HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » struggle4progress » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Current location: undisclosed
Member since: Fri Feb 27, 2004, 09:28 PM
Number of posts: 104,575

Journal Archives

I'll guess you just didn't read the FOIA release carefully. The investigation in this case concerned

a women who, contrary to order, began to frequent the Wikileaks website and who, contrary to advice, repeatedly attended Assange's trial. She also began to use screen names indicating sympathy with Assange, Wikileaks, and Manning; she further regularly posted pro-Assange Twitter messages; and in addition, she associated with some pro-Assange and/or pro-Manning groups in the UK. She also reportedly exhibited some psychological symptoms during this period. Since she had SIPR NET access and a Top Secret security clearance, there was some concern, and an investigation was launched, into whether she had communicated with the enemy. She was denied further access to restricted information. The investigation apparently produced no evidence that she had leaked anything

The investigation actually began due to a complaint that she did not follow a lawful order (the 11 January 2011 memorandum), and the natural reading of that fact is simply that the military had directed all personnel to avoid contact with Wikileaks in the aftermath of Manning's arrest; that would explain why she was advised not to attend Assange's trial, for example

Thomas A. Ferguson, Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, wrote the 11 Feb 2011 memorandum, directing DoD personnel to "follow established procedures for accessing classified information only through authorized means." The beginning page of the actual FOIA release (after the two page FOIA cover letter) states clearly:
... SUBJECT allegedly visited the website Wikileaks in violation of a Memorandum From the Undersecretary of Defense, dated 11 Jan 11, which violated Article 92, Failure to Obey, UCMJ ...
This is simply because: accessing the website Wikileaks is not an established procedure for accessing classified information through authorized means. Such access would contradict the lawful general order or regulation embodied in Ferguson's 11 January 2011

Thomas A. Ferguson
Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence


Ferguson's 11 Feb 2011 memorandum is available as pdf from the FAS site:
... It is the responsibility of every DoD employee and contractor to protect classified information and to follow established procedures for accessing classified information only through authorized means ...


From beginning page of the actual FOIA release (after the two page FOIA cover letter):
... SUBJECT allegedly visited the website Wikileaks in violation of a Memorandum From the Undersecretary of Defense, dated 11 Jan 11, which violated Article 92, Failure to Obey, UCMJ ...

Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

10 USC § 892 - Art. 92. Failure to obey order or regulation

It should be clear, to anyone who reads the entire dozen pages, that the actual concern, and the actual point of the investigation, was whether she posed a security risk and whether unauthorized releases had occurred. Her financial transactions were scrutinized for that reason; she was asked whether she had released any information; persons, who knew her, were asked whether she might release any information; and she discussed with investigators, methods by which information could be released:

... <b6 b7c> believed SUBJECT would not divulge any classification to any unauthorized individuals ... SUBJECT had access to SIPR but <b6 b7c> did not believe SUBJECT looked on SIPR often ... <b6 b7c> believed SUBJECT had the potential to leak classified information ... Lt Col <b6 b7c> explained that in light of SUBJECT's related feeling towards USAF and military service, he intended to suspend SUBJECT's access to SIPR ... <b6 b7c> was unaware if SUBJECT traveled outside the UK ... <b6 b7c> did not think SUBJECT was a National Security risk ... SUBJECT's access to classified information has since been revoked ... SUBJECT explained that at no time was she ever asked to provide or supply any classified FOUO information ... SUBJECT stated that she was not subverted ... SUBJECT pointed out that SIPRnet access was not closely monitored ... SUBJECT reiterated that she had never disclosed any classified or for official use only (FOUO) information and was never approached to provide any military information ...

The matter was finally closed because there was no evidence she had released any information to unauthorized persons
Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 11, 2012, 01:44 PM (2 replies)

... Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm

for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents .. record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October ...
10 Days in Sweden
Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 11, 2012, 07:43 AM (0 replies)

Police officer slams TV portrayal of Assange

October 9, 2012 - 10:23PM
Karl Quinn

... Mr Day claimed the attack on the US military database Milnet — a major plot point in the critically acclaimed telemovie that screened on Ten on Sunday night — never happened, and added that had Julian Assange really been on the trail of evidence that the US had deliberately targeted civilians in Operation Desert Storm his team would have known about it.

"The facts are that the AFP found no evidence of any such event," Mr Day, who left the force 12 years ago, told The Age. "We had intercepts on his telephone lines so we captured everything he did on his computer. We also captured all his verbal communications on the telephone. On top of this we gathered all of the evidence from his house" ...

"Assange was not prosecuted for breaking into any Milnet system that contained information on military targets as there was no evidence that it occurred — and we had a lot of evidence," Mr Day said ...

Another title card at the end notes that in 2010 Wikileaks "released the Afghan and Iraq War Logs, over half a million field reports and communications by the US Military. It was uncannily similar to the material <Assange had> first seen as a teenager 20 years before" ...

Posted by struggle4progress | Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:33 AM (1 replies)

Assange's lawsuit threats show him to be an habitual bullshitter:

He can't sue Julia Gillard now, for comments she made two years ago, when the statute imposes a one year limit. And the threat shows clearly that he's not the great advocate of free speech he claims to be

Less than a month ago, we learned Assange -- the supposedly great friend of free information -- had threatened to sue SXSW, because he didn't like their production WikiLeaks: Secrets and Lies, which (among other things) included a short clip of him dancing in a nightclub. Ofcom, responding to his complaint about the program, found many of his claims false.

One of the most hilarious of Assange's repeated lawsuit threats was his threat to sue a news outlet (for publishing some of the Cablegate material!) on the theory that he Assange owned the stolen cables

... Assange claimed the program was libelous, unfair, and violated his privacy, at least in part because it showed footage of him dancing in a nightclub in Iceland, notes the Guardian. The documentary first aired on November 29, 2011, and he later tried to prevent it from being shown in the United States, sending threatening letters to both SXSW and CNBC. SXSW aired the program as planned on March 9, while CNBC showed a shortened version of the documentary. On Monday, Ofcom had ruled that the documentary was fair and gave Assange plenty of opportunity to respond before it was aired. Although Assange insisted producers had not obtained his consent to appear on the film and had misrepresented what it would be about, Ofcom pointed out that his assistant had exchanged e-mails over several weeks with the filmmakers ...

Assange Threatened To Sue SXSW
Posted Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, at 12:54 PM ET

... Assange’s position was rife with ironies. An unwavering advocate of full, unfettered disclosure of primary-source material, Assange was now seeking to keep highly sensitive information from reaching a broader audience. He had become the victim of his own methods: someone at WikiLeaks, where there was no shortage of disgruntled volunteers, had leaked the last big segment of the documents, and they ended up at The Guardian in such a way that the paper was released from its previous agreement with Assange — that The Guardian would publish its stories only when Assange gave his permission. Enraged that he had lost control, Assange unleashed his threat, arguing that he owned the information and had a financial interest in how and when it was released ...

WikiLeaks’ Assange Threatened Lawsuit Over Leaked Diplomatic Cables
By Kim ZetterEmail Author
12:01 AM
Posted by struggle4progress | Mon Oct 8, 2012, 12:12 PM (0 replies)

Canongate: 'frustrating' 2011 blamed on Assange

05.10.12 | Joshua Farrington

Canongate has described 2011 as a "mixed and ultimately frustrating year", with the company posting an operating loss that it blamed on Julian Assange. Nevertheless, thanks to the sale of Text Publishing in Australia, Canongate ended the year in the black, and with an improved cash pile. The company also noted that its e-book sales grew 200%.

Canongate's turnover in 2011 was £10.8m, a decline of around 19% on 2010's turnover of £13.4m. It reported an operating loss of £406,633, though including the profit returned by trading at Text, this reduced to £368,467. Last year the company reported an operating profit of £1.1m. Pretax profits were boosted by the sale of Text, leading to a profit of £319,348. This was down 70% from £1.06m in 2010.

The failure of the Wikileaks founder to deliver a book as promised was credited for the poor performance in the bottom line. Chairman Sir Christopher Bland said the loss "was largely attributable to Julian Assange's failure to deliver the book he had contracted to produce, and we were unable to obtain repayment from him of Canongate's substantial advance, which had to be written off".

Canongate published Julian Assange: The Unauthorised Autobiography in September 2011, after Assange backed out of publication of an authorised work, declaring "All memoir is prostitution". The publisher said on release: "It fulfils the promise of the original proposal and we are proud to publish it" ...

Posted by struggle4progress | Fri Oct 5, 2012, 11:35 AM (1 replies)

Assange has very close ties to Pirate Bay, so it's likely the Pirate Bay gang shares his libertarian

ideology. And since many Republicans similarly hold hardline libertarian views, it's really not surprising to see Republican ads appearing on the Pirate Bay website
Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:39 AM (1 replies)

Pirate Bay lawyer to take over Assange defence

Published: 18 Nov 11 10:12 CET
Julian Assange has dumped his Swedish lawyer in favour of a new defence team which includes an attorney involved in the Pirate Bay trial ...
Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:36 AM (0 replies)

Wikileaks tweet calls Gottfrid Svartholm Warg "Assange friend":

How Sweden & Cambodia conspired to extradite without process Assange friend Gottfrid Svartholm Warg | Asia Times

The link http://t.co/zKjZQbuA in the tweet redirects to an Asia Times article:

Cambodia helps squeeze WikiLeaks
By Justine Drennan
Sep 14, 2012

So the phrase "Assange friend" comes from Wikileaks, not from Asia Times
Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:35 AM (0 replies)

WikiLeaks’ web host raided by Swedish police

Published: 02 October, 2012, 18:58

The Stockholm-based web host for WikiLeaks and The Pirate Bay has been raided by Swedish police. Four of the firm’s servers were seized, though it remains unclear exactly who was being targeted.

The Stockholm-based web host PeRiQuito AB, or PRQ, was targeted by police on Monday, the company’s owner Mikael Viborg told local media.

"PRQ.se, one of a number of ISPs used by WikiLeaks has been raided by Swedish police; 4 servers seized. Police still in office," WikiLeaks tweeted on Monday ...


Posted by struggle4progress | Thu Oct 4, 2012, 11:28 AM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1