Cryptome founder:"Wikileaks is a fraud"

[Plutonia]

See? We're evil trolls.

Fxd for accuracy.

[Plutonia]

US military plan to destroy Wikileaks leaked

By Iain Thomson
Mar 17, 2010 10:00 AM

Bush administration planned to discredit leak site.

A US Army Counterintelligence Agency report into Wikileaks which suggested destroying the reputation of the whistleblower web site has been published by, appropriately enough, Wikileaks.

The 2008 plan [PDF], which is marked as classified, identified Wikileaks as 'a potential force protection, counterintelligence, OPSEC, and INFOSEC threat to the US Army' and details some of the documents that have appeared on the site, including a manual for prisoner handling from Guantanamo Bay and a map of Abu Ghraib prison.

“Wikileaks.org uses trust as a center of gravity by assuring insiders, leakers, and whistleblowers who pass information to Wikileaks.org personnel or who post information to the Web site that they will remain anonymous,” the report's Executive Summary concludes.

“The identification, exposure, or termination of employment of or legal actions against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers could damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others from using Wikileaks.org to make such information public.”

The report suggests that foreign governments could be using the site to learn about US Army secrets and recommends training staff on more secure control of secret information, as well as investigating if current staff members are leaking to the site.

“As two years have passed since the date of the report, with no WikiLeaks' source exposed, it appears that this plan was ineffective,” said Wikileaks.

“As an odd justificaton for the plan, the report claims that ``Several foreign countries including China, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe have denounced or blocked access to the Wikileaks.org website''. The report provides further justification by enumerating embarrassing stories broken by WikiLeaks.

Wikileaks has broken many important stories over the last few years, despite being beset with legal action and a chronic shortage of funds.

Pdf here.

[Plutonia]

Check it out, WikiLeaks is being all Israeli-CIA-Mossad-Disney again

Yeah! Like, the leak of this document here, has CIA psy-op written all over it! Pfft! What do they think we are, full of willed stupidity?:

A Red Cell Special Memorandum 11 March 2010

Afghanistan: Sustaining West European Support for the NATO-led Mission—Why Counting on Apathy Might Not Be Enough (C//NF)

The fall of the Dutch Government over its troop commitment to Afghanistan
demonstrates the fragility of European support for the NATO-led ISAF mission.
Some NATO states, notably France and Germany, have counted on public
apathy about Afghanistan to increase their contributions to the mission, but
indifference might turn into active hostility if spring and summer fighting
results in an upsurge in military or Afghan civilian casualties and if a Dutchstyle
debate spills over into other states contributing troops. The Red Cell
invited a CIA expert on strategic communication and analysts following public
opinion at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) to
consider information approaches that might better link the Afghan mission to
the priorities of French, German, and other Western European publics. (C//NF)

Public Apathy Enables Leaders To Ignore Voters. . . (C//NF)
The Afghanistan mission’s low public salience has allowed French and German leaders to
disregard popular opposition and steadily increase their troop contributions to the
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Berlin and Paris currently maintain the third
and fourth highest ISAF troop levels, despite the opposition of 80 percent of German and
French respondents to increased ISAF deployments, according to INR polling in fall 2009.
....

FUCK!!!

[lupercal]

^ thanks Plutonia, if I had any doubt that wikileaks is an "out-of-the-box" publicity department of the CIA, this clean as a baby's butt press release would put them to rest. There's even a press office phone number in case anybody has any questions:

This memo was prepared by
the CIA Red Cell, which has
been charged by the Director
of Intelligence with taking a
pronounced "out-of-the-box"
approach that will provoke
thought and offer an
alternative viewpoint on the
full range of analytic issues.
Comments and queries are
welcome and may be directed
to the CIA Red Cell at (703)
482-6918 / 482-0169 or
44462/50127, secure. (C)

But I never had any doubts.

[Joe Hillshoist]

4. Is wikileaks any different to Cryptome, apart from the media coverage?

Yep, bigtime, and that's a key point. Cryptome puts out stuff from the CIA, which is a good thing, as the CIA is a secretive, unaccountable, illegal, and unconstitutional criminal operation that needs to be exposed.

[lupercal]

^ Joe it's crossed my mind that cryptome is a limited hangout but basically the proof is in the pudding and wikileaks stinks, badly.

[Nordic]

“The identification, exposure, or termination of employment of or legal actions against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers could damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others from using Wikileaks.org to make such information public.”

Well gosh, what they're doing to Manning is EXACTLY what they're talking about doing in this document!!!

Holy shit.

That's a hell of a find, Plu.

[lupercal]

^ Nordic please tell me you didn't need wikileaks to tell you the Army was contemplating "legal actions" against Manning.

Anyway here's where the rubber really hits the road, i.e. more evidence of what wikileaks is really all about:

How Wikileaks is helping Robert Mugabe's reign of terror - The Washington Examiner- Mark Hemingway - ‎Jan 3, 2011‎
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/bel ... ign-terror

based on:

US cable leaks' collateral damage in Zimbabwe - The Guardian - James Richardson - Jan 3, 2011‎
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... tsvangirai

And so, where Mugabe's strong-arming, torture and assassination attempts have failed to eliminate the leading figure of Zimbabwe's democratic opposition, WikiLeaks may yet succeed. Twenty years of sacrifice and suffering by Tsvangirai all for naught, as WikiLeaks risks "collateral murder" in the name of transparency.

Yay, more freedumb on the march!

[Joe Hillshoist]

Thats ironic, weren't you the one who said if wikileaks were legit JA would be gone quicker than an African dictator?

Exactly how does this fit your thesis?

[Nordic]

^ Nordic please tell me you didn't need wikileaks to tell you the Army was contemplating "legal actions" against Manning.

No, you're missing the point.

“Wikileaks.org uses trust as a center of gravity by assuring insiders, leakers, and whistleblowers who pass information to Wikileaks.org personnel or who post information to the Web site that they will remain anonymous,” the report's Executive Summary concludes.

“The identification, exposure, or termination of employment of or legal actions against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers could damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others from using Wikileaks.org to make such information public.”

The identification, exposure, and arrest and torture of a whistleblower destroys the trust.

They've got Manning in what's basically Gitmo. Worst nightmare stuff. When's he coming out? Nobody knows. What exactly are they doing to him in there? Nobody knows.

Is he afraid of rats? They'll put a cage filled with rats on his head.

It destroys the trust.

That's the point.

They're not just "taking legal action" against Manning, they are terrorizing him. Which terrorizes, in turn, any potential future leakers against leaking.

I'm just reading between the lines, and it's obvious that what the only way they could think of to destroy Wikileaks they now are able to do using Manning.

So many criminals will tell you exactly what they are going to do.

And many of them will tell others, later, exactly what they did.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Yeah but nordic Manning was only caught cos wikileaks was set up to catch him.

Isn't it obvious?

[Plutonia]

Speaking of Manning getting caught:

Lamo’s Two (?!) Laptops
By: emptywheel Friday December 31, 2010 6:31 am

In the original story about Adrian Lamo’s involuntary hospitalization, he loses his medication and calls the cops.

Last month Adrian Lamo, a man once hunted by the FBI, did something contrary to his nature. He picked up a payphone outside a Northern California supermarket and called the cops.

Someone had grabbed Lamo’s backpack containing the prescription anti-depressants he’d been on since 2004, the year he pleaded guilty to hacking The New York Times. He wanted his medication back. But when the police arrived at the Safeway parking lot it was Lamo, not the missing backpack, that interested them. Something about his halting, monotone speech, perhaps slowed by his medication, got the officers’ attention.

But in Ryan Singel’s telling of it, Lamo lost his laptop.

For instance, you make it sound creepy that Poulsen wrote a long profile about Lamo. Huh. Read the story again. Basically, it goes like this. A convicted hacker, now gone legit, calls the police to report a stolen laptop. When the police arrive, instead of focussing on the crime, they 5150 the victim.

I find that rather interesting for several reasons.

First, because the larger story ends with Lamo losing his laptop, too.

Agents from the Army’s criminal and counter-intelligence units and the Diplomatic Security Service met with Lamo on Friday night, Lamo said. The agents asked for files related to the communications between him and Manning, Lamo said, and he gave them a laptop and the hard drive from another laptop, as well as encrypted e-mails that had been stored on a remote server. Lamo said he is scheduled to give a sworn statement to authorities on Sunday.

So is the laptop the authorities took (and the hard drive from another one) a new laptop, purchased to replace the one that got taken? Another one that Lamo had lying about at home?

And then there’s this detail: the PGP key Lamo “no longer had access to” when Bradley Manning first tried to contact Lamo via encrypted email.

GREENWALD: And so the first contact he made with you, was that be email or was that some other way?

LAMO: [Sound of rustling papers] First contact was by email.

GREENWALD: And can you tell me generally what he said?

LAMO: I can’t unfortunately. It’s cryptographically impossible since he encrypted it to an outdated PGP key of mine.

GREENWALD: So were you unable to understand what he said in that first email?

LAMO: Correct. First, second, and third at the very least. I get a lot of random email and the hassle of decrypting it even if I had the key would be enough to push it back about a week or so in my “to read” stack.

GREENWALD: Right. So when you got this email that you were incapable of deciphering did you respond to him in some way, or what did you do?

LAMO: I ignored it for the first couple of hours and then I received a few subsequent emails and then I finally replied, “Hey I can’t read your emails encrypted to a PGP key I no longer have access to. Why don’t we chat via AOL IM instead?”

And finally there are the number of hackers who have had their laptops confiscated (though usually as part of a border crossing) of late.

It’s just a data point. But the story of Lamo being involuntarily hospitalized in response to reporting having his laptop taken is a whole lot different than it is if he has just had his drugs taken away.

Discussed at length in the comments.

[justdrew]

Speaking of Manning getting caught:
Discussed at length in the comments.

and here a long time ago...
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?p=342540#p342540

[jingofever]

Continuing something from here.

To jingofever: needless to say, Young got it right the first time, needless because he says it himself in your first link:

Pessimistically, it is too late, the [wikileaks] initiative never had a chance of surviving due to conflicted goals of being a unique public service and becoming rich at it. George Soros and the CIA jointly make that work, but it cannot be done without their kind. So I said in December 2006 and still believe.

http://cryptome.org/0002/wikileaks-unlike.htm

You are quoting him out of context. He is giving two assessments and you are only quoting his worst case scenario and pretending that is all John Young thinks of Wikileaks.

Optimistically, Assange is smarter than his supporters and opponents, so I expect he will come out all right. If not Wikileaks then another better.

Here he doesn't sound like somebody who believes Wikileaks is nothing more than an intelligence front. He doesn't dismiss Wikileaks like you pretend he does.

Bolding mine. And my original point here was that my view of wikileaks for the most part parallels, but doesn't depend on, Young's, which is colored by his association with it or rather its association with him, as proto-wikileaks made the initial contact with Young, before they dumped him for protesting when they put themselves on offer to spooks. From your second link:

3. An unknown person posted a message on that mail list suggesting a target of up to $5 million dollars to be raised in 6 months. I objected to that stating that such a sum of money could only come that quickly from an organization like Soros or the CIA.

http://cryptome.org/0003/wikileaks-stoned.htm

In these and other comments Young consistently supports the wikileaks concept but rejects Assange's opportunistic exploitation of it.

Your view of Wikileaks is not parallel to Young's. You think Wikileaks is the enemy and much of your criticism is centered on Julian Assange. Some more quotes:

10. Focus on Julian Assange weakens Wikileaks for its purpose is more important that he is. It is a terrible trap to concentrate on him rather than Wikileaks, a trap often set by the media and those opposed to the creation of new forms of information flow. I urge you to learn more about the material published by Wikileaks since 2006, all of it, and avoid vacuous debate about Julian Assange. Julian has said the same, often. He knows that the attention paid to him is damaging Wikileaks and that that is the intention of those who do so, wittingly or unwittingly.

Here John Young expresses concern about Wikileaks being damaged and praises Assange for having the same concern.

13. I suggest you spend six months or a year studying Cryptome and Wikileaks material, avoid trashy media brain deading, do library homework or else you will be just another exploiter and promoter of the public's as a mirror of your own ignorance. Tough comments, but that is what Wikileaks, Cryptome, you, the media and me deserve.

As above he thinks the documents Wikileaks has released are important. He doesn't think they are limited-hangouts or even modified limited-hangouts.

8. Since Wikileaks has received a lot of publicity with release of the gunship video and afterwards I have been bombarded with inquiries about Wikileaks. My attempts to deflect the inquiries were unsuccessful: most wanted information about Julian Assange and little about the operation of the initiative. Quite a few aimed to foster conflict between Cryptome and Wikileaks citing my early, very brief involvement and the mail list publication.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

There's a great documentary coming up soon on RT, all about the Wikileaks revelations concerning Putin and the oligarchs and the 'Mafia State' and Anna Politkovskaya and Chechnya and "bespredel" and the FSB.

Oh, no, wait, sorry. There isn't.