“In his editorial [of today], Assange wrote that democracies require strong media to keep governments honest and that WikiLeaks helps fulfill that role. “WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.”
Even as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is battling a Swedish extradition order on an obscure charge of rape, there is another battle being waged and the scene is on the virtual battleground of the Internet. Despite attempts by the ‘quote unquote’ authorities to shutdown WikiLeaks, empathizers of Julian Assange on the Internet are bragging that the WikiLeaks website has been duplicated in 500 locations so far. BU did a check before posting this blog and the WikiLeaks website is indeed up and running.
What is interesting about the WikiLeaks saga has been the debate suggesting that the authorities may seek to regulate the Internet. What is evident if we are to judge by the denial-of-service strikes on MasterCard International, PayPal, the Swiss Bank which has frozen the assets of Assange and others is the power which techno savvy individuals have to fight back from their bedrooms using the Internet. The proliferation of proxy servers which sit in onion networks makes searching for some of these guys like that of looking for the proverbial needle in the haystack.
The other dimension to the story is to observe the groundswell of support by those who believe freedom of expression is being threatened by the action of governments to shutdown WikiLeaks. At the risk of being accused of being idealistic, some people in the world continue to live with the belief that the clandestine behaviour which countries now engage is not required for humankind to exist. It is difficult to convince many who accept the current state of play as ‘normal’ but shouldn’t we aspire to live in a world of peace and harmony which would mean the current practices engaged by the MOSSAD, CIA, KGB, MI5 and the like must* be dismantled?
Also emerging from the WikiLeaks saga is the role of the Internet in our lifes; at every sphere (individual, corporate, country). Scary is the thought that technology is now responsible for moulding behaviours, a case of a cart before the horse. The technology industry represents billions of dollars, those who doubt the extent to which those with vested interest will go to protect it should recall the Y2K Project. We have developed an army of techno-literate citizens who if mobilized behind a cause which they believe is just can be responsible for ‘destabilizing’ the establishment. Did we write destabilizing or should we have commented on the possibility that arising from the WikiLeaks saga is an opportunity to achieve Internet Transparency. Whatever happens when the dust is settled on this battle which has morphed to control the information highway, surfing for many will never be the same.
Sources on the Internet are reporting WikiLeaks is sitting on explosive information about BP, Bank of America and Guantanamo Bay – “According to the Daily Mail, an encrypted file sent out to various fellow hackers contains the information, and can be disseminated all across the internet if he decides to give them the key — an uncrackable password consisting of 256 digits”
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Pat
I am behind Julian Assange and his supporters the Anonymous group of hackers that are wreaking havoc on MasterCard, Visa, PayPal, etc. Julian Assange did not engage in espionage, he is a third party. No third party has been convicted in the Nasty States of America for espionange. If that were the case, Bernstein and Woodward, who brought down a president would have been jailed. The Supreme Court ruled in the Daniel Ellsberg case that the public had the right to know the truth about the Vietnam war. The commentators up here think the Nasty States of America is afraid of what is going co come next:- either Guantanamo secrets, government torture of its own citizens, or something quite heinous.
I am sorry I sent Wikileaks only 50 Euros for their defence fund. On second thoughts, it should have been 500. I will check the website again and see if the Australian account is still taking bank transfers. I entreat all those who can afford it to send something, even if it is only 5 bucks! Look at all the information that can be had for that small amount of money. Send the money and turn off the Christmas lights for two days.
All are encouraged to click on the sidebar image to comment on the Barbados Tourism Blog which is attracting comments on the White Paper on tourism development.
Loading…
Hants
BU wrote “the Swiss Bank which has frozen the assets of Assange”.
I thought you only put money in a Swiss bank account if you are trying to “hide” it.
Uh wunda eff he wikileak he bank account infomation too.
Loading…
hopi
@Pat…….I would be very careful of what I put my money behind because this smells like one, big con game they’re playing on ALL of us. For all we know he might be an accomplice who would in actuality be working with BIG BROTHER or he could be a ‘fall guy.’ Who is he really working for? What government is funding him? In fact he didn’t release one shite that made a difference to many of us. All this talk is a mere distraction from the real ISSUES. First they gave us 9/11, then the shoe bomber, then the underwear bomber and we have seen where all these bogus fraudulent acts have taken us. Now deluge of “SECRET CABLES?” And All this FREEDOM of the Press don’t amount to a hell of beans because at the end of the day the populace is still IGNORANT while the Beast continue to run roughshod over us and in spite of all the Freedom of the Press, things are getting worse.
Loading…
Curious
@HOPI
“Freedom” is being taken away bit by bit with all these happenings.
The front cover of Time magazine which shows a picture of Assange says it all.
Very risky strategy from this Operation Payback crew.
Some will say they are playing into the hands of the Fat Controllers, and easing the passage of internet censorship.
Others will say this has to be the line drawn in the sand .. this far and no further.
The re-enfranchrisement of the vox populii which the internet has made possible is under serious attack by those with status to protect and unacceptable conduct to conceal.
Although the internet will always be a free for all for the geeks who will stay ahead of this wild west free for all, the danger is that the ordinary user will have their access limited and regulated by the state to whatever is judged to be suitable for them to read.
The danger is the descent by consent into censorship for the bogus promise of security, yet another backward step into 1984 style serfdom to our supposed civil servants.
Check out Australia to see the future.
What is it actually that the US government are so angry about?
Oh yes it is their actual conduct, and it is embarassing to the land of the free and the home of the brave.
The choice now is change your policies or your constitution,
at the moment they are incompatible.
Loading…
Amused
@Pat. For the first and probably the only time, we are in disagreement.
“In his editorial [of today], Assange wrote that democracies require strong media to keep governments honest and that WikiLeaks helps fulfill that role.”
I note the omission by Mr Assange of the word “responsible”. There are opposite ends to any media – on one end, we have the Barbados Nation and the Barbados Advocate that report nothing …..and at the other end Wikileaks.
“Even as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is battling a Swedish extradition order on an obscure charge of rape……” Well, of course it is obscure to us. But NOT, I suggest, to the Swedish Supreme Court, the European Court of Justice and, most importantly, the woman who alleges that she has been violated by Mr Assange.
“Julian Assange did not engage in espionage, he is a third party. No third party has been convicted in the Nasty States of America for espionage.” Not for nothing is it referred to as the Excited States of America…..HOWEVER, my dearest Pat (and I mean that) I hope you will defer to me when I say that you use the wrong phrase by using “third party”. The correct word is “accessory”. Now, did Assange pay for the information? If so, he is no longer an accessory, but a principal.
We live in a free society and we in Barbados can proudly boast a free press known as Barbados Underground. Our money is our own to do with as we see fit. So anyone wanting to contribute to Mr Assange has the inalienable right. MY money is staying firmly in my pocket.
I am reminded that when the United Kingdom alone faced the might of Hitler’s Nazi Germany in World War II, before the Excited States got in on the act, the watchword was “Loose lips sink ships”. Had we had Mr Assange then, perhaps none of us would be alive – after all, the Nazis were not just about the eradication of all Jews, but of anyone that it viewed as being from an “inferior race”, which would include all of us who derive (in whole or in part) our descent from Africa.
Please heed the lessons of history and, sorry Pat, don’t send Assange one red cent.
Sometimes to get desired change someone must be prepared to rock the boat. Often times change does not happen without some pain. Whether one agrees with WikiLeaks modus operandi or not it is evident from the cables leaked that some undesirable practices are being engaged by respectable governments in the name of democracy. It is clear the PEOPLE are looking for some balance.
The discussion continues…
Unfortunately you will not get to debate the issue on our callin programs in Barbados, they have closed shop for the holidays to maximize advertising revenue. The issues swirl while the Fourth Estate closes the window opened to the people. There is irony there somewhere.
With the US and its counterparts frequently portrayed in unflattering light in the cables and reluctant to talk, can you help get the answers to the questions raised?
The UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon at UN headquarters in New York. A leaked secret cable from the US state department ordered diplomats to find detailed intelligence on the UN leadership Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
The WikiLeaks climate cables I have reported over the last week have left some important questions unanswered. And no-one is especially keen to do so, given that while the US often come out worst in the cables, their foreign counterparts are rarely shown in a flattering light either.
• US – "no comment", except you can’t ask for money then accuse us of bribery
• EU – the US cables only report one side of the story (I’ve asked for the other side of the story)
Below are my key remaining questions, which I am sending to the relevant embassies and spokespeople. I will report back if and when I get replies. If you have other questions, let me know in the comments below. If you want to ask the same questions to the relevant authorities wherever you are, please do so and let me know how you get on. I’m on Twitter as @dpcarrington.
Spying at the United Nations
How has your country responded to being targeted by US spying at the United Nations?
Sent to the named target nations: Austria, Burkina Faso, China, Costa Rica, Croatia, France, Japan, Libya, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, Uganda, Vietnam
Dutch linkage of climate aid and support for the Accord
Did the Dutch government ask nations in receipt of Dutch financial aid to support the Copenhagen Accord?
Reference: In this cable, US diplomats report that the Dutch climate negotiator Sanne Kaasjager "has drafted messages for embassies in capitals receiving Dutch development assistance to solicit support [for the accord]. This is an unprecedented move for the Dutch government, which traditionally recoils at any suggestion to use aid money as political leverage."
Saudi Arabia’s audacious appeal for US help in "economic diversification"
Has Saudi Arabia received or been promised financial help from the US to assist with the kingdom’s economic diversification?
Reference: The world’s second biggest oil producer and one of the 25 richest countries in the world asked for US help which in return would "take the pressure off climate change negotiations"
US blocking of Iranian scientist from senior IPCC post
What action has Iran taken in response to the US blocking the appointment of Dr Mostafa Jafari to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?
I think the biggest problem or fear was people would start to be able to join the dots together in past events and would no longer be be spoon fed with lies or prepared to blindly accept Government spin and propaganda. The people give their rulers a free meal ticket and they abused their positions of trust and now the people know what they are up to.
=======================================
Regarding corruption : even a small amount of shit in a jug of milk means you cannot drink any and got to throw it all away.
Loading…
Amused
@David. As I said previously, there are grey areas. As I have said here, the use of the word “responsible” is desirable – but that is just my view. It takes someone of great even-handedness to make the call on what to publish and what not to publish in the interests of public safety of whatever nation.
As for contributing to the defense of Wikileaks, is this fund being used to defend Mr Assange against criminal charges for rape in Sweden as well? Are the public interests of Wikileaks indivisible from the private interests of Mr Assange? Have we any assurances that the money people are asked to contribute is not being used (in whole or in part) for Mr Assange’s defense against the rape charges? And if they are being used to defend Mr Assange and he is found to be guilty in such a manner that his guilt is universally accepted – it is found that he did indeed sexually violate his accusers, are we going to take the position that his value through Wikileaks transcends the rights of his alleged victims?
Mr Assange must be viewed as being innocent until proven guilty, Roman law notwithstanding. But ought we to contribute to his defense against criminal charges for having allegedly violated two women in Sweden, just because he is the integral part of Wikileaks?
I agree that there is a crying need for greater transparency on the parts of all governments – Heaven knows that I agree with that wholeheartedly. However, not at the expense of the civil rights and personal safety of any indivdual. Otherwise, we open the floodgates where any one of us can have our civil rights breached. FOI and protection of privacy i then nothing but a mockery.
Therefore, let Mr Assange provide the transparent proof that he alone is meeting the costs of his defense for the rape charges – after all, he is so good at revealing the confidential information of others, so let him put his money where his mouth is. It will then be up to contributors to decide for themselves individually whether they believe that Wikileaks is desirable or irresponsible, whether the positive value outweighs the negative and contribute (or not) accordingly.
As an aside, can anyone see this of discussion seeing the light of day on our local so-called Fourth Estate? Anyone seen any flying pigs lately?
People are free to contribute to whoever for whatever.
In fact may feel Assange’ charge of rape maybe part of the global conspiracy.
Loading…
iWatchya
OK, from what I am reading it seems that these Sweedish charges are nonsensical… also, this article adds up to what I had read about turmoil in the prosecutor’s office regarding these charges.
The way it works is..
Once you’re caught in the legal system, you’re always trapped.
They can investigate anything they want and will slowly screw you and tie you up in legal proceedings.
Loading…
Amused
@David. Just statement and you may be right about a global conspiracy. But what if you are not right. And of course people can contribute to what they want. I would be the last person to question or try to limit that right. I merely speak for myself and give my reasoning. One thing for sure, at some stage all will be revealed.
John Gilmore, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, once said “The Internet deals with censorship as though it were a malfunction. It routes around it.
This WikiLeaks experiment is proving him correct.
If you “Google” for Wikileaks, the top search term returns an IP address rather than a domain name. The former works — the wikileaks.org domain no longer does.
If you search for WikiLeaks on Wikipedia, you’ll find that they report that the main domain “wikileaks.org” is off-line, but they present two IPs you can use to access the site directly, plus seven CCtlds (Country Code Top Level Domains) which still work. (Obviously these government domain registrars are not so beholden to the “great” US of A.)
Additionally, linked off of any of the operational WikiLeaks sites are 1,368 official mirrors being hosted by volunteers all over the world.
At the end of the day, governments will have to accept that in this modern day information cannot be hidden once it is known.
It was also once said (I don’t remember by whom) “At one time it was feared that the People would be watched by the Government ala 1984 because of advanced technology. Instead what is mostly happening is the Government is being watched by the People.
Targeted sites start running slowly by throttling broadband services e.g. my harmless video above seems to be stuck and it is not that radical for reggae
@BU.David: “Forgive the healthy dose of cynicism caused by Colin Powell justifying an invasion of Iraq based on a 10 year old MBA thesis.
Please forgive Colin Powell for his being an active pawn in this game.
He did remarkable work.
And I cried while he told lies for the “great” US of A before the United Nations.
Note that he did his duty.
And he hasn’t been heard from since….
Loading…
Amused
@Chris. I have no idea if Mr Assange is being well advised legally. I have not seen any of the documentation or evidence. Also, the question of my competence to advise is in considerable question – this is a Swedish charge and I don’t even speak, nor do I read Swedish. I pass.
@David. On Colin Powell, I agree with you. Sad.
All I am saying (and have been saying all along) is that we need to exercise a healthy dose of cynicism on ALL sides and to ensure that donations to Wikileaks for its support are not being treated as personal donations to Mr Assange’s defense fund. If he wants to launch an appeal for funds for his defense, let him do so transparently – after all, he has certainly managed to create the impression that transparency is his all. But it may well be criminal and civil fraud for him to appeal for funds for Wikileaks and then use those funds for his private defense.
Look, I am not saying that Mr Assange is not the victim of a conspiracy, I don’t know – and I am not saying whether or not he is guilty of rape, that is a question of fact for the court to decide. All I am doing is urging caution before people go out and send Wikileaks their hard-earned money. As David has most correctly pointed out, however, at the end of the day, it is their money and their right to contribute – or not. I have always (and always will) support and proclaim that right.
@Amused: “Chris. I have no idea if Mr Assange is being well advised legally. I have not seen any of the documentation or evidence. Also, the question of my competence to advise is in considerable question – this is a Swedish charge and I don’t even speak, nor do I read Swedish. I pass.
Amused, why do you pass?
Should not any intellect human be able derive insight from the evidence presented? No matter what the language or the jurisdiction?
@Amused: “Look, I am not saying that Mr Assange is not the victim of a conspiracy, I don’t know – and I am not saying whether or not he is guilty of rape, that is a question of fact for the court to decide. All I am doing is urging caution before people go out and send Wikileaks their hard-earned money.
Please forgive me for this Amused, but it sounds to me like you are trying to sound authoritative, while limiting your liability…
Please forgive me for this Amused, but it sounds to me like you are trying to sound authoritative, while limiting your liability…
==============================
Chris what do you expect from a lawyer (assuming <`mr Amused is one of them money grabbers slick double speaking greedy manipulating fraudulent totally unprofessional thieves)
i hate lawyers
all solicitors are from hell
Prince CHARLES* & his wife (Camilla) on their way to the London Palladium for a Variety Concert had their car attacked by STUDENT* protesters rioting over tuition fees… The glass on the driver’s side was smashed, and paint thrown on the car….
WELCOME TO BRITAIN IN THE AGE OF WIKILEAKS…
Ya’ gotta luv all this – surely a great time to be alive!!!
@Chris 2 + 2 = 5
…but only for very large quantities of 2
What is your favourite equation this week
Why don’t you try dealing and paying one of these creeps in relation to Court Proceedings and see how much they charge (rip you off) for opening and closing a file and failing to do anything apart from drag it out and screw the case up.
How can a greedy thick headed low life lawyer represent you better than you can yourself in Court, they are too scared to say anything at all sucking up to the Judges.
Its a big deal for a lawyer to go too Court it makes their dick hard to get the experience.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.