Your Source for Leaks Around the World!

Posts Tagged ‘Government’

The Truth Of Tyranny: What We Have Already Lost

In Archive on November 29, 2014 at 2:57 AM

4thAnon:Obama-constitution-burning 111/28/2014

By: Roger Landry (The Liberty Beacon)

WARNING: If you are week of mind and heart, Avoid this article as it WILL cause a severe if not fatal attack of anxiety!

What follows is a statement of reality, NOT what could be!

Since the turn of the century, and especially in the last six plus years, aided by Congress, there has been an accelerated paradigm shift in America away from a Republic to a soft dictatorship with more power being consolidated into the hands of a single individual than any American patriot would have ever believed! So please read, and I invite one and all to challenge any part of this article they feel is falsely stated!

This is a partial list of unalienable rights and freedoms we can now, by law or by executive order, be denied in the land of the (used to be) free, and the circumstances that prevail for the powers that be to enforce this tyranny! It is not an all-inclusive list, but enough to scare the holy crap out of any patriot …

You now have lost your right to assembly or protest through HR 347, giving government the ability to arrest and bring felony charges against anyone engaged in political protests outside their allowed or permitted definition of protest! Passed by Congress!

What we now see on college campuses and protest rallies such as the Bundy ranch, is exclusion zones where free speech is not permitted via local or federal government intervention. This unalienable right must now be practiced as a (government) granted privilege in designated “Free Speech Zones” … REALLY ??? How can something be called Free Speech if the government defines when and where THEY will permit it? But if you violate their restrictions again you can suffer arrest and felony charges.

The exclusion zones (where exercising free speech is NOT permitted) imposed by Section 1752 of this law have no set boundaries. They can be as expansive as local or federal government deem necessary. The “Free Speech Zone” will always be an area designated outside the focal point of the desired protest … and isolated from appropriate press coverage and broadcast media. So by losing your right to protest, haven’t you also lost (or fatally damaged) your right to free speech through HR 347,  Passed by Congress!

The president no longer requires the Senate to approve all his Czars, and can appoint any crony or political ally to certain high-ranking government positions now with impunity from congressional checks and balances with the passage of S 679. This will allow him to consolidate powers never before even considered, due to the relationships he may have with these appointed individuals or their organizations! Passed By congress!

You no longer have the right to due process in any way, shape, or form if our president or his appointed government officials declare you an enemy of the state through the NDAA bill (section 1032/1021). Now this in itself is not so new … But the NDAA bill for 2013 military spending included a clause to protect the rights of American citizens for due process … this (under pressure from the president/White House) was subsequently stripped from the bill leaving the tyranny of the bill intact, WHY ??? There remains no requirement for the burden of proof, as you have no due process and can be locked away indefinitely, without the prospects of a trial. Passed by congress!

You can now be targeted for assassination, as an American via Executive Order 12333, by the president or his appointed representatives if for any reason you are deemed an enemy of the state, and there again is no burden of proof, no oversight and no requirement for due process! My God doesn’t this sound like the political machinations of a Dictatorial Banana Republic? Passed by presidential executive order (but of course)!

This president has made law his power to declare a national emergency, (defined by him) or martial law in an emergency, (also defined by him) with the ability to completely subjugate We The People via Executive order 13603, National Defense Resources Preparedness , This tyrannical order calls for civilian conscription under the Department of the Labor … without compensation! Can you say “Labor Camps”, or “Total Subjugation”!

Also consider under this supposed national emergency, that this EO gives this president TOTAL and absolute control over all food, food production and storage in American … So if you wish to eat, or feed your family, you had better tow the line !!!

His EO states said government would exercise TOTAL CONTROL over the following:

e)  “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption.  “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

(f)  “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer…”

Also consider that that Section 201(b) of  EO 13603 clearly states that it is enforceable under both “emergency ” and “NON-emergency conditions” … REALLY ??? … WHY ???

This president has signed a plethora of executive orders since he entered office, with some having immense power centralizing implications, but no clear definition of boundaries he may not exceed! Here is a partial list that shows the immense authority he would control over this country at his whim (pay particular attention to EO#11000)…

  • EO#10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
  • EO#10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
  • EO#10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
  • EO#10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
  • EO#11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
  • EO#11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.
  • EO#11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration
  • EO#11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
  • EO#11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
  • EO#11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

Add to the above list the constant and fervent attack on our second amendment rights, a right our founders felt critical for We The People to keep an otherwise tyrannical government in check. A right that must be defeated and rendered obsolete in order to allow the progression of tyranny to come to fruition in America. Why, because we as a society own hundreds of millions of guns … more than just about any standing army on this planet, and this poses a serious threat to the fundamental change promised to America, change that does NOT bode well for Americans.

Now consider that this government has bought, paid for and staffed over 600 internment centers, built under contract by Halliburton industries, strategically placed around the country, and capable of holding millions of patriots for forced reeducation and relocation purposes, without due process and for an indefinite period of time as detailed in DOD report FM 3-39.40 (please research this, it is very real).

Your right to reasonable privacy is gone as, through the patriot act and other legislation we are not privileged to, government agencies may spy on you and collect your personal data with legal impunity. Whether it be through social media, phone conversations, internet searches, street lights, appliances in your home, your automobile, or high flying drones etc… Even if you wish to be, you will never be truly alone again!

The government has been, and continues to actively hire tens of thousands of goons, thugs and self proclaimed mercenaries, to man an internal army called by their soft names, the TSA and Homeland Security. These troops are being armed as well as the best combat troops we send abroad to fight our illegal, imperialistic wars, including battle-proven automatic weapons, 2.2 BILLION rounds of ammunition (enough to fight a ten year war of the scope we are involved in across the middle east) including a massive number of .40 caliber hollow point rounds (only meant to kill and outlawed by the Geneva convention even for use in times of war), body armor, armored vehicles, aerial surveillance (drones) etc…!

These internal forces are currently being stationed across the country at strategic locations such as airports, train and bus stations, shopping malls, checkpoints on major highways and even sports events. So, basically, in any place there is significant gathering, or the flow of population!

The Military is in the process of training as many as 40,000 returning soldiers in crowd control and riot termination to be used to augment the internal forces mentioned above, even though this is in direct violation of Posse Comitatus and the Constitution, which clearly states the standing army is to be used for foreign conflicts and not against the American people!

Now this list, as long and comprehensive as it is, only shows the surface of the preparations being made to subjugate the American population … Question, COULD THESE LAWS AND EO’S EVEN EXIST IN AMERICA without tyrannical presidents and a complicit congress?

Seditious

Here is a list of things tyrannical governments throughout history have found cannot be tolerate in order to maintain and protect their hold on absolute power …

Freedom of speech

The right to bear arms

The right to assemble (protest)

The right to due process

The right to reasonable privacy

The right to ownership of critical properties

The right of citizens to choose their leaders

Now look at the above article again … Need I say more. Is the title of this article making more sense to you now?

Are you angry yet ???

All of this is mind boggling, and most would truly believe this cannot happen in America! But America has no magical immunity against tyranny. Just like all republics before us, any government not held accountable by its true governors (the people) will eventually accumulate power unto themselves and tyranny WILL result! Take a serious look at what has been presented here and understand that this is “What We Have Already Lost”! It is well past time to wake up and push back !!!

At present the line “Land of the Free and home of the Brave” is a cruel joke! It is obvious to anyone aware of the above that we are no longer free … and as far as being brave, well where is the massive push-back against this obvious tyranny, where are the masses of the Brave ???

The struggle for liberty may cost you a lot, BUT, doing nothing WILL cost you EVERYTHING!

Please remember, as bleak as this seems, there is hope, because regardless of their power and preparation, the most powerful force in this country has always been, and still remains the 315 million Americans! Together we constitute an unstoppable force that cannot be silenced!

One voice may speak but many unified voices can roar …

Dammit, it is time for We The People to …

ROAR !!!

Resistance From a Cage: Julian Assange Speaks to Norwegian Journalist Eirik Vold

In News on March 1, 2013 at 1:50 PM

ja

03/01/2013

This is an exclusive English translation of an interview published Saturday, February 16, 2013, in the Norwegian news outlet Dagens Næringsliv.

Julian Assange is the itinerant hacker from the Australian Outback who gave the world the biggest leak of secret documents in history. Seven months into his embassy asylum, the cyber crusade for transparency goes on.

This is not the first time that WikiLeaks has come under attack, Assange tells me.

“We had been through a couple of fights. With a commander at the Guantanamo base. We were sued by a Swiss bank. One of my cryptographer friends was ambushed by intelligence agents in a parking lot in Luxembourg. They tried to make him tell them things about WikiLeaks.”

A cryptographer friend? Does that sound a bit like having a “hobbit friend” to you? Then let this be a warning: If you are not used to a modern Internet vocabulary, the story of Julian Assange is full of characters that may seem like they are out of a science fiction novel: cryptographer friends with vital secrets looking over their shoulders in order not to get caught; eccentric professors about to conjure up a quantum mechanics machine with the power to destroy all of cyberspace if it falls into the wrong hands; tiny torrent files, floating around in abstract space, unintelligible and meaningless when separated, but powerful information packages able to knock down governments if sewn together the right way and delivered to the masses. And they are all real and alive. Just as real and alive as the Swedish prosecutors and their extradition request for Assange or the CIA agents on a mission to stop WikiLeaks from leaking – as real as the heavy wooden door I just opened on my way into the Ecuadorian embassy in London and then shut carefully behind me. Aside from the will of a controversial South American president, that door is now the only barrier between Julian Assange and me on the inside, and the police officer from Scotland Yard (London Metropolitan Police) waiting patiently on the outside with handcuffs, a gun and orders to arrest and deport my interviewee.

Travelers in the Australian Outback

“I do what I do because I saw the opportunity,” Assange says. “Because I was born in a Western country, with the necessary education and material resources. And because I care about these issues.”

Don’t even bother to ask if he became the world’s most famous leaker and the West’s number-one dissident because of his special family background and childhood in the Australian Outback.

“I really don’t like that approach,” he says.

But Assange does have a special background. He was born on July 3, 1971, in the medium-sized town of Townsville on the tropical northern coast of Australia. The French-sounding surname, Assange, is said to be an Anglification of the Chinese name Ah Sang. A Taiwanese pirate, it is said, brought that surname to Australia. Assange grew up with his mother. They lived in hiding for about five years due to a conflict over the custody of Julian’s half brother and moved about 30 times before Julian was 14.

Some describe Assange as a distrustful person, at times bordering on paranoid. Is that why he started the interview by asking me questions about my Spanish, as he heard me make small talk with someone who I thought was an Ecuadorian embassy employee?

“Where did you learn your Spanish? Why do you speak with a Cuban accent?”

His voice and body language, however, reveal curiosity rather than distrust. Assange has always asked questions – and was always willing to go all the way to get the answers.

Meet Mendax

It was during his youth that Assange started to take advantage of the opportunities that come from growing up in a First World country: literacy, sufficient money to buy a computer, and access to the Internet. Meet Mendax, the online pseudonym of the 16-year-old hacker Julian Assange. Today Assange is seen by many as the world’s first great “ethical hacker.” His hacker team, called “the international subversives” had strict rules for their activities: “Don’t damage computer systems you break into (including crashing them); don’t change the information in those systems (except for altering logs to cover your tracks); and share information.” Others believe the pseudonym Mendax, which is Latin for “deceitful,” is the most precise way of describing Assange’s personality. Everyone, however, seems to agree that he was an extremely talented hacker.

In 2002, Assange entered the university. With his restless nature, he went through two different universities and jumped between natural sciences, philosophy and neuroscience. The grades he obtained were rather mediocre, but one particular experience proved decisive.

“I became critical of the academy. Mathematics in the university was financed by the US government and military establishment. We had to work with mathematical models that were used to make military bulldozers, such as were deployed in Iraq and employed by Israel to demolish Palestinian homes. There were quantum mechanical models that could be used for mass espionage on the Internet.”

No academic title came out of Assange’s university studies in Canberra and Melbourne. But the typical hacker outlook – rebellious, but apolitical – went through a deep metamorphosis. Faced with what Assange calls “the ivory tower’s connections to economic power relations on the ground” and global geopolitics, Mendax merged with the political consciousness of Assange the university student.

The result was WikiLeaks.

In 2006, a year after Assange strolled out of campus for the last time, WikiLeaks was founded in the capital of Iceland, Reykjavik. During WikiLeaks’ first years, Assange traveled between international conferences with geeky names like Chaos Communications Congress. WikiLeaks arranged meetings and Assange would talk to the journalists who bothered to listen. Meanwhile, the WikiLeaks staff silently stretched its probing tentacles through cyberspace in its search for secrets. Big secrets.

The Rebel Library

January 8, 2010 – the WikiLeaks Twitter account posts a request for help in decrypting a video about a “U.S. bomb strike on civilians ” Three months later, the world witnessed a pristine video recording from 2007 of two Apache artillery helicopters attacking a group of defenseless Iraqis, among them two Reuters press photographers, with 30 millimeter anti-armor ammunition.

“The Collateral Murder video became the iconic video of the Iraq war,” says Assange proudly.

But we had seen nothing yet. During 2010, WikiLeaks released three more enormous leaks: The Afghan War Diary, in which US military servicemen provide the naked truth about NATO’s killing of Afghan civilians, lies, secrecy and support for a corrupt undemocratic Afghan regime; a similar package from Iraq, called the Iraq War Logs, and finally, Cablegate, a collection of cables sent between Washington and US embassies in 274 countries, dating from 1966 to 2010.

Assange explained how US foreign policy was exposed as violent and dishonest, how the revelations made the ground shake beneath corrupt and oppressive regimes and corporations all over the world and stimulated revolutions, as in Tunisia, and reformist movements in Ghana and Kenya.

WikiLeaks is “a rebel library of Alexandria,” Assange declares, making a parallel to the largest known library of classical antiquity.

“With Cablegate, we have provided the largest geopolitical encyclopedia of how the world actually works that ever existed. It’s really hard to think of anything in modern times that comes close to this.”

Assange paints in grandiose words, but insistently backs them up with numbers. All together, the three releases contain more than 700,000 documents. With its 251,276,536 words, Cablegate alone constitutes the greatest package of classified material ever released.

Has he read all the documents?

“No, but I’ve read thousands, many thousands.”

“It’s too much; it’s impossible to read it all, or get the full overview of all the revelations. But the impact all over the world is enormous. Every single one of our releases causes thousands of reactions, and they always give people more insight,” he says.

The chase begins. Assange has still not revealed how WikiLeaks got the Collateral Murder video decrypted. Presumably, one of his cryptographer friends had something to do with it. But in the Pentagon, eyes turned to a young American soldier on duty in Iraq. On May 26, 2010, Private Bradley Manning was arrested.

“We started to realize that the heat was really coming down on us,” Assange says. And it certainly was.

“We were tipped off that we were being followed. Journalists reported about US pressure on different countries – Germany and Australia – to make them prosecute us legally. There were public calls for my assassination from leading American politicians; proposals for laws that WikiLeaks be declared a terrorist organization. The Pentagon announced that it had put together a task force of 120 defense and intelligence personnel. The CIA and the FBI had theirs, too,” he says.

In the United States, WikiLeaks’ domain name in California was shut down. Bank of America announced that all transactions dealing with WikiLeaks would be blocked. Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, Western Union and Amazon followed. German tax authorities started to investigate WikiLeaks.

“Friends of mine were stopped and interrogated in airports. People who only had remote connections to WikiLeaks started to lose jobs and contracts,” he says.

But the FBI may have been closer than Assange imagined. In 2011, the Bureau sent a group of agents in a private jet to Iceland. Without the knowledge of the government of Iceland, the FBI agents hunted down suspected WikiLeaks allies and brought them to the US embassy in Reykjavik for interrogation.

They Can’t Stop Us

During the two-and-a-half hour interview, only once did Assange display his characteristic impatience when he thinks a journalist says something stupid. The occasion was my interruption of a long argument about how powerful elites trick potential opponents into passivity by giving the impression that they have a greater capacity to harm than they actually have. “But you are afraid,” I ask – or, rather, I state.

“That’s a silly statement,” Assange responds.

A short awkward silence follows.

“So you believe that those who are after you exaggerate their ability to harm you?”

“Those who want to harm WikiLeaks constantly exaggerate their ability to harm us. They are mostly incompetent people.”

Is this the cocky Mendax, talking about helpless old policemen in their clumsy hunt for an agile young hacker in cyberspace? Has Assange forgotten that he’s entering his seventh month holed up in a 50-square-meter embassy out of fear of ending up like Bradley Manning?

“This isn’t about me. What happens to me is not important, beyond the practical difficulties it might create for WikiLeaks.”

Assange goes back to a televised Pentagon press conference from 2010 to explain what he means.

“They demanded that WikiLeaks hand over all the documents, eliminate all the copies and cut off all contact with whistleblowers in the US military. Or else they would, and I quote, ‘compel us to do so.'”

But WikiLeaks didn’t obey.

“Yes, they put great pressure on us, financial and legal measures that are still ongoing. But we haven’t removed a single thing,” says Assange.

He thinks the Pentagon has lost face, that their threats are degraded after WikiLeaks ignored their demands and continued publishing.

“The first time we took it seriously, but when they repeated the same demand afterwards, we just laughed about it.

They might be able to take revenge on WikiLeaks, but they couldn’t stop us.”

The WikiLeaks Philosophy

“The left? The left is still stuck in the 1960s,” Assange states drily. Ideologically, he is closer to the free market, even though he says markets always tend to evolve into monopolies unless they are forced to work freely.

Assange might not be afraid, but he is clearly taking a huge personal risk with his disclosure activities. There must be a driving force within him, and it is definitely not a political ideology.

Assange takes a deep breath.

“I can answer long and theoretically, or short, depending on your audience.”

Assange is service-oriented now. Or just very eager to be correctly understood when he is about to answer why a world full of freely competing news media, political movements and research institutions really needs publishers of secret material like him. Assange wants to make a deeper point. WikiLeaks, he says, is about more than just scandalous revelations and splashy headlines.

“In the same way that the ability to solve physical problems is limited by our understanding of physical laws, the ability to solve societal problems depends on our insight into human institutions. All political theories on how the world is and how it should be are built on such an understanding.”

By “institutions” Assange means governments, private companies and other networks of power groups. The problem, he explains, is that while institutions constantly change as they absorb new technology and make old theories outdated, the information about how they actually work is concealed, kept secret.

“Much of what we are being presented, and upon which we build our understanding of the world, is designed to make these institutions palatable for the outside world.”

“This is why only by knowing the internal communications of these institutions can we understand how they really work. So, if we want to make the world more just, if we want humanity to reach its heights and not its lows, then the first step is to get access to that information,” he says.

“And then there’s the media.”

Mainstream Media Disappoints

From high theoretical spheres, Assange brings the discussion down to earth again. Or rather down into the mud, to what was to become a dirty conflict between WikiLeaks and the mainstream media.

But it started as a sweet tango. WikiLeaks did the initial work; The New York Times, Der Spiegel and other leading news publications provided their best writers and huge readerships, maximizing the global impact of the revelations.

“I was quite impressed by their work and what we achieved together in the beginning,” Assange admits.

Then it all went downhill.

Assange speaks with indignation about Western news media turning an American document about an Iranian missile purchase into “fear propaganda” by censoring the expert assessment in the same document which showed that the purchase did not constitute any threat, about Der Spiegel choosing not to publish information that shed some unfortunate light on Angela Merkel, about the terrible accounts of Task Force 373 and their killing of innocent Afghans – which The New York Times refused to publish – and about what Assange considers an intentional personal smear that reached its low point in August last year, when The New York Times wrote that he refused to flush the toilet.

“Media organizations start off small. But when they grow, they are invited to sit down with the powerful. Then they become part of the same powerful elite that they are supposed to be critically monitoring,” he explains.

“It’s shameful,” Assange says, “that a handful of activists in WikiLeaks have published more secret documents than the entire establishment press, with all its billion-dollar budgets, technical competence and human resources, all together.”

A South American Savior

June 19, 2012: Ecuador’s government announced that Assange had sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and requested political asylum in Ecuador. Swedish prosecutors want him extradited to Sweden to question him about sexual assault allegations from two Swedish women. Both said they had voluntary sex with Assange in August 2010, but one claim, among other things, is that Assange ripped off a condom and continued intercourse without consent. So far, the closest prosecutors have come to presenting evidence in the cases is a torn-up condom that later turned out not to have any trace DNA from Assange.[1] Assange has offered to answer questions by telephone, or to go to Sweden, provided that that country guarantees that he will not be extradited to the United States, where alleged whistleblower Manning has been held under conditions that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture deemed “cruel and inhuman.” The Swedes rejected the offer.

So, why did Assange choose to apply for political asylum in a country popularly known as the “banana republic” par excellence of South America?

“Ecuador’s president Rafael Correa is really a special person,” Assange says, his voice filled with admiration.

“He belongs to a new generation of leaders. People like Hugo Chávez in Venezuela have also achieved impressive things, but he is still a military leader. Correa is a US-educated PhD economist. A nationalist in the good sense of the word and a social reformer. This is a very interesting combination.”

On August 15 last year, however, a lot of people doubted that this lifeline would be enough to save Assange. In response to Ecuador’s granting political asylum to Assange the day before, the British government sent a letter wherein it threatened to revoke the diplomatic immunity of the embassy and go in to arrest Assange. International media described warnings about economic sanctions with catastrophic consequences for Ecuador if Assange was not sacrificed. Most analysts seemed to believe Ecuador would give in. Correa reacted by gathering the entire South American continent behind a declaration that unanimously condemned the threat and scared the British government into a humiliating retreat.

Assange smiles when asked what happened to the pale, hunched up and morally defeated refugee that I had read about in the British press lately. Life as a persecuted person may be rough, but Assange also has a lot of friends. The British movie director Ken Loach donated a running machine, and a former British intelligence agent gives Assange martial arts training at the embassy.

“I’m improving my boxing too, now,” Assange says.

The mysterious boxing trainer – Assange does not provide his name – is not the only former intelligence agent who has sided with the Australian “rebel librarian.” A recent letter to the British newspaper The Guardian in support of Assange was signed by an impressive list of former CIA agents and former colleagues from other agencies. On January 25, the CIA officer John Kiriakou was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison for blowing the whistle on waterboarding torture by the US military, while the torturers continue to go free. These are hard times for talkative military and intelligence personnel in the US, and many see Assange and WikiLeaks as their voice.

In addition, a broad spectrum of intellectuals, musicians, politicians from the left and right, hackers and even celebrity feminist Naomi Klein have thrown their support behind Assange and demand that he get free passage to Ecuador. The EU parliament voted against the US-imposed banking blockade against WikiLeaks. Last week, Iceland’s interior minister Ogmundur Jonasson revealed that he told the FBI agents to get out of Iceland when he found out about the illegal interrogations in the US embassy.

“We have support from all over the world. But the level of support is found in countries that have toppled bad governments in the past, and where the internal archives of the fallen regimes have been central elements in the public debate afterward,” Assange explains, pointing to countries like the former apartheid regime of South Africa and former East Germany.

But the rape allegations, whether rooted in reality or not, have stuck to Assange’s name now, it seems, and have undermined his support in some parts of Europe.

“You are not very popular in Sweden, are you?”

“Not in the media, but polls show that I have the support of about 55 percent of the Swedish people. That is right in the middle compared to other countries, and better than in the US and Great Britain,” he says.

A Way Out

A lady whom I had first thought was an Ecuadorian embassy employee turns out to be part of the team of the world’s possibly most famous judge, Baltazar Garzón, who has taken on the task of leading Assange’s legal defense.

Garzón has already confronted Great Britain in another high-profile extradition case in the past. In 1998, the former military dictator of Chile, Augusto Pinochet, was arrested in London on the orders of Interpol. Garzón wanted him extradited to Spain to have him prosecuted for murder, torture and kidnappings committed during his 17-year dictatorship. TheBritish government, however, released Pinochet and let him return to Chile as a free man. Now Garzón is trying to convince the British government that Assange is innocent and does not deserve a harsher treatment – so far, in vain.

Nevertheless, Assange is still optimistic.

“We are many people working hard to make the US drop persecution of WikiLeaks,” he says, and seems to believe that the accusations from Sweden will also disappear if the US gives up its goal of crushing WikiLeaks.

“But right now, it does not really seem that the cases against you and WikiLeaks are about to disappear. Don’t you have another plan to get out of here?”

I ask the question while peeking out from the tiny gap between the old-fashioned curtains in the room. It is no more than two meters from the window to the ground beneath, and it looks dark and abandoned. Earlier speculations had it that the Ecuadorians would attempt to smuggle Assange out in a diplomatic bag and into a speed boat waiting in the river Thames a good kilometer south of the embassy, and then into international waters.

Assange has a different escape route planned. It goes via the upcoming parliamentary elections in Australia. He will be a candidate for the newly founded WikiLeaks party.

“25 percent of the electorate says it will vote for me. I have supporters from the social democrats, the conservatives and the Green Party. And the support is uniform all over the country,” says Assange.

And the election campaign has not even started. The Australian police has said Assange’s legal problems abroad do not impede him from being a candidate in Australia.

Still, escape “in a British police car” is the option with the lowest odds, only 1.38, at the Irish bookmaker site Paddy Power, which takes bets on how the celebrity refugee will leave the embassy in the end. A seat in the Australian senate stands at 3.5.

As the bets keep rolling in, Assange makes the best out of life on 50 square meters. Meanwhile, WikiLeaks continues pumping out secret documents. In spite of mutual distrust, smearing and accusations of censorship, WikiLeaks and the establishment media hold on tight to each other. It still takes two to tango. WikiLeaks needs access to the public and newspapers need splashy headlines. According to Assange’s most recent numbers, there is a WikiLeaks-based article in almost every second issue of The New York Times. The tones might have soured, but neither can afford to stop dancing.

wiki2

Via Truthout

Sequester May Slow Pentagon Response to WikiLeaks

In News on February 27, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Howard Stern and Jesse Ventura discuss politics, WikiLeaks, Monsanto and other interesting topics.

02/27/2013

The across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration that are expected to take effect on March 1 could impede the government’s ability to respond to WikiLeaks and to rectify the flaws in information security that it exposed, a Pentagon official told Congress recently.

Zachary J. Lemnios, the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering, was asked by Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) to describe the “most significant” impacts on cybersecurity that could follow from the anticipated cuts to the Pentagon’s budget.

Mr. Lemnios replied that “cuts under sequestration could hurt efforts to fight cyber threats, including […] improving the security of our classified Federal networks and addressing WikiLeaks.”

The sequester could also interfere with the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative that began under President Bush, he said, and could hold up plans to “initiat[e] continuous monitoring of unclassified networks at all Federal agencies.”

Mr. Lemnios’ response to Sen. Portman’s question for the record (which had not specifically mentioned WikiLeaks) followed a March 2012 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Emerging Threats and Capabilities that was published in December 2012 (at page 42).

Generally speaking, computer security within the military is a daunting problem, Mr. Lemnios told the Committee, particularly since “The Department operates over 15,000 networks and 7 million computing devices across hundreds of installations in dozens of countries around the globe.”

The challenge of cybersecurity cannot be fully described in public, said Dr. Kaigham J. Gabriel of DARPA. “The complete picture requires a discussion at the special access level.” But he told the Committee last year that several basic points can be openly acknowledged:

“Attackers can penetrate our networks: In just 3 days and at a cost of only $18,000, the Host-Based Security System” — the Pentagon’s baseline computer security system — “was penetrated.”

“User authentication is a weak link: 53,000 passwords were provided to teams at Defcon; within 48 hours, 38,000 were cracked.”

“The Defense supply chain is at risk: More than two-thirds of electronics in U.S. advanced fighter aircraft are fabricated in off-shore foundries.”

“Physical systems are at risk: A smartphone hundreds of miles away took control of a car’s drive system through an exploit in a wireless interface.”

“The United States continues to spend on cybersecurity with limited increase in security: The Federal Government expended billions of dollars in 2010, but the number of malicious cyber intrusions has increased.”

Though it was presumably not intentional, the WikiLeaks project galvanized government information security programs and accelerated efforts to devise “insider threat” detection mechanisms, along with intensified surveillance of classified and unclassified government computer networks.

“New classes of anomaly detection methods have been developed and are based on aggregating events across time and multiple sources to identify network and host-based behavior that might be malicious,” James S. Peery of Sandia National Laboratories told the Senate Armed Services Committee at last year’s hearing. “These approaches and behavioral-based methods have been successful in finding previously undiscovered malware.”

“One drawback of this technology, though, is that it has a very high false positive rate,” he said.

One Response to “Sequester May Slow Pentagon Response to WikiLeaks”

Anonymous Says:

The Pentagon’s cybersecurity issue is not about money, and how to develop the technology to prevent these attacks. It’s much deeper. Hackers, I think, have a certain tendency to question authority and that tendency doesn’t fit well in a military environment. That means that the human talent needed to tackle the cybersecurity issues won’t even work for the Pentagon and its cybersecurity divisions.

Also, there is this huge link between the Defense Department’s black eavesdropping initiatives and a vision of a different Internet, that is somewhat less open and less anonymous, and certainly less subversive. That, I think, makes the hackers side with the Average Joe on his desktop (the hacker was just an Average Joe, too) instead of with the huge Big Brother being built in the basement of the NSA that seeks to control everything that goes through the Internet. It’s a lost cause for the Pentagon.

wiki

Via SecrecyNews

America must not “dictate” to world, new defense chief says

In News on February 27, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Hagel speaks to service members and civilian employees on his first day in his new post at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia

02/27/2013

Decorated Vietnam veteran Chuck Hagel was sworn in as U.S. defense secretary on Wednesday after a bruising Senate confirmation battle, and promised to renew old U.S. alliances and forge new ones without attempting to “dictate” to the world.

Addressing Pentagon employees shortly after a small, closed-door swearing-in ceremony, Hagel spoke optimistically, if vaguely, about global challenges ahead and the importance of American leadership abroad.

“We can’t dictate to the world. But we must engage the world. We must lead with our allies,” Hagel said in what appeared to be unscripted remarks.

“No nation, as great as America is, can do any of this alone.”

He also plainly acknowledged the prospect of looming automatic budget cuts, known as the sequester, saying flatly: “That’s a reality. We need to figure this out. You are doing that.”

“We need to deal with this reality,” he added, as hopes dim in Washington that Congress might act in time to forestall $46 billion in Pentagon cuts, due to kick in on March 1.

Hagel, a former two-term Republican U.S. senator from Nebraska, broke from his party during the administration of George W. Bush to become a fierce critic of the Iraq war.

Many Republicans opposed to Hagel’s nomination scorned him over Iraq and raised questions about whether he was sufficiently supportive of Israel, tough enough on Iran or truly committed to maintaining a robust nuclear deterrent.

The 58-41 Senate vote to confirm him late on Tuesday was the closest vote ever to approve a defense secretary, with only four Republicans supporting him.

AMERICA MUST USE POWER “WISELY”

Hagel did not acknowledge any Republican criticisms or reveal any personal concerns about working with Congress during his remarks on Wednesday. But he did articulate his views about the need for caution when America flexes its muscle abroad.

“We have great power and how we apply our power is particularly important,” Hagel said.

“That engagement in the world should be done wisely. And the resources that we employ on behalf of our country and our allies should always be applied wisely.”

Hagel’s views of war and the limits of American military power were shaped in part by his experiences in Vietnam, where he fought as an infantryman alongside his brother and was awarded two Purple Hearts, the medal given to troops wounded in battle.

Hagel still carries the shrapnel from one of his injuries and he is the first Vietnam veteran to lead the Pentagon.

Introducing Hagel in the Pentagon auditorium, an Army infantryman with two tours in Afghanistan said Hagel “knows the very real cost of war” and was guided by principals to use force only when necessary.

Among his first tasks, Hagel will start weighing in on crucial decisions about the Afghan war, notably the size and scope of the American force that President Barack Obama will leave behind in the country once NATO declares its combat mission over at the end of 2014.

Leaving fewer troops than U.S. commanders recommend could create tension with the military, and become a lightening-rod issue with Republicans.

Hagel’s predecessor, former defense secretary Leon Panetta, discussed with NATO allies in Brussels last week keeping a NATO force of between 8,000 and 12,000 troops. A senior NATO official said last month that the United States expects other NATO allies to contribute between a third and half the number of troops Washington provides.

Via Reuters

Army Forced to Release Documents Related to Secretive Bradley Manning Case

In Bradley Manning, Manning, News on February 27, 2013 at 12:59 PM

02/27/2013

After over one-thousand days of secretive legal proceedings, the United States government has released a small portion of the thousands of pages of courtroom documents from the case against alleged WikiLeaks source Pfc. Bradley Manning.

Manning, a 25-year-old Army intelligence specialist, was arrested in May 2010 and accused of passing hundreds of thousands of sensitive military documents to the anti-secrecy whistleblower site while working as an intelligence officer in Iraq. The soldier is scheduled to be formally court-martialed beginning this June and could be sentenced to life in prison for his role in providing WikiLeaks with privileged material. Since details from the pre-trial motion hearings have been scarce, however, little has been known publically about the government’s prosecution until now.

On Wednesday, the Military District of Washington informed members of the press that 84 judicial orders and rulings from the pre-trial hearings have been reviewed, redacted and uploaded to a military-run website where they can be viewed “In response to various Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and inquiries from news agencies.” The trove so far includes minor legal rulings regarding Pfc. Manning’s proposed plea, court orders sent to mental health professionals and other rulings made by the judge.

The Army says that the seven-dozen documents published on Wednesday make up just a small sampling of the more than 500 files that have already been either filed by attorneys for both sides in the matter or the military judge presiding over the case, Col. Denise Lind. In all, those documents total more than 30,000 pages, and the Army says materials will be continuously published online as they are prepared for release. They warn the media, however, that “due to the voluminous nature of these documents,” it could be a long time coming before the rest of the papers are vetted appropriately for publication.

The statement from the military comes just one day after Col. Lind ruled that although Pfc. Manning has been detained for over 1,000 days, the government did not violate the speedy trial statute in the military’s Rules for Courts-Martial. Lind admitted to the court that delays in the case have occurred in part due to the continuous efforts the government has undertaken to audit the trove of documents relevant to the case, but said the defense was not hindered by the slow-moving trial. David Coombs, the civilian defense attorney for Pfc. Manning, had unsuccessfully asked the judge to dismiss all charges against his client due to the lingering, nearly three-year process.

Previously, Coombs implored the court to free Pfc. Manning by arguing that the treatment his client endured while detained in a military brig after being captured was tantamount to torture. Lind agreed, in part, and said 112 days will be subtracted off of any sentence handed to the officer. When Coomb’s latest request was declined, however, journalist Ed Pilkington wrote for The Guardian that the government’s absurd quest for total secrecy has left Manning to stand trial in an “Alice-in-Wonderland world.”

“Lind spent an hour and a half without pause reading out a judgment that must have stretched to 50 pages, at a rate that rendered accurate reporting of it diabolically difficult,” he said of Lind’s response to Coomb’s last unsuccessful appeal. “No copy of the ruling has – then or now – been made available to the public, presumably on grounds of national security, even though every word of the document had been read out to the very public that was now being withheld its publication.”

“This prosecution, as it is currently conceived, could have a chilling effect on public accountability that goes far beyond the relatively rarefied world of WikiLeaks,” Pilkington wrote. Only hours later, the Army said they would start releasing courtroom filings.

Last May, the Center for Constitutional Rights sued the US government over the lack of transparency in the Manning trial. “Public scrutiny plays a vital role in government accountability. Media access to the Manning trial proceedings and documents is critical for the transparency on which democratic government and faith in our justice system rests,” CCR Legal Director Baher Azmy said in a statement when the petition against the Army Court of Criminal Appeals was filed. Additionally, a legal brief urging the government to release documents was filed last September and endorsed by The Associated Press, Atlantic Media, Dow Jones, Gannett, Hearst, CNN, McClatchy, The New York Times, The New York Daily News, Reuters, the Washington Post and other media outlets.

Pfc. Manning is expected to testify on Thursday this week when he is scheduled to formally offer a plea. He may avoid a life sentencing by pleading guilty to lesser charges.

manning

Via RT

%d bloggers like this: