unknown party.
Buisiness as usual for Wikileaks who tweeted this last night: "Today's actions against our editor-in-chief Julian Assange won't affect our operations: we will release more cables tonight as normal".
According to leaked correspondence between the US embassy in Canberra and US secretaries of state Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton, Foreign Minsiter and former Prime Minsiter Kevin Rudd is not only a “control freak” but made “mistakes” and “significant blunders” throughout his tenure. Thanks Wikileaks we already knew that.
Fuck Yeah Julian Assange! This Matrix themed Tumblr is hypnotic for reasons I can't articulate.
Also, Julian Assange will almost certainly take out Time's Person of the Year poll.