Ok, so Joseph Lieberman or his staff got in touch with Amazon’s internet hosting service in regards to their newest customer, The Wikileaks website, of whom it’s creator Julian Assange is under fire for the release of Classified documents. Assange had swapped to Amazon’s hosting service following a weekend filled with his site being cyber-attacked over and over. Now regardless of how you feel about these documents being “Leaked” , the big picture is this…….Is it right that a member of the Government can call up a company that is paid for their services and by whatever means get that said company to remove a customer’s website? This isn’t the first time Lieberman has done this type of thing. In 2008, Lieberman wrote to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, demanding immediate removal of “content produced by Islamist terrorist organizations from YouTube.” While YouTube did remove a few videos that violated community guidelines against violence and hate speech, it refused to remove most of them.

Where will it end? Is this just a one time thing or will these occurences grow in number? With all the talks of Government intervention in things that are happening on the interwebs, one must seriously ponder these questions. Especially if you are an alternate news source or a site that posts things of a somewhat touchy or taboo nature. If someone comes to you with substantial proof of something going on within the government that should not be happening, would you hesitate to post it? I’m sure the majority would answer NO, or I would at least hope that would be the answer. I for one would not even  think twice, if the information has a firm foundation in fact.

http://thetruthsyndicate.com/1172/headline-news/lieberman-amazon-shutdown-wikileaks/

You know you are in trouble when the only national leader to have reacted with any sense of proportion to the WikiLeaks revelations so far has been President Ahmadinejad of Iran who dismissed them as "mischief-making".

Julian Assange has made a host of enemies in the last few months, not least in Moscow, where the "virtual Mafia state" label looks destined to stick for a while as a result of the WikiLeaks cables.

The prospect of being hunted down by the violent apparatchiks of a humourless Kremlin no doubt keeps him awake at night but the clearest and most present danger to Assange's life and liberty is the United States of America.

Its imperial reach, moral arrogance and vengeful mood make it a formidable opponent.

The window for the CIA to defenestrate Julian Assange has probably closed. But he needs to think and act quickly if he is to avoid ending up forever in the Federal Supermax Detention Facility at Florence, Colorado, where America incarcerates its most dangerous criminals. ­ Current alumni include 'shoe bomber' Richard Reid.

Assange can run and he can hide but neither is going to be easy.

His first priority should be to leave British jurisdiction as soon as he can. It is abundantly clear from a number of leaked US diplomatic cables that the UK is not sovereign in any meaningful way in relation to the United States.

Gordon Brown's perfectly reasonable offer of a deal to allow the Pentagon hacker Gary McKinnon to serve any sentence imposed on him in the UK was turned down like a bedspread by the US Ambassador to the Court of St James.

Read more: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/72376,news-comment,news-politics,julian-assange-should-get-out-of-britain-asap-and-face-the-music-in-sweden#ixzz177oOgbWt

Marie Burns Fort Myers, Florida

Oh, please. This was bound to happen. Something like 3 million people have clearance to read the documents -- which were not "top secret." Who in his right mind thinks 3 million people can keep a secret, especially when all it takes to break it is a computer & a Lady Gage CD? Massimo Calabresi writes in Time that, ""The number of new secrets designated as such by the U.S. government has risen 75%, from 105,163 in 1996 to 183,224 in 2009.... The number of documents and other communications created using those secrets has skyrocketed nearly 10 times, from 5,685,462 in 1996 to 54,651,765 in 2009. Not surprisingly, the number of people with access to that Everest of information has grown too.... As more individuals handle more secrets in more places around the world, it naturally becomes harder to keep track of them." Add to that (1) the Internet & (2) the fact that after 9/11, U.S. agencies began sharing more information among themselves, as some disgruntled grunt was a leak waiting to happen.

Secrets creep has been a government problem for decades. If some real good is to come from the WikiLeaks dumps it will be for somebody smart to revise the idea of what a secret is. It's been reported that the Obama Administration is doing just that.

And maybe ambassadors & other embassy personnel will stop blithely e-mailing each other the latest gossip from the country to which they're assigned. Was it really important for someone in Washington to know that Prince Andrew of Britain refers to the press with expletives? Or that Gaddafi has a number of Ukrainian "nurses" on staff? These are fun facts, but they don't have much "diplomatic" value, other than maybe at the next dinner party of the chichi, don't seat Prince Andrew next to the editor of the Guardian & do seat Gaddafi next to a good-looking blonde spy.

The problem lies not with Assange, who is merely a tool, but with the profligate e-mailers & our ludicrous "secrets" policies. Peter King & all the hyperventilating, overwrought opinionators who think rubbing out Assange will solve the problem need to grow up.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/the-hunt-for-julian-assange/?hp

 

1  Julian Assange301253
2  Recep Tayyip Erdogan222943
3  Lady Gaga138574
4  Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert72694
5  Glenn Beck82237
6  Barack Obama24527
7  Steve Jobs22225
8   The Chilean Miners25201
9  The Unemployed American17616
10  Mark Zuckerberg15993
11  Sarah Palin27125
12  Liu Xiaobo11058
13  David Cameron19017
14  Hu Jintao10466
15  Robert Gates11498
16  Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf8480
17  Nancy Pelosi10916
18  Craig Venter7141
19  Arne Duncan12248
20  Elizabeth Warren, Mary Schapiro and Sheila Bair6471
21  David and Charles Koch8062
22  LeBron James12016
23  Jonathan Franzen 10610
24  Tony Hayward10121
25  Hamid Karzai7615

 

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2028734_2029036_2029037,00.html #ixzz17TqHdAzT

 

As critics protest against the "shonky" way WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been denied his freedom, diplomatic sources have reportedly revealed informal talks are underway for him to be transferred into US custody.

US and Swedish officials have already discussed the possibility of Assange being delivered into the hands of US law enforcement to face potential charges over "espionage offences", Britain's The Independent reported, citing "diplomatic sources".

The espionage claims relate to Assange releasing hundreds of thousands of confidential US State Department cables, not the sexual misconduct accusations being investigated in Sweden. Right-wing politicians such as former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin say Assange should be pursued in the same way as terrorist leaders.

'Treat my dad fairly'

WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange's son Daniel has called for his father to be treated "fairly and apolitically" following his arrest in Britain last night.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/assange-wanted-by-us-for-espionage-offences-20101208-18ouj.html

Gus: Julian may have made spooks redundant... That could be why by letting the truth out there, the spooks' masters are totally pissed off for having their nose pushed in their own "caca"... especially when they work hard at making us swallow shit... See toon at top and keep voting for Julian at the Times magazine's person of the year....

Yes Gus,

No room for those super protectors of freedom, democracy & the amerikan way, Robert (Buck) McClelland or Julia (Duds) Gillard on the charts ....

Life can be cruel, particularly on those self-promoting, all-deceiving, immoral personalities known as politicians. I mean its one thing to be upstaged by Lady Gaga, but Hamid Karzai .... mein gott, that's like having to go through life as a relative of Tony Blair, John Howard or George Bush.

Cheers,

John.

 

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) will not seek a fifth term in 2012, according to two Democratic sources familiar with the decision.

Lieberman's office did not offer any comment on his plans, saying only that he would make an announcement tomorrow in Stamford, Conn. "The Senator's remarks tomorrow will stand on their own," said a Lieberman spokeswoman.

Lieberman will be the second senator who caucuses with Democrats to make public his plans to leave the chamber in the past 24 hours. On Tuesday morning, North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad said he would not seek a fifth term in 2012.

On the Republican side, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison announced her retirement last week.

Lieberman's long-awaited decision means an end to a political career that took him from the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nomination to a 2004 Democratic presidential candidacy to a speaking role at the 2008 Republican National Convention in support of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Lieberman's increased alienation from the Democratic Party -- primarily over his ardent support for the war in Iraq -- led to his defeat at the hands of cable television executive Ned Lamont in 2006. But Lieberman formed his own independent party and beat Lamont in a general election to win a fourth term.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/joe-lieberman-to-retire-in-201.html?hpid=topnews

Facebook and Twitter have been given too much credit by Hillary Clinton and other commentators for driving the pro-democracy campaigns in north Africa and the Arab world, according to Julian Assange. Al Jazeera TV and his own website WikiLeaks have had more of an impact, he said in a rare public appearance. Speaking to more than 800 students at the Cambridge Union last night, Assange pointed out that Facebook had actually been used by Egyptian authorities to round up and incarcerate participants at a protest three or four years ago. The internet, said Assange, is "the greatest spying tool the world has ever seen". Assange claimed - as others have done - that cables from US embassies in Tunis and Cairo, released by WikiLeaks last year, played a major role in the recent unrest. "The Tunisian cables showed clearly that... if it came down to a fight between the military on the one hand, and Ben Ali's political regime on the other, the US would probably support the military. "That is something that must have also caused neighbouring countries to Tunisia some thought: that is that if they militarily intervened [on behalf of President Ben Ali], they may not be on the same side as the United States." As for Egypt, the release of embassy cables about Omar Suleiman's torture methods forced America to change its tune about the man they had hoped would take over from Hosni Mubarak. "It was not possible for Joseph Biden to [repeat his earlier claim that Mubarak was not a dictator]. It was not possible for Hillary Clinton to publicly come out and support Mubarak's regime." Assange, who is appealing a London court decision to extradite him to Sweden on what he claims are trumped-up sexual assault charges, had hoped to keep the contents of the Cambridge address secret. He demanded a media blackout and made the unusual request of refusing to sign the release forms for official event footage until after the talk, according to a Union spokesman. "It is illegal to film, photograph or record," read signs plastered around the site. "You will be evicted and have your membership revoked". The building was protected by eight security guards; six around the perimeter and two watching over proceedings inside. Asked by an audience member whether Wikileaks could guarantee the safety of its sources, given the incarceration of Private Bradley Manning, Assange replied that he had "to be very careful about speaking about Mr Manning for obvious reasons". Assange went on: "He is in a terrible situation. That said, there is no allegation being made that he was arrested as a result of anything to do with us. Rather the allegation is that his arrest was as a result of speaking to Wired magazine in the United States, who betrayed him". Read more:

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/76435,people,news,julian-assange-boosts-wikileaks-role-in-arab-world-unrest#ixzz1Gr38sHsg

Wikileaks is the organization the entire political class and media establishment told us we must hate. When the whistleblower outfit famously made its mark in November of 2010 by releasing thousands of classified US government cables—which revealed everything from Saudi Arabia’s desire for an American strike on Iran to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s attempts to obtain the DNA and credit card information of United Nations officials—Washington went into immediate demonization mode. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called Wikileaks’ founder Julian Assange a “high-tech terrorist.” Vice President Joe Biden would reiterate McConnell’s charge. Clinton said Wikileaks’ actions were “an attack on the international community.” Marc Thiessen wrote in the Washington Post: “WikiLeaks is not a news organization; it is a criminal enterprise.”

I distinctly remember talking to a family member about Assange in the heat of last year’s Wikileaks controversy. “He sounds like a really bad dude,” he said.

The official narrative had been established: Wikileaks was the enemy and Assange was a terrorist. But what actual danger did any Wikileaks revelation ever pose, then or now? Was it a risk to “national security” to reveal in detail that the Afghanistan War was not going particularly well? Were liberals simply embarrassed that Wikileaks revealed it was the Obama administration that helped kill the probe into Bush-era torture abuses? Did conservatives really not want to know that the Obama administration bullied scientists and foreign governments that might have undermined the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009? Did anyone really think it was wrong to learn that Vatican officials were reluctant to cooperate in sex abuse investigations?

In late January of this year, MSNBC thought it proper to run the following headline during the revolution in Egypt: “WikiLeaks: Mubarak lets Egyptians suffer to avoid ‘chaos.” In fact, the news about the soon to be ousted Egyptian president’s many abuses ran everywhere—primarily thanks to Wikileaks. A few months later, I remember watching a CNN report about the sinister behavior of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s sons. The corner of my television screen read “Source: Wikileaks.”

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2011/07/25/wikileaks-revisited/

see toon at top...

WikiLeaks, the whistleblowing website, has said that its massive archive of unredacted US state department cables was exposed in a security breach, which it blamed on its one-time partner - Britain's Guardian newspaper.

In a 1,600-word-long editorial posted to the internet on Thursday, WikiLeaks accused the Guardian's investigative reporter David Leigh of divulging the password needed to decrypt the files in a book he and another Guardian journalist, Luke Harding, published earlier this year.

WikiLeaks said that the disclosure had jeopardised the "careful work" it was doing to redact and publish the cables.

"Revolutions and reforms are in danger of being lost as the unpublished cables spread to intelligence contractors and governments before the public," WikiLeaks said in its statement.

Leigh and the Guardian both denied wrongdoing, and the exact sequence of events WikiLeaks was referring to remained clouded in confusion.

In comments to the AP news agency, Leigh dismissed WikiLeaks' claims as "time-wasting nonsense".

He said that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had supplied him with a password needed to access the US embassy cables from a server in July 2010, but that Assange assured him the site would expire within a matter of hours.

"What we published much later in our book was obsolete and harmless," Leigh said.

"We did not disclose the URL [web address] where the file was located, and in any event, Assange had told us it would no longer exist.

"I don't see how a member of the public could access such a file anyway, unless a WikiLeaks or ex-WikiLeaks person tells them where it is located and what the file was called.''

On its Twitter feed, WikiLeaks described one of Leigh's previous statements as false and warned of "continuous lies to come".

It also suggested that sloppy handling by people who formerly worked with WikiLeaks resulted in the inadvertent disclosure of unredacted versions of the cables.

Meanwhile, the group is defending itself against accusations from US and Australian officials that it may have put lives at risk by publishing uncensored US diplomatic cables on the internet.

'Circulating on the internet'

The latest squabble among current and former WikiLeaks insiders has become increasingly heated and arcane.

But the key issue is who, if anyone, released unedited documents that could put those named at risk or complicate anti-terrorism operations.

Earlier this week, German publications and a blog published by Wired magazine claimed that a 1.73 gigabyte
password-protected file containing all the uncensored cables was "reportedly circulating somewhere on the Internet".

Wired quoted the editor of German publication Der Freitag saying that his paper had found the file and "easily obtained the password to unlock it".

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/09/20119144322844866.html

see toon at top...

 

How to create a 1.7 gigabyte password?... Though I'm not a computer programming expert, I think I could create such non-literate (unreadable) key in about 15 minutes with a 1.8 gigahertz computer... It sure would not be the right one to open a particular file with an already existing password, but it could become a new password for a new file. A bit cumbersone though with a slow computer like mine. Just installing the key would take a few minutes. I guess that on the net, such key can only be used via FTP using fibre optics? .... Amazing, such password would not fit on an ordinary CD-R...

All Leaked U.S. Cables Were Made Available Online as WikiLeaks Splintered

By ROBERT MACKEY, JACOB HARRIS, RAVI SOMAIYA and NICHOLAS KULISH

Updated | 3:18 p.m. A WikiLeaks computer file that allows anyone to read every word of 251,287 leaked United States diplomatic cables by typing a password made public six months ago was posted online by mistake last year, potentially endangering human rights activists and other sources who spoke to American officials in confidence.

As Spiegel Online reports, the password-protected file with the unredacted cables was made available because of “a chain of careless mistakes, coincidences, indiscretions and confusion” that followed the splintering of the antisecrecy organization into rival factions over the past year.

The most important of these errors appears to have been made before Dec. 12, 2010, when someone working with WikiLeaks posted the encrypted cable archive on a file-sharing site at a time when supporters of the group wanted to make sure that the leaked data could be made public if the group’s founder, Julian Assange, was arrested and his site closed down. A copy of the file, which seems to have been last modified on June 9, 2010, also appears to have been posted on the mirrors or complete copies of the main WikiLeaks site the group encouraged its supporters to create.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/all-leaked-u-s-cables-were-made-available-online-as-wikileaks-splintered/?hp

--------------------------

It appears more like sabotage by someone of the "disgrunted faction" at wikileaks, than an error to me...

On the money there Gus ....

A Guardian journalist has negligently disclosed top secret WikiLeaks' decryption passwords to hundreds of thousands of unredacted unpublished US diplomatic cables.

Knowledge of the Guardian disclosure has spread privately over several months but reached critical mass last week. The unpublished WikiLeaks' material includes over 100,000 classified unredacted cables that were being analyzed, in parts, by over 50 media and human rights organizations from around the world.

For the past month WikiLeaks has been in the unenviable position of not being able to comment on what has happened, since to do so would be to draw attention to the decryption passwords in the Guardian book. Now that the connection has been made public by others we can explain what happened and what we intend to do.

WikiLeaks has commenced pre-litigation action against the Guardian and an individual in Germany who was distributing the Guardian passwords for personal gain.

Over the past nine months, WikiLeaks has been releasing US diplomatic cables according to a carefully laid out plan to stimulate profound changes. A number of human rights groups, including Amnesty International, believe that the co-ordinated release of the cables contributed to triggering the Arab Spring. By forming partnerships with over 90 other media and human rights organizations WikiLeaks has been laying the ground for positive political change all over the world.

The WikiLeaks method involves a sophisticated procedure of packaging leaked US diplomatic cables up into country groups or themes, such as 'resources corruption', and providing it to those organizations that agreed to do the most research in exchange for time-limited exclusivity. As part of the WikiLeaks agreement, these groups, using their local knowledge, remove the names of persons reporting unjust acts to US embassies, and feed the results back to WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks then publishes, simultaneously with its partners, the underlying cables together with the politically explosive revelations. This way publications that are too frightened to publish the cables have the proof they need, and the public can check to make sure the claims are accurate.

Guardian journalist negligently disclosed Cablegate passwords

From John Pilger

This week's Supreme Court hearing in the Julian Assange case has profound meaning for the preservation of basic freedoms in western democracies.

This is Assange's final appeal against his extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual misconduct that were originally dismissed by the chief prosecutor in Stockholm and constitute no crime in Britain.

The consequences, if he loses, lie not in Sweden but in the shadows cast by America's descent into totalitarianism. In Sweden, he is at risk of being "temporarily surrendered" to the US where his life has been threatened and he is accused of "aiding the enemy" with Bradley Manning, the young soldier accused of leaking evidence of US war crimes to WikiLeaks.

The connections between Manning and Assange have been concocted by a secret grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, which allowed no defence counsel or witnesses, and by a system of plea-bargaining that ensures a 90 per cent conviction. It is reminiscent of a Soviet show trial.

read more at: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3806462.html?WT.svl=theDrum

 

It is now the Swedes’ plan, and their ally America’s plan, for a ‘Lee Harvey Oswald moment’ when, emerging handcuffed from the embassy gates, Assange will be shot from a high window across the street in an ‘incident’ Scotland Yard will profoundly regret — and his funeral will be watched by half a billion viewers across the world and the assassin will get away.

This is their plan now. Their previous plan was not to try him for rape in Sweden – since his accusers were plainly right-wing conspirators who publicly kissed and hugged him for days and days after the supposed offence – but to beat him to death in gaol in an ‘incident’ the authorities would profoundly regret.

This was always their plan. This is why they never charged him with anything — wanting only to ‘question’ him in Sweden. Though they could have questioned him in London, he had to be in Sweden. There can be no other reason for this, as any fan of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo will tell you, but to kill him there.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/the-imminent-killing-of-julian-assange/

----------------------

Meanwhile at naive diplomacy school of believe anything...

The Federal Government says there is no evidence to suggest Julian Assange will eventually be extradited to America to face trial for divulging US state secrets.

The WikiLeaks founder is holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London as his bid for political asylum is considered.

He is seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden to face questioning on sex abuse allegations, and also fears Stockholm will turn him over to the United States.

WikiLeaks enraged Washington by releasing a flood of classified information and diplomatic cables in 2010, and Mr Assange says America wants to try him for leaking the documents.

But Foreign Affairs Minister Bob Carr has told the ABC's Insiders program that is not the case.

"When I've raised it and I think I have raised it on two occasions with US officials, I've received no hint that they've got a plan to extradite him to the US," Senator Carr said.

"There was one allegation that appeared somewhere of something called a sealed indictment. No US figure has confirmed that to us.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-24/carr-says-us-has-no-plans-to-extradite-assange/4088862

Hell Bob!!! I expect far more than this, from you.... You're starting to smell like old Rattus piss versus Hicks and others...

 

see toon at top...

 

Interviewed on 28 October 2021 by MSNBC host Mehdi Hassan, former Senator Joe Lieberman acknowledged that he induced Congress to support the war against Iraq not because of the weapons of mass destruction it allegedly possessed, but in order to overthrow President Saddam Hussein.

 

Read more: https://www.voltairenet.org/article214497.html

 

 

Read from top.

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOWWWWWWWWW!!!