Posted By Joseph Klein On December 5, 2010 @ 9:00 am
Today is the day that WikiLeaks is going to get a taste of its own medicine. Thanks to an early participant in WikiLeaks‘ operations dating back to 2006 and the beginning of 2007, who became so disgruntled with its leader’s outsized ego, lies and deceitful methods that he quit, we have a treasure trove of internal Wikileaks e-mails. I am including a portion of them here (with typos and all). The image above was WikiLeak’s original design for its logo, presumably to show a mole in action.
Mr. John Young, the disenchanted ex-WikiLeaker who runs his own website Cryptome.org and has posted these e-mails, removed the names of the authors and addressees on most of them. However, there is little doubt in my mind, judging from their tone and context, that the main voice of Wikileaks coming through in these e-mails is most likely none other than its founder Julian Assange, who is now being hunted by Interpol under a warrant for sex crimes that he allegedly committed in Sweden.
What these e-mails show are fanatics whose objective has always been to topple governments, including the United States government, by publishing highly embarrassing purloined secret documents. They also reveal a possible connection with George Soros, which should be investigated by the Justice Department as part of its probe into possible criminal wrong-doing in the whole WikiLeaks affair.
These e-mails should dispel the myth about the noble intentions of WikiLeak’s leaders to promote transparency and an informed public – a myth that was peddled last night on the O’Reilly Factor by ultra-liberal Alan Colmes and libertarian John Stossel.
Ironically, the Wikileaks e-mails usually begin with warnings about maintaining the secrecy of their own communications, funding sources and operations. Transparency should start at home, don’t you think?
In the following e-mail, the author talks about bringing down governments, including that of the United States, through what he calls democratized revelations and revolutionary collaborative analysis of the leaks.
In the following example, after discussing the virtues of file-sharing over the Internet as a way to defeat copyright enforcement, the e-mail ends with its author’s belief that Wikileaks can assist with the ” total annihilation of the current US regime.”
The author also exhorts Young (who would quit the Wikileaks enterprise soon thereafter) in messianic terms to:
In yet another e-mail exchange in January 2007, the e-mailers discuss the idea of “fleecing the CIA” for $5M and mention how Soros is “suspectedof being a conduit for black money to dissident groups racketeering for such payola.”
The internal WikiLeaks e-mails back and forth spend much time trying to figure out how to brand Wikileaks. They discuss, for example, using the phrase “ethical leaking” as one way to describe what they do. They also are not above pretending to be a human rights organization:
–
Joseph Klein is the author of a new book entitled Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations and Radical Islam.
Mr. John Young, the disenchanted ex-WikiLeaker who runs his own website Cryptome.org and has posted these e-mails, removed the names of the authors and addressees on most of them. However, there is little doubt in my mind, judging from their tone and context, that the main voice of Wikileaks coming through in these e-mails is most likely none other than its founder Julian Assange, who is now being hunted by Interpol under a warrant for sex crimes that he allegedly committed in Sweden.
What these e-mails show are fanatics whose objective has always been to topple governments, including the United States government, by publishing highly embarrassing purloined secret documents. They also reveal a possible connection with George Soros, which should be investigated by the Justice Department as part of its probe into possible criminal wrong-doing in the whole WikiLeaks affair.
These e-mails should dispel the myth about the noble intentions of WikiLeak’s leaders to promote transparency and an informed public – a myth that was peddled last night on the O’Reilly Factor by ultra-liberal Alan Colmes and libertarian John Stossel.
Ironically, the Wikileaks e-mails usually begin with warnings about maintaining the secrecy of their own communications, funding sources and operations. Transparency should start at home, don’t you think?
In the following e-mail, the author talks about bringing down governments, including that of the United States, through what he calls democratized revelations and revolutionary collaborative analysis of the leaks.
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 06:01:09 +1100
It overlooks the unintended consequences of failing to publish and it overlooks all those who are emancipated by being in a climate where bad governance cannot be concealed. Such a climate is a motivating force to behave better in the first place and shifts structures and individuals that generate bad governance away from positions where they generate poor governance. Injustice concealed cannot be answered. Concealed plans for future injustice cannot be stopped until they are revealed by becoming reality, which is too late. Administrative injustice, by defintion affects many…
From:
To:
[This is restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.
Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'.
This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]
Hi xxxxxxxxx,
Thanks for your kind words.
We’ve thought long and hard about this.
It’s easy to percieve the connection between publication and the complaints people make about publication. But this generates a perception bias, because it overlooks the vastness of the invisible.
Moves towards the democratisation of revelation are strongly biased in favor of justice. Where democratised revelations are unjust they tend to affect isolated individuals, but where they are just, they affect systems of policy, planning an governance and through them the lives of all.The Ellsberg reference is to Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon Papers fame, with whom the Wikileaks folks were comunicating.
Sufficient leaking will bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality – including the US administration. Ellsberg calls for it. Everyone knows it. We’re doing it…”
You may point to a salicious main stream media, but that is not democratised revelation. We point instead to the internet as a whole, which although not yet a vehicle of universal free revelation, is very close to it. Look at the great bounty of positive political change pooring forth as a result.
WikiLeaks reveals, but it is not primarily a tool of revelation. There are many avenues on the internet for revelation. What does not exist is a social movement to that makes acting ethically by leaking a virtue. What does not exist is a comfortable way for everyone to leak safely and easily. What does not exist is a way to turn raw leaks into politically influential knowledge through the revoutionary mass collaborative analysis of wikipedia.
In the following example, after discussing the virtues of file-sharing over the Internet as a way to defeat copyright enforcement, the e-mail ends with its author’s belief that Wikileaks can assist with the ” total annihilation of the current US regime.”
“From:Then there are the tantalizing references to George Soros, whom Wikileaks apparently tried to hit up for a substantial donation to its cause.
WL can advance the political/governance aspects of these developments by several years which will have all sorts of positive cascades, not the least of which is total annihilation of the current US regime and any other regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone.
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 08:56:55 +1100
To:
[This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.
Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]
It’s clear to me that as i2p, tor, anonnet and freenet evolves, other p2p programs become more anon and file-sharing web-sites become more popular the anon + can’t get the cat in the bag part aspects of the internet will become fait acompli with its general in speed and sophistication.
There will be real free speech — that also means an inability to enforce copyrights…
To:In another e-mail dated December 25, 2006 to John Young, the unidentified author of the e-mail (who sounds an awful lot like Assange) describes Wikileaks’ “great task” as “DIY universal open governance.” I’m guessing that DIY means “do it yourself.” In any case, “universal open governance” sure sounds awfully similar to George Soros’ “Open Society .”
From:
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 18:46:09 +1100
[This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]
Some people may be wondering about the unusual names on this list.
There are xxxxxxxxxxxxx people on this list. Everyone is personally known and trusted by, or is, the founding group.
How much will YOU pledge to WL (in matched pledging or otherwise) for its next six months of activities? We can succeed at a slower / scale limited way with under $50,000 / year & volunteers, but it is our goal to raise pledges of $5m by July. Smaller pledges can be used in ways that will generate larger ones, so there’s an amplification on any early contribution.
We’ve noticed at least one blog saying that we appear to be a stalking horse for Soros. This is excellent and part of our strategy for division and support.
The author also exhorts Young (who would quit the Wikileaks enterprise soon thereafter) in messianic terms to:
draw forth our anger, our courage — and our fire — to lick at the damp paper of uncivilization until it catches and our hearts are warmed by the conflagration of basement mendacities the world over. Let our smiles be woken by flowers of openness pushing through the ash from below.As Glenn Beck has so aptly put it in describing how Progressives want to inflame the current world in order to re-make it in their own image, so too does this WikiLeaks fanatic. Bottom up and inside out.
In yet another e-mail exchange in January 2007, the e-mailers discuss the idea of “fleecing the CIA” for $5M and mention how Soros is “suspectedof being a conduit for black money to dissident groups racketeering for such payola.”
The internal WikiLeaks e-mails back and forth spend much time trying to figure out how to brand Wikileaks. They discuss, for example, using the phrase “ethical leaking” as one way to describe what they do. They also are not above pretending to be a human rights organization:
“From:It is time for WikiLeaks to be as transparent about its own operations – including its funders, enablers and its true plans to use purloined classified information as a means to topple the U.S. government and other institutions. If not, we will just have to keep on doing it for them.
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:31 PM
To:
Subject: advisory board inquiry [wikileaks]
xxxxxxx, please pass this around to the relevant folks (is that just you?).
WikiLeaks is developing an uncensorable version of WikiPedia for untraceable mass document leaking and discussion. Our primary targets are those highly oppressive regimes in China, Russia and central Eurasia, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the west who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their own governments and corporations. We aim for maximum political impact; this means our technology is (like the WikiPedia) fast and usable by non-technical people.
We have received over one million documents so far. We plan to numerically eclipse the content the English WikiPedia with leaked documents and analysis.
We believe fostering a safe, easy, socially sanctified way for uncensorable mass document leaking, publishing and analysis is THE most cost effective generator of good governance. We seek good governance, because good governance does more than run trains on time.
Good governance responds to the sufferings of its people. Good governance answers injustice.
We are looking for initial advisory board members to advise us politically, since our strengths are in building large technical projects such as the WikiPedia…
We expect difficult state lashback unless WikiLeaks can be given a sanctified frame (“center for human rights, democracy, good government and apple pie press freedom project” vs “hackers strike again”)…”
–
Joseph Klein is the author of a new book entitled Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations and Radical Islam.
No comments:
Post a Comment