Posted on October 27, 2010 - by Venik

Breaking WikiLeaks

It is a familiar feeling: you work on a major project, build something from the ground up, stick your neck way out to keep things running smoothly and suddenly all kinds of coauthors and collaborators come out of the woodwork to take credit for the job well done. True, I did not work alone. I had some help: this girl brought me coffee and this guy ordered pizza, while I was working. And a very nice lady from the office next door helped me print out transparencies for the project presentation. All very timely and much appreciated contributions that, nevertheless, somehow seem to fall short of co-authorship.

Julien Assange – the much respected and probably soon to be the “most wanted” in certain countries founder of the brilliant WikiLeaks project – recently came under a lot of fire not just from the US government, but also from his former collaborators in the WikiLeaks project. Facing the unprecedented PR barrage from Pentagon, it must have been difficult for Assange to also have to deal with his backstabbing coworkers.  Whenever a project becomes this big, people in charge of replacing coffee filters and printing transparencies start developing opinions and attitudes. They start feeling entitled.

“Outside of the Iraq and Afghan dossiers, Wikileaks has been incapacitated by internal turmoil and politics,” Smari McCarthy, a former Wikileaks volunteer and freedom of information campaigners from Iceland, told The Independent.

“Key people have become very concerned about the direction of Wikileaks with regard to its strong focus on US military files at the expense of ignoring everything else. There were also serious disagreements over the decision not to redact the names of Afghan civilians; something which I’m pleased to see was not repeated with the Iraq dossiers.”

(Source: “Secret war at the heart of Wikileaks“, by Jerome Taylor, The Independent, October 25, 2010)

In any organization somebody has to make decisions and assume the responsibility. Most people don’t mind calling the shots, it’s just the part about taking responsibility that gets them in a tizzy. Assange is the founder of WikiLeaks. He is the man ultimately responsible for everything that happens to the project. Assange has a big target sign painted on his back and Pentagon and CIA after him. But it is Smari McCarthy – a self-styled and, until today, completely unknown to me anarchist from Iceland – who has all the most vital opinions.

Forget Smari McCarthy, I am surprised Iceland is still around: I thought it went bankrupt two years ago and was sold off at an auction. See, this just goes to show that every day you learn something new. And here another former member of WikiLeaks from – I’ll be damned – Iceland.

Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a member of Iceland’s parliament who recently quit Wikileaks, played a key role in the website’s release earlier this year of “Collateral Murder”, the 39-minute video showing an Apache helicopter gunning down a group of armed men, civilians and two Reuters journalists in Baghdad. Its release brought Wikileaks global notoriety but Jónsdóttir believes the website should have paid more attention to the smaller, less headline-grabbing leaks.

“I don’t want to take away from the importance of the Iraq dossiers,” she said yesterday. “But I have been saying for some time that before all these big scoops came along, Wikileaks was very much about creating small hubs in different countries where people could leak important information to. It shouldn’t just be about the international scoops.”

(Source: “Secret war at the heart of Wikileaks“, by Jerome Taylor, The Independent, October 25, 2010)

I am not sure exactly how Ms. Jonswhatever was instrumental in the release of the video made from the Apache gunship – maybe she piloted the chopper or, perhaps, she converted the video from Windows Media Player to MP4 format – but her feelings are also important. And she feels that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not significant enough to warrant such a wholehearted commitment of WikiLeak’s limited resources. Perhaps she feels we should learn more about political scandals in Iceland. And, because I am not aware of any, she very well may have a point.

So, yes, I can understand Assange when he gets annoyed and calls characters like McCarthy “peripheral players… spreading poisonous false rumors“. Some of you may be aware of the persistent attempts by the Pentagon and other US government agencies to personally discredit Julien Assange (as if doing so would somehow undermine credibility of official US government documents published by WikiLeaks) by influencing a prosecutor’s office in Sweden to file sexual molestation charges against Assange. Why Sweden? That’s where most of WikiLeaks servers are being hosted by PeRiQuito AB.

Here’s a brief early timeline of Swedish charges against Assange and by all means let me know if these events don’t strike you as complete bullshit:

August 20, 2010 – An arrest warrant for Assange has been issued by the Swedish Prosecution Authority on the charges of “one report of rape and one report of molestation”. Based on the timing of the events as initially disclosed in Swedish media, the warrant appears to have been issued before the alleged crimes were committed. The initial arrest warrant has been issued on Friday night by the on-duty prosecutor Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand. The night court, he-he.

Prosecutor Marie Häljebo Kjellstrand confirmed that a warrant was issued on Friday evening and that the grade of suspicion — probable cause — was strong enough to ensure that the 39-year-old Australian could be detained upon his arrest, newspaper Expressen reports.

A source close to the case told the newspaper that two women in their twenties went to the police in Stockholm on Friday to speak about their recent encounters with Assange.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority released a statement on Saturday morning in which it revealed that the warrant was based on “one report of rape and one report of molestation. A warrant has been issued for the person’s arrest since there is a risk that he could hamper the investigation.”

Assange spent time with one of the women at an apartment in Södermalm in Stockholm on Saturday night, while he met the other women in the nearby town of Enköping, according to Expressen. The prosecution authority said Assange was suspected of rape in the Enköping case and molestation in Stockholm.

Kristinn Hrafnsson, a colleague of Assange’s who spoke to news agency AFP from Iceland, said that the charges against him were false.

“He didn’t know of the charges until he read them in the right wing tabloid Expressen this morning”, Hrafnsson said. “There are powerful organisations who want to do harm to WikiLeaks.”

(Source: “WikiLeaks founder suspected of rape“, The Local, August 21, 2010)

August 21, 2010 – Just a few hours later AFP quoted Sweden’s chief prosecutor Eva Finne as saying that the rape charge against Assange has been dropped and arrest warrant – rescinded.

Sweden’s prosecution service said Saturday that Assange was now “not suspected of rape” and was no longer wanted for questioning on the allegation, but added that an investigation into a separate molestation charge remained open…

As the furore over the arrest warrant grew, the Swedish prosecutor’s office issued a statement on Sunday defending its actions. It said that chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who was responsible for withdrawing the arrest warrant, had “more information available to decide on Saturday than the duty prosecutor on Friday evening”.

“A decision regarding restrictive measures, such as this, must always be reevaluated in a preliminary inquiry,” the statement added. Prosecutor’s office spokeswoman Karin Rosander told AFP late Saturday that the procedure followed was normal and would have been launched automatically by the duty prosecutor in serious cases such as rape.

Separately the duty prosecutor, Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand, said that she “did not regret her decision”.

(Source: “WikiLeaks founder points at Pentagon over rape claims”, by Igor Gedilaghine, August 21, 2010)

August 24, 2010 – Swedish prosecutor’s office was set to make a decision that day on whether or to pursue the remaining charge of sexual molestation against Assange. On the same day WikiLeaks announced that a new batch of classified documents about CIA activities in Afghanistan will be published the following day. The Guardian published some interesting details on the bogus nature of the allegations.

On Friday last week, Ms A and Ms W together approached police in Stockholm and reported that they had been sexually assaulted by Assange… Both women reported that they had been involved in consensual sexual relationships with Assange, but each reported a separate non-consensual incident of a similar character in which Assange allegedly had sex with them without using a condom… It is understood that before going to the police, both women asked Assange to have a health check to reassure them, and that Assange declined to do so… One source who is closely involved said neither of them had originally wanted the case prosecuted; that Ms W had wanted to report the alleged rape to police without their pursuing it, and that Ms A had gone with her to give her moral support and then become embroiled with the police, who had insisted on passing a report to prosecutors. Neither the police nor the prosecutor has spoken to Assange to record his version of events. The fact that a warrant had been issued for his arrest was rapidly leaked to a Swedish newspaper.

(Source: “Prosecutors may decide today on charges against WikiLeaks founder“, by Nick Davies, August 24, 2010)

August 25, 2010 – As promised, WikiLeaks published a new installment of the “Afghanistan dossier”. The Swedish prosecutor’s office delayed its decision on the remaining charge against Assange. Seeing which way the wind is blowing, Assange hired one of Sweden’s top defense attorneys.

Leif Silbersky, one of Sweden’s most high profile defence lawyers, has been hired by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange ahead of a looming decision by prosecutors about whether he will face molestation charges, reports said Tuesday.

“I can confirm that I will represent him,” Silbersky told the Aftonbladet daily.

Swedish prosecutors on Friday night issued an arrest warrant for 39-year-old Assange over an allegation of rape but then abruptly withdrew it on Saturday.

Authorities are still, however, investigating a separate claim of molestation against the former hacker.

Assange has said the claims are part of a smear campaign aimed at discrediting his whistleblowing website, which is locked in a row with the Pentagon over the release of secret US documents about the war in Afghanistan.

(Source: “Assange hires top Swedish defence lawyer“, The Local, August 25, 2010)

August 26, 2010 – WikiLeaks published a three-page internal CIA document reviewing the negative effect on CIA operations of the perception by its foreign “partners” that the US may be “exporting terrorism”. The Swedish prosecutor’s office announced that the sexual misconduct charge against Assange will remain open. Now the chief prosecutor Eva Finne suddenly felt that there was “sufficient evidence” to warrant continuing the investigation.

August 31, 2010 – Assange has been questioned by Swedish police. His lawyer Leif Silbersky told reporters that the interview went “very well” and that this “very strange” investigation may soon closed. The same day the Wall Street Journal reported that Assange submitted an application for Swedish residency. I am thinking this move might have been suggested by Assange’s new legal counsel.

Assange is expected to try to register WikiLeaks as a media organization in Sweden which would protect the anonymity of the whistleblower site’s sources and prevent them from being prosecuted.

Martin Valfridsson, a spokesman for Sweden’s Ministry of Justice, said the site would have to be registered with the Swedish Radio and TV Authority and a responsible publisher appointed.

“The publisher needs to be a physical person who is a permanent resident of Sweden,” Valfridsson said.

(Source: “WikiLeaks Founder Assange Applies For Swedish Residency“, by Ian Edmondson, Wall Street Journal, August 31, 2010)

September 1, 2010 – The very next day after Assange had a “very good” talk with the police, Marianne Ny, a representative of the Swedish prosecutor’s office, announced that the case against Assange will be reopened based on the further review of the evidence. At the same time she noted that the evidence was not sufficient to file formal charges against Assange. By this most reporters got thoroughly confused by exactly which investigation was closed and which was reopened and what was the nature of the alleged crimes.

September 13, 2010 – WikiLeaks announced a planned publication of the “Iraq dossier”. No further detailds have been revealed at that time.

September 19, 2010 – Assange’s lawyers told reporters that there still have been no formal charges or an arrest warrant for Assange. Since the original warrant has been rescinded hours after it was issued, the lawyers said, their client was free to leave Sweden at any time (source: “WikiLeaks founder ‘free to leave Sweden’”, AFP, September 19, 2010). This announcement might have been an attempt on the part of Assange’s legal team to force the issue with the prosecutors, who by that time were obviously dragging their feet investigating a she-said-he-said case for over a month.

September 27, 2010 – WikiLeaks German spokesman Daniel Domscheit-Berg announced about his plans to resign from the organization. The announcement was made in an interview to Der Spiegel in which Domscheit-Berg said Assange suspended him from work back in August, claiming insubordination.

The nature of WikiLeak’s former spokesman’s issues with the project in general and with Assange in particular are difficult to understand from his interview. The guy claims that due to recent high-profile publications technical resources of the project are stretched to the limit. I am sure this is true, I am not sure, however, is why this comes as a surprise to anyone. I guess Domscheit-Berg is upset that WikiLeaks diverts most of its attention to high-profile cases like the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, allocating little time to deal with information leaks of local significance. To me the approach chosen by Assange makes more sense: if your resources are limited, they must be allocated to the most high-profile tasks. However, one statement from Domscheit-Berg’s interview to Spiegel is worth quoting:

The investigation into Julian in Sweden is, in my opinion, a personal attack against him, but they do not have anything to with WikiLeaks directly. Still, it does cost time and energy and it weighs on him. In my opinion it would have been best if he had pulled back a bit so that he could quietly deal with these problems. It would have been fine if he had continued his normal work out of the spotlight. But he clearly saw my internal proposal as an attack on his role.

(Source: “‘The Only Option Left for Me Is an Orderly Departure‘”, Der Spiegel, Sept. 27, 2010)

This seems to be the key point in the disagreement between the leader of WikiLeaks and some of the project’s former employees. They feel that, following the great success of the project’s recent publications about the war in Afghanistan and ensuing attention from various government agencies, they need to step back, honker down, deal with personal problem quietly. Assange, on the other hand, feels that time may be running and that the project needs to press on with high profile publications and stay in the center of media attention if it is going to survive attacks from the CIA, the Pentagon, the Swedish authorities, etc.

The critics within WikiLeaks feel their best chance to save their skin is to hide in a dark alley. Assange feels that a dark alley is exactly where they shouldn’t be for the sake of the project and their personal safety. Naturally, once you thoroughly understand the scale of the situation and the caliber of WikiLeak’s opponents, you will realize that, of course, Assange is absolutely right. Lawyers and courts alone are not going to protect you from the guys from Langley. Assange clearly realizes the full gravity of the situation, while some of his former employees seem to think they were running a regular newspaper.

September 30, 2010 – For the first time since the rape allegations Assange made a public appearance. Talking to journalists in London he dismissed criticism from the former WikiLeaks employees. He denied that Daniel Berg – WikiLeaks’ former spokesman – was suspended because of his criticism of Assange’s handling of the project. Assange said that Berg was suspended due to insubordination.

Regardless of Berg’s personal feelings about the situation at WikiLeaks, we have to keep in mind that he was the project’s spokesman. His job was to follow orders from above and to function as the project’s public face – not to vent his own frustrations.It is hard to imagine a spokesperson in any organization keeping his job under similar circumstances.

In London, Assange promised further publications of the remaining fifteen thousand classified documents from the “Afghanistan dossier” in the upcoming weeks and said that there was no evidence any of WikiLeaks’ informants suffered reprisals.

The Guardian attempted to follow up on some of the information published by WikiLeaks detailing civilian deaths in Afghanistan at the hands of British soldiers, but ran into a wall:

MoD officials responded to a freedom of information request by the Guardian yesterday by admitting that they possessed information on the civilian casualties, but claimed it would involve too much work to search their electronic archive.

An anonymous official at the British military headquarters, Northwood, rejected the FOI request on the grounds that “we would need to undertake … separate searches, one for each incident you have detailed, of our electronic archive system, each of which will take up to five days”.

(Source: “UK defence chiefs silent on Afghan civilian deaths revealed by WikiLeaks“, by Rob Evans and David Leigh, The Guardian, October 1, 2010)

October 5, 2010 – Norwegian state news agency NRK was given advance access by WikiLeaks to the yet-to-be-published fifteen thousand documents from the “Afghanistan dossier”, leading to a major political scandal in Oslo. During a visit to Kabul by Norway’s foreign minister on January 14, 2008, the hotel hosting the Norwegian delegation was attacked by Taliban. A journalist was killed and an employee of the Norwegian foreign ministry was seriously wounded.

The initial investigation by Norwegian authorities into the attack concluded that nothing could have been done to prevent these casualties. The documents obtained by WikiLeaks showed that the Norwegian foreign ministry and the police security force (PST) responsible for safety of the delegation  knew about the planned attack and considered the hotel to be among the likely targets. This information was withheld from the Norwegian parliament and from the journalists accompanying the foreign minister on his trip.

Another document released by WikiLeaks to NRK showed that the Norwegian forces deployed in Afghanistan had advance knowledge of the January 20, 2009, rocket attack by Taliban against Afghanistan’s security forces that resulted in twenty killed and wounded Afghan policemen. The Norwegians did not warn the Afghan police and did nothing to prevent the attack.

Also on October 5, 2010, Pentagon issued a absurd demand that WikiLeaks return the seventy five thousand documents it already published and destroys all copies. WikiLeaks refused.

October 13, 2010 – Moneybookers – a British Internet payment company processing donations for WikiLeaks – decided to freeze the organization’s accounts. Moneybookers did not explain its reasons.

Moneybookers moved against WikiLeaks on 13 August, according to the correspondence, less than a week after the Pentagon made public threats of reprisals against the organisation. Moneybookers wrote to Assange: “Following an audit of your account by our security department, we must advise that your account has been closed … to comply with money laundering or other investigations conducted by government authorities.”

When Assange emailed to ask what the problem was, he says he was told in response by Daniel Stromberg, the Moneybookers e-commerce manager for the Nordic region: “When I did my regular overview of my customers, I noticed that something was wrong with your account and I emailed our risk and legal department to solve this issue.

“Below I have copied the answer I received from them: ‘Hi Daniel, you can inform him that initially his account was suspended due to being accessed from a blacklisted IP address. However, following recent publicity and the subsequently addition of the WikiLeaks entity to blacklists in Australia and watchlists in the USA, we have terminated the business relationship.’”

Assange said: “This is likely to cause a huge backlash against Moneybookers. Craven behaviour in relation to the US government is unlikely to be seen sympathetically.” Moneybookers, which is registered in the UK but controlled by the Bahrain-based group Investcorp, would not make anyone available to explain the decision.

(Source: “WikiLeaks says funding has been blocked after government blacklisting”, by David Leigh and Rob Evans , The Guardian, October 14, 2010)

October 18, 2010 – Pentagon came out with another loony demand: that news organizations don’t publish any documents due to be released by WikiLeaks. In other news, Pentagon ordered the sun not to shine. Pentagon’s PR clowns announced that the planned release by WikiLeaks of nearly five hundred thousand classified documents on the war in Iraq was not a threat to security. They also announced that it was a threat to security and that a special team of some hundred and twenty analysts was created to review the documents when they are published. Perhaps some Pentagon officials were already working on the insanity defense.

October 23, 2010 – After being offline for a few weeks, WikiLeaks came back with a bang, publishing some four hundred and ninety thousand classified documents about the war in Iraq. The documents covered the period from the beginning of 2004 to the end of 2009.

October 26, 2010 – Having successfully deflected wrath of the CIA (for the time being at least), Assange is ready to take on the FSB. On October 26 the founder of WikiLeaks announced that the organization was preparing to publish a large number of secret documents from Russia. Many of the documents, according to Assange, were supplied by sources in the US. I bet these are the same people who only a few weeks ago wanted to see Assange hang. Having failed at that, they may be hoping the FSB will be more effective and so they are giving Assange all the rope he needs. Still, I am hoping WikiLeaks will survive the new KGB and publish something interesting. Russians are getting bored and complacent. There is no country in the world with greater love for conspiracy theories than Russia and everybody is guessing what WikiLeaks may have in stock. Assange says China is next on the menu.

“If they are going to disclose details of secret bank accounts and offshore businesses of the Russian elite, then the effect will be shocking,” says Stanislav Belkovsky. president of the Kremlin-connected Institute of National Strategy. “Most Russians believe that political leaders and others have siphoned off billions of dollars into foreign accounts, but proof of something like that would be dynamite.”

(Source: “WikiLeaks ready to drop a bombshell on Russia. But will Russians get to read about it? “, by Fred Weir, The Christian Science Monitor, October 26, 2010)

Silly criticism from some of the disgruntled employees aside, Julian Assange proved to be much tougher than he looks. WikiLeaks is one of the most important Internet projects reminding everyone of the old idiom about stones and glass houses. Assange restructured WikiLeaks and beefed up its security; published massive amounts of secret information about two of the most controversial wars of modern times despite enormous pressure from some of the most powerful governments; and he even restored WikiLeak’s bank accounts and donations system. I just donated a hundred bucks from my PayPal account. I hope Assange continues to successfully dodge fire for many years to come. A word of advise to Pentagon and CIA: if you guys love your secrets so much – learn how to keep them.

Popularity: 16% [?]

Related posts:

1. WikiLeaks US embassy cables: live updates
2. Julian Assange says WikiLeaks wants to expose China and Russia as much as US
3. PayPal dumps Wikileaks
4. WikiDefendors
5. WikiLeaks cables, day 12: summary of today’s key points