hxxp://wikileaks.org/
http://twitter.com/wikiLeaks
EDITORIAL:U.S. must stop spying on WikiLeaks
Fri Mar 26 08:44:46 UTC 2010
Over the last few years, WikiLeaks has been the subject of hostile acts by security organizations. In the developing world, these range from the appalling assassination of two related human rights lawyers in Nairobi last March (an armed attack on my compound there in 2007 is still unattributed) to an unsuccessful mass attack by Chinese computers on our servers in Stockholm, after we published photos of murders in Tibet. In the West this has ranged from the overt, the head of Germany's foreign intelligence service, the BND, threatening to prosecute us unless we removed a report on CIA activity in Kosovo, to the covert, to an ambush by a "James Bond" character in a Luxembourg car park, an event that ended with a mere "we think it would be in your interest to...".
Developing world violence aside, we've become used to the level of security service interest in us and have established procedures to ignore that interest.
But the increase in surveillance activities this last month, in a time when we are barely publishing due to fundraising, are excessive. Some of the new interest is related to a film exposing a U.S. massacre we will release at the U.S. National Press Club on April 5.
The spying includes attempted covert following, photographing, filming and the overt detention & questioning of a WikiLeaks' volunteer in Iceland on Monday night.
Fri Mar 26 08:44:46 UTC 2010
Over the last few years, WikiLeaks has been the subject of hostile acts by security organizations. In the developing world, these range from the appalling assassination of two related human rights lawyers in Nairobi last March (an armed attack on my compound there in 2007 is still unattributed) to an unsuccessful mass attack by Chinese computers on our servers in Stockholm, after we published photos of murders in Tibet. In the West this has ranged from the overt, the head of Germany's foreign intelligence service, the BND, threatening to prosecute us unless we removed a report on CIA activity in Kosovo, to the covert, to an ambush by a "James Bond" character in a Luxembourg car park, an event that ended with a mere "we think it would be in your interest to...".
Developing world violence aside, we've become used to the level of security service interest in us and have established procedures to ignore that interest.
But the increase in surveillance activities this last month, in a time when we are barely publishing due to fundraising, are excessive. Some of the new interest is related to a film exposing a U.S. massacre we will release at the U.S. National Press Club on April 5.
The spying includes attempted covert following, photographing, filming and the overt detention & questioning of a WikiLeaks' volunteer in Iceland on Monday night.
Army: Wikileaks A National Security Threat
An Army counterintelligence document claims the site is a security threat because it posts classified government materials.
By Elizabeth Montalbano
InformationWeek
March 16, 2010 12:33 PM
Wikileaks.org is considered a threat to national security because it posts classified intelligence information, according to a 2008 U.S. Army document Wikileaks posted Monday.
An Army counterintelligence document claims the site is a security threat because it posts classified government materials.
By Elizabeth Montalbano
InformationWeek
March 16, 2010 12:33 PM
Wikileaks.org is considered a threat to national security because it posts classified intelligence information, according to a 2008 U.S. Army document Wikileaks posted Monday.
If anything happens to us, you know why: it is our Apr 5 film. And you know who is responsible. 8:33 PM Mar 23rd via bit.ly
Judging from their tweets, Wikileaks believes the surveillance is related to an upcoming presentation where they will show unencrypted footage of a May 7 U.S. airstrike in Afghanistan which killed 97 civilians:
The Pentagon had originally planned to show the video as proof that it had conducted the operation appropriately, despite having used airbursting bombs with civilians in the area. They later back-pedaled, likely because video was actually more incriminating than they first believed.
The Pentagon had originally planned to show the video as proof that it had conducted the operation appropriately, despite having used airbursting bombs with civilians in the area. They later back-pedaled, likely because video was actually more incriminating than they first believed.
Afghan Airstrike Video Goes Down the Memory Hole
Last month, U.S. Central Command chief Gen. David Petraeus and other American military officials strongly suggested that they were ready to show the public a classified video which they said would largely vindicate a series of deadly American air strikes in western Afghanistan. Now, a CENTCOM report on the incident has been released. But the video is nowhere to be seen. And the report fails to address why massively destructive one-ton bombs and airbursting munitions were used during the fight, when civilians were in the vicinity.
Secretary of State Clinton, President Obama, and other American leaders apologized after American F/A-18 jets and a B-1 bomber dropped munitions on suspected Taliban positions during a firefight in the village of Garani. As many as 97 civilians may have lost their lives, according to the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission. But the U.S. military remained steadfast that the attacks on a set of Garani compounds were justified — and said that footage taken from the B-1’s weapon sight would “prove [t]hat the targets of these different strikes were the Taliban,” as Petraeus told NPR. The video allegedly shows that two groups of fully-grown adults going inside the compounds targeted by the B-1. Additional footage shows women and children streaming into other buildings that were not bombed.
“Are you going to release the video itself?” NPR’s Steve Inskeep asked the general.
Petraeus answered, “We won’t give it to you, but I believe that we will show it as part of the press briefing.”
Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/200...ideo-goes-down-the-memory-hole/#ixzz0jJWqCZ9q
- By Noah Shachtman
- June 23, 2009 |
- 7:00 am |
- Categories: Af/Pak, Air Force, Info War
Last month, U.S. Central Command chief Gen. David Petraeus and other American military officials strongly suggested that they were ready to show the public a classified video which they said would largely vindicate a series of deadly American air strikes in western Afghanistan. Now, a CENTCOM report on the incident has been released. But the video is nowhere to be seen. And the report fails to address why massively destructive one-ton bombs and airbursting munitions were used during the fight, when civilians were in the vicinity.
Secretary of State Clinton, President Obama, and other American leaders apologized after American F/A-18 jets and a B-1 bomber dropped munitions on suspected Taliban positions during a firefight in the village of Garani. As many as 97 civilians may have lost their lives, according to the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission. But the U.S. military remained steadfast that the attacks on a set of Garani compounds were justified — and said that footage taken from the B-1’s weapon sight would “prove [t]hat the targets of these different strikes were the Taliban,” as Petraeus told NPR. The video allegedly shows that two groups of fully-grown adults going inside the compounds targeted by the B-1. Additional footage shows women and children streaming into other buildings that were not bombed.
“Are you going to release the video itself?” NPR’s Steve Inskeep asked the general.
Petraeus answered, “We won’t give it to you, but I believe that we will show it as part of the press briefing.”
Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/200...ideo-goes-down-the-memory-hole/#ixzz0jJWqCZ9q