Showing posts with label Assange Wiki-Leaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Assange Wiki-Leaks. Show all posts

January 18, 2017

Is Julian Assange Ready for Extradition or Was this another Lie?

 A lawyer for Julian Assange has indicated that the WikiLeaks founder is ready to face extradition to the US after Barack Obama commuted the sentence of US army whistleblower Chelsea Manning.

 When will the US government stop persecuting whistleblowers? Assange Vs. Manning

[Assange is not your typical hacker and more or whistle blower. There is a difference between whistle blowing and stealing information from people’s computers.  Since Assange has hacked-stolen information from people without their knowledge he is more of a hacker than whistle blower. Also some of the information has been classified as ToP Secret and the understanding among intelligence agencies has been that he probably cost some agents their life’s and others to be neutralized in their positions. Chelsea Manning never divulged Top Secret information, just secret. He never put anyone life’s in danger, except maybe his own.  It is suspected that his connection with Assange convinced him he was doing the right thing. He was a very young computer IT with lots of problems dealing with his sexuality. We actually don’t know if he was black mailed by Assange or someone else to give the information to Assange. Assange who has been described as a man without a conscience by some and a stooge by Putin has felt bad for Manning and proposed to turn himself in if Manning was released.  He is no fall guy, He knows Trump likes him(as even quoted him) and there is a chance he might be pardon or not prosecuted in the US. I think he is wrong on both counts because his crimes are just too many and then there is the American Presidential election in which it is believed he meddle in the US election by releasing information provided by Russia’s Secret Service and helped Clinton in no small way to loose the election. Still with Trump’s there are no guarantees.] adamfoxie*blog

Assange has been holed up at the Ecuadorian embassy in London since claiming asylum there in 2012. He has refused to meet prosecutors in Sweden, where he remains wanted on an allegation of rape, which he denies. He has repeatedly said he fears extradition to the US on espionage charges if he leaves the embassy, though at the moment the only public extradition ruling against him comes from Sweden.

Assange welcomed Obama’s decision to free Manning, who passed 700,000 documents, videos, diplomatic cables and battlefield accounts to WikiLeaks. “Your courage and determination made the impossible possible,” Assange said in a statement thanking campaigners for their efforts to get her released.

He did not mention a pledge made last week that he would agree to US extradition if Obama granted clemency to Manning:

But Melinda Taylor, who serves on Assange’s legal team, said he would not be going back on his word. “Everything that he has said he’s standing by,” she told the Associated Press.

The WikiLeaks Twitter accounted also suggested its founder was ready to go to the US:

The White House insisted on Tuesday that Assange’s offer to submit to extradition if Obama “grants Manning clemency” did not influence the US president’s action.
“The president’s decision to offer commutation was not influenced by public comments by Mr Assange or the WikiLeaks organisation,” the White House official said. “I have no insight into Mr Assange’s travel plans. I can’t speak to any charges or potential charges he may be facing from the justice department.”

In his statement, Assange said Manning should never have been convicted and described her as “a hero, whose bravery should have been applauded not condemned”.

Assange went on to demand that the US government “immediately end its war on whistleblowers and publishers, such as WikiLeaks and myself”.

Another lawyer for Assange, Barry Pollack, did not address whether Assange intended to come to the US.

“For many months, I have asked the DoJ to clarify Mr Assange’s status. I hope it will soon,” he said in a statement. “The Department of Justice should not pursue any charges against Mr Assange based on his publication of truthful information and should close its criminal investigation of him immediately.”

The justice department has never announced any indictment of Assange and it is not clear that any charges have been brought under seal. The department, in refusing to turn over investigative documents sought by Manning under the Freedom of Information Act, has acknowledged that the FBI is continuing to investigate the publication of national security information on WikiLeaks arising from Manning’s disclosures.

“That investigation concerns potential violations of federal criminal laws, in the form of serious threats to the national security, and the investigation continues today,” department lawyers wrote in a court filing last year. “From the terms of her request, it is clear that Manning seeks to obtain documents concerning that investigation.”

Separately, the FBI is also investigating Russian meddling through hacking in the US presidential election. Hacked emails from top Democratic officials and Hillary Clinton campaign aides were posted on WikiLeaks in the final weeks of the presidential race.

With the commutation coming just days before Obama leaves office, any decision on whether to charge or seek to extradite Assange will now fall to the Trump administration.

January 17, 2017

Whistle Blower Chelsea Manning Will Be Freed After 7 Yrs.Confinement

 After 7 yrs Chelsea will be let set free as a whistle blower. Q. Will Putin’s mouth Piece, Julian Assange turn himself now and would admirer Pres. Trump also pardon him?

President Obama has commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning, the former Army intelligence officer, who is serving 35 years for giving classified information to Wikileaks, the White House announced Tuesday.

The decision, made in the last days of Obama's presidency, means that Manning can be freed May 17, seven years into her prison term. Obama granted 209 other commutations and 64 pardons.

The Manning commutation, which will undoubtedly be controversial, was not a complete surprise.

NBC News reported last week that she was on the president's short list. And at a briefing before the announcement, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said that Manning's actions were not as "dangerous" as those of fugitive leaker Edward Snowden.

More than 117,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to consider the commutation, and Snowden had tweeted that if Obama could only free one person, it should be Manning.

Manning — then known as Bradley — was locked up in 2010 after swiping 700,000 military files and diplomatic cables and giving them to Wikileaks.

Three years ago, she applied for a presidential pardon and was rejected. In her petition this November to have her sentenced commuted, she said she understood her earlier request was "too soon" and "too much."

"I should have waited. I needed time to absorb the conviction, and to reflect on my actions. I also needed time to grow and mature as a person," she wrote.

"I take full and complete responsibility for my decision to disclose these materials to the public. I have never made any excuses for what I did. I pleaded guilty without the protection of a plea agreement because I believed the military justice system would understand my motivation for the disclosure and sentence me fairly. I was wrong."

Manning, who announced she was a transgender woman the day after her sentencing, said she has not been able to get proper treatment for an anxiety-producing condition called gender dysphoria while incarcerated at the military prison in Leavenworth, Kansas.

"The bottom-line is this: I need help and I am still not getting it. I am living through a cycle of anxiety, anger, hopelessness, loss, and depression. I cannot focus. I cannot sleep. I attempted to take my own life,” she wrote.


October 24, 2016

DOS US Computer Attacks Courtesy of Assange Friends


Besides being able to be a free man there is nothing Wiki-hacks Assange would like more than to have Donald Trump become the President of the US. That would probably open the door to residency in the US. After all he is not Mexican so that should be ok.

Assange friends were frightened at first and then pissed when they could not hear from the master and then they find out the Ecuadorians cut the internet connection under pressure from everyone connected to the West and Particularly the US. Their only way to retaliate was to deprive business’ in large sections of the US of their customers.

With Donald Trump's poll numbers in freefall, pundits say he needs something big to happen to rescue his campaign.

One of his last chances might be WikiLeaks.

Julian Assange has been consistently leaking emails from the Clinton team over the last few months, which has been causing big problems for her campaign.

The US government has been working hard to shut Assange down, and last week his host, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, pulled the plug on his internet connection.

Wikileaks says its supporters launched a massive cyber attack on major US websites in retaliation.

So why is Julian Assange—former champion of left-wing libertarians—seemingly throwing his support behind Donald Trump? Power corrupts and Assange is got his head full. No one has ever tried in a serious way to manipulate US elections before but there was never a Donald Trump running and he is a man that does not take loosing well. Needless to say he will grab the devil’s own pussy to get elected and if Assange can deliver wether by real emails or made up emails showing that she is done anything similar to what Trump is done she is fried. Only Trump is allowed to get away with Trump shenanigans. The american press makes sure of that and the american people seals it.

October 18, 2016

Is Wikileaks (wikihacks) Assange Dead? -Update-

No it seems he is not dead but there is no confirmation either Adamfoxie believes he is not dead because it has been 24 hours and in that time we would have received confirmation. Below is what sparked the rumors yesterday:

Social media yesterday went into meltdown over the bizarre messages, consisting of a string of numbers, which user speculated may be a “dead man's switch". 
Prominent figures who fear for their lives, such as Mr Assange, have been known to programme their communication channels to send out seemingly incomprehensible messages upon their deaths which make sense to only a select few followers.
Julian Assange

Ecuadorian embassy in London
He is currently holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London
The revelations provoked a maelstrom of speculation about the health and potential state of the WikiLeaks founder, who is hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. 
Concerns about his safety intensified earlier this month after it emerged that Hillary Clinton asked whether the US miltary could "drone" Mr Assange whilst she was Secretary of State. WikiLeaks has repeatedly vowed to release dynamite information which could sink the Democrat nominee's bid for the White House. 
However, rumours of his death were immediately denied by WikiLeaks volunteer Kelly Kolisnik, who tweeted: "Julian Assange is alive and well. Rumors circulating that he tweeted out a ‘Dead Mans' switch are completely false and baseless."

The speculation surrounding the condition of Mr Assange is not the first to be sparked by a series of cryptic tweets.

Back in August the account of fellow whistleblower Edward Snowden, who is currently in exile in Russia, posted a similarly bemusing message.

The tweet contained a string of numbers and letters, just like WikiLeaks', followed by a message simply saying: "It's time."

However, the alert later turned out to be a false alarm, with the account deleting the tweet and friends of Mr Snowden insisting he was fine.

It comes as Wikileaks said an unidentified "state actor" had shut down internet access for Assange.

Assange has been claiming asylum at London's Ecudorean embassy. Wikileaks did not return calls and emails on Monday, but it tweeted: "We have activated the appropriate contingency plans."

A woman who picked up the phone at the Ecuadorean embassy said: "I cannot disclose any information."
Information source:

Update 10/19/2010
The Ecuador embassy in London has for the time being taken away Assange(wikihacks, wikileaks) internet connection for trying to influence ‘another nation’s political system’.
This apparently was the reason for the silence which many thought it was Assange being dead because he stopped sending out hack emails.
He seems to be alive and twirling his thumbs (for the time being).

Politics by and for Cowards Wikileaks(wikihacks)

 Sends out stuff and no one seems to verify what is true or not but then there’s
 no one stand behind it except a hack living in Ecuador’s embassy in London. Can’t be sued , can’t be prosecutor can’t even be punch in the mouth.

The public release, via WikiLeaks, of purloined e-mails and documents related to Hillary Clinton and her campaign has produced starkly different reactions. On the whole, the news media is nonplused.
In a typically snarky tweet, Washington Post reporter David Weigel mocked the notion that the WikiLeaks dump would alter the dynamics of the election, summing it up with the purposefully mundane revelation that “Clinton strategists debated how to respond to controversies.”
The leaks, which may or may not be part of a Russian effort to undermine Clinton in order to advance her rival, largely exposeroutine political discussion among staff engaged in the constant, necessary balancing of policy, politics and presentation. It’s an equilibrium that any successful campaign must achieve before assuming leadership of a successful government.
How far should the campaign go in appeasing popular Senator Elizabeth Warren? How would the media react if Clinton, in discussing her use of e-mails, said she was “bemused” by technology? How should the candidate reposition herself on trade, given the shifting politics?
To anyone who has worked in electoral politics, or extensively covered it, the WikiLeaks dump reads like a thousand variations on the theme of “dog bites man.” It paints a portrait of Clinton as a normal politician surrounded by a normal staff engaged in normal politics.
To many on the political right, that reality is unacceptable. They had told themselves that WikiLeaks would be the deus ex machina of this election, exposing Clinton as a treasonous devil and delivering the White House, and all its broad powers, into the transgressive hands of Donald Trump. Now, having promised themselves scandalous gold, they re-imagine every dull pebble in the pan as a shimmering nugget.
Americans for Tax Reform, an organization devoted to using the tax code to preserve and enhance the financial interests of the wealthy, packaged a leaked e-mail on gun regulation -- ATR leader Grover Norquist sits on the board of the National Rifle Association -- with a video that the group had unearthed of Clinton testifying on guns in 1993. “On April 14, 2016,” the press release stated, “ATR released previously unseen video footage from a non-C-SPAN camera showing Hillary’s visceral facial expression” as then Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey discussed a proposed gun tax.
Not only is the video footage “previously unseen,” it emanated from a “non-C-SPAN camera.” Ooh-la-la. The secret footage shows Clinton silently nodding her head, appearing both sincere and thoughtful as she acknowledges either her agreement with, or merely the rudimentary comprehension of, another person. The “visceral facial expression” is recognizably human.
Judicial Watch, a right-wing organization that has pursued Clinton for years and sued to gain access to her State Department e-mails, likewise has been sifting through its discoveries. After another batch was released last week, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton stated in a press release that “the e-mails are further proof that Hillary Clinton used her office to provide special treatment -- even photo ops -- for donors to the Clinton Foundation.”
Judicial Watch is based in Washington D.C. Throughout that city, lobbying and law-firm offices, even cubicles occupied by junior staff, are accented with photographs of the occupant grinning next to President Ronald Reagan or George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton or George W. Bush or Barack Obama or hundreds of other prominent politicians. There is cause for unease about Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system when she was secretary of state and, to a lesser extent, about the dual tracks of the Clinton family’s foundation work and the powers of the office that Clinton seeks. A proliferation of photo-ops, however, is not a threat to the republic.
There is more than desperation in these efforts to transform a “visceral facial expression” or a series of photo-ops into a sinister conspiracy. There is pathos. It reaches its logical conclusion in right-wing blogs, such as the popular Gateway Pundit, which posited that leaked e-mails suggest that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last year one month before his 80th birthday, was murdered and that Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta was involved.
The suggestion is painfully stupid (you can read it here if you have an abundance of patience or a paucity of wits). Yet it’s a mistake to think that stupidity is the common ground for such wild charges. Norquist is no dummy, and most likely the others are plenty bright as well.
The source fueling the right’s recklessness isn’t stupidity. It’s cowardice. It takes a basic level of character and respect for truth to confront the world as it is rather than concoct fantasies that flatter your ideology, complement your anxieties and excuse your faults.
Clinton is a complex, real politician with formidable skills and obvious failings. The cartoon versions of the right -- and left -- are shabby frauds devised by people who shrink from the demands of honest politics. To defeat Clinton, and the political tradition she embodies, on the merits requires facts, arguments, policies, vision. Credible opponents rise to the task. For cowards, there’s WikiLeaks.
Francis Wilkinson  at

September 16, 2016

Wikileaks Assange Will Turn Himself in if Obama Pardons Chelsea Manning

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the target of one of the largest national security investigations in U.S. history, agreed on Thursday to hand himself over to authorities. There’s only one catch.

In exchange for his surrender, Assange is asking President Barack Obama to grant clemency to Chelsea Manning, a former U.S. Army private convicted in 2013 of leaking sensitive government files to WikiLeaks. Under the U.S. Constitution, Obama has the authority to pardon or commute the sentences of prisoners convicted of federal crimes.

Manning, a transgender woman, is currently serving out the remainder of a 35-year prison sentence at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in Leavenworth, Kansas. She suffers from gender dysphoria (as diagnosed by military doctors) and in July attempted to end her own life, later citing a lack of appropriate treatment as the cause. The military agreed this week to allow Manning to undergo sex reassignment surgery drawing an end to a hunger strike initiated by the prisoner five days before.

While there’s no indication the Obama administration would consider Assange’s offer—the White House did not respond to a request for comment—the president has the ability to commute Manning’s sentence and set her free. (In contrast, a “pardon” is applied in the case of a former prisoner who has already completed their sentence.) According to the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Obama has granted 575 commutations during his presidency, more than the last nine presidents combined, while denying nearly 9,000 commutation requests.   uest for treatment, she must still attend a hearing on Sept. 20 concerning a set of charges stemming from her suicide attempt. Those charges reportedly include “resisting the forced cell move team” and “conduct which threatens.” Manning’s lawyers have characterized the charges as “absurd,” stating it is impossible Manning resisted the cell extraction, or threatened the safety of the prison guards, since she was unconscious when they arrived. Manning additionally faces a charge of “prohibited property” for a book in her cell allegedly mislabeled. 

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, Manning, if convicted, could face an array of harsh punishments, including solitary confinement, reclassification into maximum security, and an additional nine years in medium custody. The conviction might also negate any chance of parole.

Last month, Manning supporters delivered more than 100,000 signatures calling on Secretary of the Army Eric Fanning to drop the charges. 

“Chelsea's access to mental health care has been inconsistent,” Manning attorney Chase Strangio of the ACLU said at the time. “It is an ongoing concern of her attorneys and supporters that she is not getting adequate mental health care, particularly in light of the external forces that are destabilizing her mental health, like the service of these administrative charges against her and the ongoing investigation of those charges.”
100,000+ signatures delivered to the Army requesting Manning's charges be dropped.  

Manning was previously held in solitary confinement for nearly a year at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia for up to 23 hours a day and was forced to strip naked at night. The treatment, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture found, was tantamount to “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.”

Dr. Daniel Ellsberg, a whistleblower behind released the Pentagon Papers in the 1970s, told the Daily Dot by phone that he believes the indefinite detention faced by Manning amounts to a threat of torture by the U.S. government. “It is in fact very common,” Ellsberg said, regarding the isolation of prisoners for extended periods of time, a practice shown by scholarly research to have devastating effects on the human psyche. (Approximately half of all prison suicides in the U.S. occur in solitary confinement.)

“When you say ‘indefinitely,’ we've seen for example in the U.S. system that can mean years, really, many years even,” Ellsberg said. The fact that solitary confinement is widely used, he added, “doesn't mean that it's acceptable, or normal, or tolerable, but rather that torture goes on very widely in our prison system.”

Manning’s treatment at the hands of the U.S. government may offer a preview of what life would be like for Assange were he to wind up in the U.S. under charges of espionage.

A United Nations working group ruled early this year that Assange has been “arbitrarily detained” by the British government for more than four years. Assange, now 45, fled to Ecuador’s London embassy in August 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden where he is sought by police for questioning over sexual crimes, which he has denied committing. Assange has previously stated he believes Sweden’s request is a ruse by officials seeking to curry favor with the U.S. government by handing him over to face espionage charges for leaking classified U.S. information.

This week, the Ecuadorian embassy agreed to allow an Ecuadorian prosecutor to question Assange at the London embassy on Oct. 17. on behalf of Sweden. Swedish chief prosecutor Ingrid Isgren and a police investigator are permitted to be present during the questioning.

Assange has previously offered to surrender himself for extradition, provided U.K. and Swedish authorities confirm publicly they have no intention of handing him over to the U.S. for his WikiLeaks-related activities. That offer was apparently refused or ignored.

Assange’s fears are, in fact, well grounded. The Federal Bureau of Investigation claimed as late as last year that files pertaining to WikiLeaks are exempt from freedom of information laws due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.” The FBI also targeted Jacob Appelbaum, an activist and researcher and known confidant of Assange, in various ways, including a warrant to acquire a year’s worth of his data from Google.

WikiLeaks did not immediately respond to a request for further details about Assange’s offer. 

For more information about suicide prevention or to speak with someone confidentially, contact the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (U.S.) or Samaritans (U.K.).

Dell Cameron

 Dell Cameron, 

August 25, 2016

On His Mass Data Dump Assange Gets Gays Outed, Medical Files Exposed

 Julian Assange, safely in hiding while he reveals people identities and thus either ruins their lives or get them killed.
In 2010 he was called a journalists by some. Today everybody knows better.

Below I am posting the original post from the Associated Press (AP) in which they write about their investigation on this man who is the father of Wiki leaks and what he has been revealing. Most of us thought that it was a good thing when whistle blowers were posting about secret memos and emails between the tops heads of governments in the West. Nobody even ask why he never posted about Russia or even China. Since he is a hack it would seem he would be able to break into any country since he had information of the biggest countries like US and the countries the US did any sort of business with, except Russia. He would publish about US Vs. Russia but not the other way around.

Today we know. He has no qualms in exposing foreign agents (American and others) in any government. He also does not mind exposing gay diplomats or government officials in countries where being gay carries a death sentence. No, he publishes all, except what he doesn’t publish.  He figures in order to stay relevant he needs to publish secrets and hurt people from time to time. You will notice he will not publish Trumps secret tax return papers but he would publish what ever he is got on the DNC and even some Republicans except the ones he thinks he might need in the future. He is not careful about what he reveals but what he doesn’t reveal is because is close to him. Which means justice, truth and the righteous way is not him. He talks about principles like if he had any.
He is just a hack that makes a living at this.  

Here is the AP posting on these man’s latest mass data leak:


 WikiLeaks' giant data dumps have rattled the National Security Agency, the U.S. Democratic Party, and the Saudi foreign ministry. But its spectacular mass-disclosures have also included the personal information of hundreds of people — including sick children, rape victims and mental health patients, The Associated Press has found.

In the past year alone, the radical transparency group has published medical files belonging to scores of ordinary citizens while many hundreds more have had sensitive family, financial or identity records posted to the web. In two particularly egregious cases, WikiLeaks named teenage rape victims. In a third case, the site published the name of a Saudi citizen arrested for being gay, an extraordinary move given that homosexuality can lead to social ostracism, a prison sentence or even death in the ultraconservative Muslim kingdom.

"They published everything: my phone, address, name, details," said a Saudi man who told AP he was bewildered that WikiLeaks had revealed the details of a paternity dispute with a former partner. "If the family of my wife saw this ... Publishing personal stuff like that could destroy people."

WikiLeaks' mass publication of personal data is at odds with the site's claim to have championed privacy even as it laid bare the workings of international statecraft, drawing criticism from longtime allies.
Attempts to reach WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for an interview over the past month have been unsuccessful and the ex-hacker did not reply to written questions. In a series of tweets following the publication of the AP's story, WikiLeaks dismissed the privacy concerns as "recycled news" and said they were "not even worth a headline."

Assange has been holed up for the past four years in Ecuador's embassy in London, where he sought refuge when Swedish prosecutors sought to question him over sexual assault allegations. He gave no indication Tuesday that the offending material would be taken down.

WikiLeaks' purported mission is to bring censored or restricted material "involving war, spying and corruption" into the public eye, describing the trove amassed thus far as a "giant library of the world's most persecuted documents."

The library is growing quickly, with half a million files from the U.S. Democratic National Committee, Turkey's governing party and the Saudi Foreign Ministry added in the last year or so. But the library is also filling with rogue data, including computer viruses, spam, and a compendium of personal records.

The Saudi diplomatic cables alone hold at least 124 medical files, according to a sample analyzed by AP. Some described patients with psychiatric conditions, seriously ill children or refugees.

"This has nothing to do with politics or corruption," said Dr. Nayef al-Fayez, a consultant in the Jordanian capital of Amman who confirmed that a brain cancer patient of his was among those whose details were published to the web. Dr. Adnan Salhab, a retired practitioner in Jordan who also had a patient named in the files, expressed anger when shown the document.

"This is illegal what has happened," he said in a telephone interview. "It is illegal!"

The AP, which is withholding identifying details of most of those affected, reached 23 people — most in Saudi Arabia — whose personal information was exposed. Some were unaware their data had been published; WikiLeaks is censored in the country. Others shrugged at the news. Several were horrified.

One, a partially disabled Saudi woman who'd secretly gone into debt to support a sick relative, said she was devastated. She'd kept her plight from members of her own family.

"This is a disaster," she said in a phone call. "What if my brothers, neighbors, people I know or even don't know have seen it? What is the use of publishing my story?"

Medical records are widely counted among a person's most private information. But the AP found that WikiLeaks also routinely publishes identity records, phone numbers and other information easily exploited by criminals.

The DNC files published last month carried more than two dozen Social Security and credit card numbers, according to an AP analysis assisted by New Hampshire-based compliance firm DataGravity. Two of the people named in the files told AP they were targeted by identity thieves following the leak, including a retired U.S. diplomat who said he had to change his number after being bombarded by threatening messages.

The number of people affected easily reaches into the hundreds. Paul Dietrich, a transparency activist, said a partial scan of the Saudi cables alone turned up more than 500 passport, identity, academic or employment files.

The AP independently found three dozen records pertaining to family issues in the cables — including messages about marriages, divorces, missing children, elopements and custody battles. Many are very personal, like the marital certificates that reveal whether the bride was a virgin. Others deal with Saudis who are deeply in debt, including one man who says his wife stole his money. One divorce document details a male partner's infertility. Others identify the partners of women suffering from sexually transmitted diseases including HIV and Hepatitis C.

Lisa Lynch, who teaches media and communications at Drew University and has followed WikiLeaks for years, said Assange may not have had the staff or the resources to properly vet what he published. Or maybe he felt that the urgency of his mission trumped privacy concerns.

"For him the ends justify the means," she said.


Initially conceived as a Wikipedia-style platform for leakers, WikiLeaks' initial plan was for a "worldwide community of informed users" to curate the material it released wholesale, according to the site's now defunct question-and-answer page. Prominent transparency advocate Steven Aftergood privately warned Assange a few days before the site's debut that the publish-everything approach was problematic.

"Publication of information is not always an act of freedom," Aftergood said in an email sent in late 2006. "It can also be an act of aggression or oppression."

Those concerns were heightened after WikiLeaks published a series of documents leaked by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, now known as Chelsea, in 2010. The publication provided explosive evidence of human rights abuses in Iraq and Pakistani cooperation with the Taliban in Afghanistan — among many other revelations — but it also led to allegations that civilians in war zones had been endangered.

Assange insisted WikiLeaks had a system to keep ordinary people's information safe.

"We have a harm minimization policy," the Australian told an audience in Oxford, England in July of 2010. "There are legitimate secrets. Your records with your doctor, that's a legitimate secret."

Assange initially leaned on cooperating journalists, who flagged sensitive material to WikiLeaks which then held them back for closer scrutiny. But Assange was impatient with the process, describing it as time-consuming and expensive.

"We can't sit on material like this for three years with one person to go through the whole lot, line-by-line, to redact," he told London's Frontline Club the month after his talk in Oxford. "We have to take the best road that we can."

Assange's attitude has hardened since. A brief experiment with automatic redactions was aborted. The journalist-led redactions were abandoned too after Assange's relationship with the London press corps turned toxic. By 2013 WikiLeaks had written off the redaction efforts as a wrong move.

Withholding any data at all "legitimizes the false propaganda of 'information is dangerous,'" the group argued on Twitter.

But some private information genuinely is dangerous, courting serious consequences for the people involved.

Three Saudi cables published by WikiLeaks identified domestic workers who'd been tortured or sexually abused by their employers, giving the women's full names and passport numbers. One cable named a male teenager who was raped by a man while abroad; a second identified another male teenager who was so violently raped his legs were broken; a third outlined the details of a Saudi man detained for "sexual deviation" — a derogatory term for homosexuality.

Scott Long, an LGBT rights activist who has worked in the Middle East, said the names of rape victims were off-limits. And he worried that releasing the names of people persecuted for their sexuality only risked magnifying the harm caused by oppressive officials.

"You're legitimizing their surveillance, not combating it," Long said.


WikiLeaks was criticized last month after it released what it described as "AKP emails," a reference to Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party, known by its Turkish acronym AKP. But dissidents' excitement turned to scorn when they realized the 300,000 documents were little more than a vast collection of junk mail and petitions.

Vural Eroz, 66, was one of many people who'd written to the AKP, complaining in 2013 that his car had been towed from his lawn by authorities in Istanbul. He was startled to find that WikiLeaks had published the message along with his personal number.

"I would like to know for what purpose they exposed me," he said in a phone interview.

Prominent anti-censorship campaigner Yaman Akdeniz, who reviewed hundreds of messages like Eroz's, said there was nothing newsworthy in any of them.

Eroz said he admired WikiLeaks for exposing wrongdoing but said, "they should try to protect innocent civilians. They should screen what they leak."

Experts say WikiLeaks' apparent refusal to do the most minimal screening is putting even its own readers at risk.

Vesselin Bontchev, a researcher at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences' National Laboratory of Computer Virology, said he was startled to find hundreds of pieces of malicious software in WikiLeaks' dumps — suggesting the site doesn't take basic steps to sanitize its publications.

"Their understanding of journalism is finding an interesting document in a trash can and then dumping the can on your front door," he said.

Even Assange's biggest backers are getting uncomfortable. Journalist Glenn Greenwald, one of the site's leading allies in the media world, has distanced himself from WikiLeaks over its publication strategy. National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, whose asylum in Russia WikiLeaks helped broker, recently suggested the site should take more care to curate its work.

Others are disillusioned.

Dietrich, the transparency activist, said he still supported WikiLeaks "in principle" but had been souring on Assange and his colleagues for a while.

"One of the labels that they really don't like is being called 'anti-privacy activists,'" Dietrich said in a phone interview. "But if you want to live down that label, don't do stuff like this!"


Satter reported from Paris and London. Cinar Keper in Istanbul contributed to this report.

July 6, 2013

Snowden Gets Assylum Offer From Venezuela and Nicaragua

Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro said it would give asylum to the intelligence leaker, who is believed to be stuck up in a transit area of Moscow airport.

Actually Venezuela would be an excellent choice to go in this hemisphere which is a country not controlled by United States.  Actually the best place would be Canada but that would never happened. This is not like the Viet Nam days in which Canada showed exceptional courage in doing what was right even though both the Democratic Administration of Lyndon B. Johnson and Republican Richard M. Nixon put surmateble pressure against the Canadians to not accept and exatradite all the young guys that were going there before being drafted for the war or just desserting the army while on leave in the US.
Any country in Europe would be best of all because the trip could be made by a combination of land and waterand sikipping air but any place the Russians fly should not be a problem. Cuba would be just great, except that he is a decade or two too late. The government there now as both Fidel and his brother Raul, who is the President now, are looking to possibly improve relations with the United States, particularly while they have a democratic adminisration. He Could have a nice life in Cuba with little money and be able if the government there would allow it to have internet and phone access to anywhere. However I would be surprised of that happening. 
Contrary to Julian Assange that kept jumping from one place to the other and eventually was quiet down by a sillly charge of rape. A charge that anyone can prove and it can put someone in jail for a quarter of a century. He has been given assylum by Equador (Extradiction and information on Assange), He (Snowden have been stuck in one place, which is very uncomfortable for him but probably safer since the Russian have given him free passage to leave to anywhere that would take him.
Meanwhile Ex contra-Leader Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega said his country would do so "if circumstances permit”.
The offer from Mr. Ortega, ex enemy of the administration of Ronald Reagan, who tried to forced him out of office even though he had been elected President ( so much for the statement of the USA that Morsi in Egypt could nlot be forced out by the Army because he was dully elected ( sometimes I think that the governemnt of the USA, both Congress and the White House either Don’t know history or they think all the people have forgotten it).
In Nicaragua he wont be as well as in Venezuela which is a country more educated than Ncaragua and a bit less poor because of their oil imports. Yes I said lesss poor when it shpould be rich being that the have enough oil for theselves and to import. Someone most be righ overthere, I hear from the people from there that is not the people that are rich. You wonder sometimes…!
Bolivia's Evo Morales said Mr Snowden could get asylum there if he sought it.
Mr Snowden has sent requests for political asylum to at least 21 countries, most of which have turned down his request. Earlier, Wikileaks said he had applied to six additional countries on Friday.
The whistleblowing website said it would not name the countries "due to attempted US interference".
But even if a country accepted the American's application, getting there could prove difficult, the BBC's Steven Rosenberg, in Moscow, reports.
European airspace could be closed to any aircraft suspected of carrying the fugitive, our correspondent says.
Earlier this week, several European countries reportedly refused to allow the Bolivian president's jet to cross their airspace on its way back from Moscow - apparently because of suspicions that Edward Snowden was on board.
Mr Morales described Mr Snowden's actions as "a fair way of protesting" and described him as "persecuted by his fellow countrymen".
"We are not scared [of reprisals]," he added.

President Maduro made his announcement in a speech on Venezuela's Independence Day.
"As head of state and government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela I have decided to offer humanitarian asylum to the young US citizen Edward Snowden so he can come to the fatherland of Bolivar and Chavez to live away from the imperial North American persecution," President Maduro said.
The US wants to prosecute Mr Snowden over the leaking of thousands of classified intelligence documents.
Earlier Mr Ortega said Nicaragua had received an application at its embassy in Moscow.
"We are open, respectful of the right to asylum, and it is clear that if circumstances permit it, we would receive Snowden with pleasure and give him asylum here in Nicaragua," AFP news agency quoted the Nicaraguan president as saying.
 Daniel Ortega was a fierce opponent of the US during his first period as Nicaragua's president in the 1980s, after the left-wing Sandinista movement came to power.
Bolivia, which had also suggested it could offer Mr Snowden asylum, saw its presidential plane barred from European airspace on Tuesday.
There was speculation the 30-year-old was on the plane carrying President Evo Morales back from Russia to La Paz earlier this week.
"Edward Snowden has applied to another six countries for asylum," tweeted Wikileaks, which has been helping the former CIA contractor.
"They will not be named at this time due to attempted US interference."
The US has been blamed for being behind the decision by France, Portugal, Italy and Spain to close its airspace to Bolivia's president, whose plane was grounded in Austria for 13 hours as a result.
Earlier on Friday, Spain's Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo admitted he and other European officials had been told that Mr Snowden was on board - but refused to say who gave out the information.
He denied Spain had closed its airspace to the presidential plane, explaining that the delay in Austria meant the flight permit had expired and needed to be renewed.
His comment is the first official recognition by the European states that the incident with Mr Morales' plane was connected with the Snowden affair.
It has been widely condemned by President Morales and several other South American nations, who were critical of the US.
Mr Snowden arrived in the Moscow airport from Hong Kong last month.
He revealed himself to be responsible for the leaking of classified US intelligence documents that revealed a vast surveillance programme of phone and web data.
The documents have also led to allegations that both the UK and French intelligence agencies run similarly vast data collection operations, and the US has been eavesdropping on official EU communications.
source: BBC/UK 

Featured Posts

How isTrump aTerrible Pres?Don’t knowHowDemocracyWorks^Cats

Donald Trump was supposed to be the guy who would fix everything in Washington, but after two months in office he’s p...