-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
From Leak to Gusher
Author: BobR
Date: 02/11/2011 13:47:19
When WikiLeaks first started to make a name for itself, it seemed like an amazing idea. Here was a place where whistle-blowers could "leak" documents in order to right wrongs they felt were not seeing the light of day. It was a noble idea, and a threat to power, which is why you would expect the powers-that-be to try and take them down. That seems to have happened, although their meteoric appearance on the websphere has been cause for internal problems as well.
It's never been proven whether or not governments have plotted against WikiLeaks. There are those who live and breathe conspiracy theory who assume it as fact. Those of us who prefer evidence (not coincidence or inference) are not convinced. However, a slew of documents has been released which shows that a coordinated campaign to disrupt and discredit WikiLeaks has come from the private sector:
It's not clear whether BOA actually hired them or even sought them out, but there were definitely meetings with high-level executives where discussions took place. I swear I've seen movies like this. Incredible...
Of course - there are internal problems as well. There's founder Jullian Assange's well-known rape investigations and extradition nightmares. Former wikileaks "employee" Daniel Domscheit-Berg has released a book named "Inside WikiLeaks", in which he paints Assange as the egotistical narcissistic person he seems to be. Some of the allegations are a bit specious, including charges that Assange abused Berg's cat. Nonetheless, the internal rifts and defections are textbook examples of what happens when a good concept is ruined by egos and infighting.
To add another facet to this story, the site has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. It's unclear how a website (as opposed to a person) can be awarded a prize like this. If Assange is the one to pick it up (should they win), he should feel lucky it is in Norway, not Sweden.
The ultimate problem with WikiLeaks, though, is that the original concept fell apart. The submitters were supposed to be anonymous, yet Bradley Manning is in military prison, awaiting a trial. The leaked documents were meant to shine a light on the nefarious doings of the powerful, yet names of the powerless were not redacted from the documents, putting them in harm's way. It seems that some documents were released and some power structures were attacked simply to show that they could do it. Huge caches of documents spilled out to voyeuristic eyes, with no thought about the damage they could do to those they purported to help.
This is why Daniel Domscheit-Berg and others split from WikiLeaks and created their own site OpenLeaks. The idea is to provide a place for people to anonymously submit documents which are then turned over to the press. The submitter's identity is protected. The press can act responsibly to ensure that innocents are not harmed by the release of the information. OpenLeaks will not release documents directly to the public. The powerful will never know how the press obtained the documents.
It seems to be a well-thought out approach that achieves the original goals of WikiLeaks. Here's hoping they can keep the egos out of it. We don't need another gusher.
It's never been proven whether or not governments have plotted against WikiLeaks. There are those who live and breathe conspiracy theory who assume it as fact. Those of us who prefer evidence (not coincidence or inference) are not convinced. However, a slew of documents has been released which shows that a coordinated campaign to disrupt and discredit WikiLeaks has come from the private sector:
After a tip from Crowdleaks.org, The Tech Herald has learned that HBGary Federal, as well as two other data intelligence firms, worked to develop a strategic plan of attack against WikiLeaks. The plan included pressing a journalist in order to disrupt his support of the organization, cyber attacks, disinformation, and other potential proactive tactics.
[...]
What was pointed out by Crowdleaks is a proposal titled "The WikiLeaks Threat" and an email chain between three data intelligence firms. The proposal was quickly developed by Palantir Technologies, HBGary Federal, and Berico Technologies, after a request from Hunton and Williams, a law firm that currently counts Bank of America as a client.
The law firm had a meeting with Bank of America on December 3. To prepare, the firm emailed Palantir and the others asking for "...five to six slides on Wikileaks - who they are, how they operate and how this group may help this bank."
Hunton and Williams were recommended to Bank of America’s general council by the Department of Justice, according to the email chain viewed by The Tech Herald. The law firm was using the meeting to pitch Bank of America on retaining them for an internal investigation surrounding WikiLeaks.
"They basically want to sue them to put an injunction on releasing any data," an email between the three data intelligence firms said. "They want to present to the bank a team capable of doing a comprehensive investigation into the data leak."
It's not clear whether BOA actually hired them or even sought them out, but there were definitely meetings with high-level executives where discussions took place. I swear I've seen movies like this. Incredible...
Of course - there are internal problems as well. There's founder Jullian Assange's well-known rape investigations and extradition nightmares. Former wikileaks "employee" Daniel Domscheit-Berg has released a book named "Inside WikiLeaks", in which he paints Assange as the egotistical narcissistic person he seems to be. Some of the allegations are a bit specious, including charges that Assange abused Berg's cat. Nonetheless, the internal rifts and defections are textbook examples of what happens when a good concept is ruined by egos and infighting.
To add another facet to this story, the site has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. It's unclear how a website (as opposed to a person) can be awarded a prize like this. If Assange is the one to pick it up (should they win), he should feel lucky it is in Norway, not Sweden.
The ultimate problem with WikiLeaks, though, is that the original concept fell apart. The submitters were supposed to be anonymous, yet Bradley Manning is in military prison, awaiting a trial. The leaked documents were meant to shine a light on the nefarious doings of the powerful, yet names of the powerless were not redacted from the documents, putting them in harm's way. It seems that some documents were released and some power structures were attacked simply to show that they could do it. Huge caches of documents spilled out to voyeuristic eyes, with no thought about the damage they could do to those they purported to help.
This is why Daniel Domscheit-Berg and others split from WikiLeaks and created their own site OpenLeaks. The idea is to provide a place for people to anonymously submit documents which are then turned over to the press. The submitter's identity is protected. The press can act responsibly to ensure that innocents are not harmed by the release of the information. OpenLeaks will not release documents directly to the public. The powerful will never know how the press obtained the documents.
It seems to be a well-thought out approach that achieves the original goals of WikiLeaks. Here's hoping they can keep the egos out of it. We don't need another gusher.
