Berlusconi vows to leave ‘shitty’ Italy in conversation recorded by police
September 1, 2011 No Comment
Transcripts from blackmail investigation reveal the Italian prime minister’s frustration with his country In a sign of his frustration at the investigations into his alleged crimes and misdemeanours, Silvio Berlusconi vowed in July to leave Italy, which he described as a “shitty country” that “sickened” him. The Italian prime minister’s astonishing remarks are contained in the transcript of a telephone conversation secretly recorded by police investigating claims he was being blackmailed about his sex life. At dawn on Thursday, police swooped on a flat near Via Veneto – one of Rome’s most expensive streets – to arrest Giampaolo Tarantini, a central figure in a scandal that threatened to bring down Berlusconi two years ago. Tarantini’s wife, Angela Devenuto, was also taken into custody and a search launched for a third person. The arrest warrant shows that the three are accused of extorting at least €500,000 (£440,000) “as well as other benefits of economic significance”. Berlusconi has admitted paying the couple, but said he did so voluntarily. Two years ago, Tarantini, a businessman from Bari in southern Italy, said he supplied 30 women for parties at the prime minister’s Roman palazzo . He told police at least six women spent the night there. According to the judicial arrest warrant issued on Thursday, a third person – Valter Lavitola, the editor of a small newspaper – maintained direct contact with Berlusconi and received the cash in monthly instalments from the prime minister’s personal secretary. It was in a phone conversation with Lavitola late on 13 July that Berlusconi was said by the judge to have erupted in anger. “They can say about me that I screw. It’s the only thing they can say about me. Is that clear?” he said to the man allegedly blackmailing him. “They can put listening devices where they like. They can tap my telephone calls. I don’t give a fuck. I … In a few months, I’m getting out to mind my own fucking business, from somewhere else, and so I’m leaving this shitty country of which I’m sickened.” Berlusconi was speaking four days after a court in Milan dealt him the heaviest blow he has suffered in his long and intensely controversial business career. The court ruled that the firm at the heart of his group of companies should pay €560m to his bitterest commercial rival as compensation for bribing a judge in order to win control of Mondadori, Italy’s biggest publisher. But the conversation also took place at the height of a crisis on the financial markets, and in the midst of frantic efforts in parliament to approve a package of measures designed to eliminate Italy’s budget deficit. Berlusconi’s public silence during this period attracted comment at the time, particularly in the financial media. The sex scandal at the origin of the latest allegations was one of several involving Berlusconi in the past three years. He is on trial in Milan charged with paying an underage prostitute and then using his position to cover up the alleged offence, but that case is not related to the one that has now come back to haunt him. Details of the latest investigation were leaked last month in a news magazine belonging to Berlusconi. The magazine, Panorama, claimed the prosecutors believed Tarantini was being paid to stop him contradicting the prime minister’s claim that he was unaware that some of the women who visited his home were prostitutes. But Panorama said Tarantini had repeatedly confirmed in wiretapped conversations that Berlusconi was indeed oblivious of the payments the women were receiving. Italy’s prime minister, who turns 75 later this month, has made much over the years of his talents as a playboy and has insisted he would never pay for sex. The magazine claimed the main reason the prime minister was passing money to Tarantini was to ensure he did a deal with the prosecutors to avoid a trial and the disclosure of “telephone wiretaps held to be embarrassing”. Berlusconi told the magazine: “I helped someone and a family with children who found themselves and continue to find themselves in very serious financial difficulty. I didn’t do anything illegal. I limited myself to helping a desperate man without asking for anything in exchange. That’s the way I am and nothing will change that.” Silvio Berlusconi Italy John Hooper guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke tells US court: ‘I’m pleading guilty because I am’
September 1, 2011 No Comment
Drug kingpin faces up to 23 years in prison after admitting in US court to trafficking and violence A Jamaican drug smuggler who unleashed a small war in Kingston last year in an attempt to avoid extradition to the US is facing more than 20 years in prison after pleading guilty in a New York court to trafficking and violence. Christopher “Dudus” Coke, 42, who was once regarded by many Jamaicans as the most powerful man in their country, admitted trafficking more than three tonnes of marijuana and 30lb (14kg) of cocaine to the US, and to ordering the stabbing of a marijuana dealer in New York. “I’m pleading guilty because I am,” said Coke, who faces up to 23 years in prison when he is sentenced in December. The plea, which saved Coke from the possibility of a life sentence, was welcomed by political leaders in Jamaica. Some will be relieved that it does not require him to reveal the powerful political ties that enabled him to run his drug trafficking empire unhindered from the Tivoli Gardens neighbourhood of the capital, Kingston, until the government finally bowed to US pressure last year and sent the police and army in to arrest him. More than 70 people died in the ensuing battle, including some in summary execution-style killings by soldiers. Coke reached the deal a week after a judge ruled that tapes of bugged phone conversations in which he discusses smuggling marijuana, cocaine and weapons could be played in court. He would also have faced several witnesses who prosecutors said would testify that Coke ran a small and violent army, known as the Shower Posse because of its tactic of showering its enemies with bullets, to control the smuggling of drugs through Jamaica. Prosecutors said they would produce evidence that Coke personally killed several people, including cutting up a man with a chainsaw. The prosecution said he was also personally responsible for other murders, shootings and beatings. “Because Coke’s heavily armed soldiers patrolled the Tivoli Gardens community, it was largely closed to Jamaican law enforcement,” prosecutors said in court papers. “Coke’s influence over his New York-based narcotics trafficking co-conspirators, from his base in Kingston, was fundamentally a function of his soldiers’ involvement and reputation for violence and the fact that many family members of these US-based traffickers had stayed behind in Jamaica and were, therefore, vulnerable to threats and intimidation.” Peter Bunting, security minister for the opposition People’s National party, told the Jamaica Gleaner that he was not surprised by Coke’s plea. “Once Mr Coke’s request to reject wiretapping evidence into evidence was turned down by the court, there would have been little chance of him getting away as the evidence, coupled with that of the witness co-operation, has been so strong.” Before his conviction, months of speculation in Jamaica suggested Coke would seek to avoid a more substantial sentence by doing a deal with prosecutors that would prove highly embarrassing to the Jamaican government and some prominent politicians. Tivoli Gardens is one of the neighbourhoods known as “garrisons” because they were built by one of Jamaica’s two political parties during their rotations of power and could be relied on to deliver up the vote accordingly. They also proved to be breeding grounds for criminal organisations that became key to the parties maintaining their grip on the vote. Tivoli Gardens is the constituency of Jamaica’s prime minister, Bruce Golding, who has denied links to Coke. But the drug lord commanded considerable support in Tivoli Gardens by helping the poor send their children to school and buying food and clothes for hard-up families, and was regarded as a political force in delivering votes for Golding and his party. The country’s political and business leaders promised that the political links with organised crime and the dependence of the poor on the gangs would change after Coke was extradited, but residents of Tivoli Gardens have complained that they have seen few improvements in their circumstances. Many remain loyal to Coke and the Jamaican press reported that many residents were shocked that he did not fight the case. Some noted that his mother’s death last week may have had a bearing on his mental state. In an editorial, the Jamaica Observer called on Coke to reveal all that he knew before he was sentenced so that the political system could finally be cleaned up. “Between now and then, we hope that Mr Coke will ‘sing like a bird’, naming names and pointing fingers. In a small society such as ours, it is not possible for Mr Coke to have been able to run such a ‘successful’ organisation without the involvement of well-placed individuals in both the public and private sectors. Not to mention the beneficiaries of his nefarious activities,” it said. “Among the 73 people who died by official count are people whose blood cries out for justice. “Someone must account for the trauma suffered by this nation, particularly during the security forces’ operation to flush out thugs from Tivoli Gardens, and for the severe battering that our national image and economy took internationally.” Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke Jamaica Drugs trade United States Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Charities and health bodies call on equalities minister to intervene and protect rights of women to get impartial advice A coalition of women’s groups has written to the equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, urging her to intervene in the row over backbenchers’ attempts to reform abortion protocols. They say the proposals could delay abortions and allow anti-abortion groups to counsel women. Featherstone is being asked to seek a guarantee within government that the current system won’t change, ahead of a potential vote that could overhaul the existing counselling services for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy The signatories to the letter include the Fawcett Society, the Women’s Health Equalities Consortium, the Medical Women’s Federation and the National Assembly of Women as well as the trade union Unison. It will pile pressure on the Liberal Democrat minister, who has faced criticisms that she has failed to intervene on other coalition policies that Labour claims adversely affected women. “Preventing abortion providers from offering decision-making support opens the door for organisations opposed in principle to abortion to become formally involved in counselling women on their pregnancy options,” the letter says. “Previous governments have always acted on evidence and taken guidance from expert medical professionals. There is no evidence of a need for change in this area and no support from professional clinical organisations for such change.” The intervention comes amid wranglings in government over how to handle an amendment that could be selected when the health bill returns to the Commons next week, which would mean all women seeking abortions would be offered counselling independent of the abortion provider, in a move that could strip charities that provide the services of their current role. It is being proposed by the Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries and Labour’s Frank Field and backed by a campaign with links to anti-abortion groups. On Sunday, the Department of Health said that it would go ahead with plans to introduce independent counselling and consult on how it would work, in a move that was interpreted as caving into the campaign. After an intervention from No 10 and furious Lib Dems, the government announced it will not support the amendment – though MPs will still get a free vote – with David Cameron and DoH ministers voting against. It also reworded its position on the plans, saying it would consult on the “best” counselling options for women but that the outcome was not a foregone conclusion. Anne Milton, the public health minister, wrote to coalition MPs yesterday to clarify the government’s position and confirm that the health ministers would vote against it. On Thursday, the Right to Know campaign, which is supporting Dorries’s and Field’s campaign and is backed by some known anti-abortionists, responded robustly to the government’s opposition to the plan. It published a poll of MPs conducted in April, prior to the row over the implications of the move, which found that some 92% backed the statement. “A woman should have a right to impartial advice when considering having an abortion, from a source that has no commercial interest in her decision.” A spokeswoman for the campaign said: “The widespread support for the objectives of this campaign is unsurprising.
Continue reading …Sarkozy under pressure after Le Monde claims secret service spied on journalist
September 1, 2011 No Comment
Phone records of reporter covering Bettencourt affair were intercepted, judge tells paper Nicolas Sarkozy is under pressure over yet another twist in the Bettencourt affair after Le Monde newspaper said it had proof that the French secret services had spied on one of its journalists to uncover his sources. France’s paper of record said an investigating judge had uncovered documents showing that state intelligence agencies had ordered the mobile phone operator Orange to hand over detailed phone records of its investigative reporter Gérard Davet. These included details of every call Davet had made and received and the geo-localisation of his movements. Shortly after the secret services illegally requested the phone files on Davet in July 2010, Le Monde said state spies identified an adviser in the justice ministry as the supposed source for one of Davet’s stories. The adviser, a magistrate, was swiftly demoted and posted to French Guyana. The Bettencourt affair began as a family feud between the L’Oreal heiress, Liliane Bettencourt, and her daughter. But in 2010 it exploded into a series of scandals that threatened the highest levels of the French state. Investigations were opened into illegal party funding, suspected tax evasion and money-laundering while Bettencourt’s links with Sarkozy and his government, in particular the minister of labour, Eric Woerth, came under the spotlight. Davet was targeted after an article revealing Woerth’s links to the case. Le Monde began court action in September last year, suing for the violation of the French law that protects the anonymity of journalists’ sources. The paper said the targeting of Davet and his personal phone information was illegal. The alleged targeting of journalists in the Bettencourt affair, seen as an attempt by the state to intimidate sources into staying quiet, has become known as “the scandal within a scandal”. In a scathing front-page editorial Le Monde said the tracking of journalists had become “an affair of state” which lent credence to the suspicion that a cabinet noir , or office of shady operations, existed at the highest reaches of French power, namely the Elysée. Nicolas Sarkozy France Privacy Le Monde Angelique Chrisafis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Home secretary to specify tighter restrictions under terrorism prevention and investigation measures The government is planning emergency powers to forcibly relocate terror suspects, months after pledging to scrap the existing measure. Launching the terrorism prevention and investigation measures (Tpim) bill in May, the Home Office said “relocation to another part of the country without consent will be scrapped”. But it has now brought back the powers, reserving them for “exceptional circumstances”. The emergency legislation would enable the home secretary to specify more stringent restrictions on suspected terrorists in exceptional circumstances, the Home Office said. These would include the power to relocate the individual without their consent to a different part of the country and tighter restrictions on association and communications, it said. The enhanced Tpim bill will be put before parliament should exceptional circumstances arise. Under the measures, the home secretary “may impose restrictions on the individual leaving a specified area or travelling outside that area”, the draft bill said. A suspect under such an order may also be forced to hand in their passport. The home secretary could also impose restrictions on the individual’s possession or use of electronic communication devices, including both computers and telephones. Further restrictions could also be imposed to limit who the suspect communicates or associates with, where the suspect works or what he or she studies. The restrictions imposed under the Tpim were an “imperfect but necessary step”, the Home Office said. It also rejected a recommendation from the joint committee on human rights that an alternative system of restrictions linked to an ongoing criminal investigation, such as that proposed by the former director of public prosecutions Lord Macdonald, was appropriate. “Tpim notices, like the control orders they will replace, are intended to be used in such cases – where there is no realistic prospect of a prosecution, and there is no imminent prospect that further investigation will yield evidence that could be used to prosecute,” the Home Office said. “In such cases the government is faced with a stark choice between taking no action at all – potentially leaving the public unprotected from a serious threat – and imposing preventative measures to protect the public. “In such a case the purpose of the measures is not to facilitate the gathering of evidence – which process will already have been exhausted, although of course it will continue as far as is possible while restrictions are in force – but to protect the public and disrupt or prevent the individual’s involvement in terrorism-related activity.” May’s decision to impose a control order on a terror suspect banned from London was upheld by the high court in July. Mr Justice Owen, sitting in London, ruled that the restrictions imposed on CD’s freedom, including the decision to relocate him from London to a Midlands city, were a “necessary and proportionate measure for the protection of the public from the risk presented by CD and his associates”. The judge said he was satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that CD, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was “a leading figure in a network of Islamist extremists based in north London and has been involved in planning an attack or attacks on members of the public”. The relocation powers were ditched by the coalition under the new terrorist prevention and investigation measures, which will replace control orders from next year. The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, warned MPs that plans to water down the control orders would mean that CD could no longer be stopped from living in the capital. Under the draft emergency legislation, such powers would be able to be brought back in exceptional circumstances. UK security and terrorism Terrorism policy Global terrorism guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
A defiant Gaddafi denounced rebels as ‘traitors’, and said tribes loyal to him would never surrender to ‘collaborators’ A defiant Muammar Gaddafi has issued his latest apocalyptic statement, urging his surrounded followers to “keep fighting” and promising to turn Libya “into a hell”. In an audio statement aired this afternoon by Syria’s Arrai TV station, Gaddafi denounced the rebels as “traitors”, and said tribes loyal to him would never surrender to “collaborators”. “We won’t surrender again; we are not women; we will keep fighting,” he declared. “They [the Libyan people] cannot be brought to their knees. You cannot even pass through their soil, can you imagine ruling them? The Libyan people are not a herd of sheep, they cannot be defeated,” he said, referring to still-loyal tribes in the towns of Sirte and Bani Walid. He continued: “My voice represents danger to them [the international community]. Now they are working to jam our radio stations. They fear our voices. This proves the occupiers are weak.” He then exhorted: “Stand up to them from city to city, mountain to mountain, valley to valley. It will continue to be a long battle. Libya will turn into a hell. How can the Libyan people surrender? Continue to fight. We enjoy grassroots support. Collaborators cannot survive.” The message gives no clue where Gaddafi might be hiding, or even if he is still inside the country. There is continuing speculation that he is in or near Bani Walid, 150kms south-east of Tripoli, where he was allegedly spotted last Friday. Alternatively some believe he has fled further to the southern desert town of Sabha, 750 kilometres from the capital. It does indicate that Libya’s vanished ex-leader hasn’t yet grasped the reality of his situation: that most of the country including Tripoli is now under new management. Nor does he appear understand that, far from wanting to rise up and defend his old regime, most Libyans are glad to see the back of him. There is no indication when the message was recorded. But Gaddafi’s broadcast seems deliberately designed to undermine the “Friends of Libya” conference taking place in Paris. The conference, attended by world leaders, is a major boost to the National Transitional Council (NCT), now acclaimed by most of the international community as Libya’s legitimate ruling authority. Muammar Gaddafi Libya Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Luke Harding guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …A defiant Gaddafi denounced rebels as ‘traitors’, and said tribes loyal to him would never surrender to ‘collaborators’ A defiant Muammar Gaddafi has issued his latest apocalyptic statement, urging his surrounded followers to “keep fighting” and promising to turn Libya “into a hell”. In an audio statement aired this afternoon by Syria’s Arrai TV station, Gaddafi denounced the rebels as “traitors”, and said tribes loyal to him would never surrender to “collaborators”. “We won’t surrender again; we are not women; we will keep fighting,” he declared. “They [the Libyan people] cannot be brought to their knees. You cannot even pass through their soil, can you imagine ruling them? The Libyan people are not a herd of sheep, they cannot be defeated,” he said, referring to still-loyal tribes in the towns of Sirte and Bani Walid. He continued: “My voice represents danger to them [the international community]. Now they are working to jam our radio stations. They fear our voices. This proves the occupiers are weak.” He then exhorted: “Stand up to them from city to city, mountain to mountain, valley to valley. It will continue to be a long battle. Libya will turn into a hell. How can the Libyan people surrender? Continue to fight. We enjoy grassroots support. Collaborators cannot survive.” The message gives no clue where Gaddafi might be hiding, or even if he is still inside the country. There is continuing speculation that he is in or near Bani Walid, 150kms south-east of Tripoli, where he was allegedly spotted last Friday. Alternatively some believe he has fled further to the southern desert town of Sabha, 750 kilometres from the capital. It does indicate that Libya’s vanished ex-leader hasn’t yet grasped the reality of his situation: that most of the country including Tripoli is now under new management. Nor does he appear understand that, far from wanting to rise up and defend his old regime, most Libyans are glad to see the back of him. There is no indication when the message was recorded. But Gaddafi’s broadcast seems deliberately designed to undermine the “Friends of Libya” conference taking place in Paris. The conference, attended by world leaders, is a major boost to the National Transitional Council (NCT), now acclaimed by most of the international community as Libya’s legitimate ruling authority. Muammar Gaddafi Libya Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Luke Harding guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Study Casts Further Doubt on Jefferson-Hemings Affair. Will Press Notice?
September 1, 2011 No CommentFact: The man who wrote so eloquently about basic human liberty in the Declaration of Independence was himself a slave owner. Unproven theory: That man had a sexual relationship with one of those slaves and fathered at least one of her children. If you’re a liberal journalist, the fact makes you inclined to believe the theory, and ideology and political necessity take you the rest of the way. At least, that has been the case in reporting on the Jefferson-Hemings historical controversy over the last decade and more. It will be interesting to see if a new book that goes a long way toward exonerating Thomas Jefferson receives the same kind of breathless coverage as evidence the media cited to condemn him. Or if CBS produces a miniseries to correct the one it made exploiting that evidence. Back in 1998, DNA testing finally produced something conclusive about the centuries-old question of whether Thomas Jefferson had a sexual relationship with his slave, Sally Hemings. Liberal journalists, then desperate for ways to defend President Bill Clinton during his own sordid sex scandal, pounced on the news that a descendent of Hemings shared some of our third president’s DNA. But that’s all it said about the rumors and legends that had circulated for nearly two centuries. The report stated only that a Jefferson fathered a child with Hemings. And in fact there was a more likely culprit – Thomas’s younger brother Randolf, who did father children by his own slaves and was much closer to Hemings’ age. But the press had its story. In Nov. 1998, the Media Research Center quoted CNN anchor Marina Kolbe saying “new genetic work, coupled with old circumstantial evidence, proves Jefferson fathered at least one child by his slave, Sally Hemings. One of the study’s authors says it suggests, according to history, presidential indiscretions are long-standing.” NBC reporter Bob Faw was even more direct: “ After all, if Bill Clinton’s favorite President could end up on Mount Rushmore and the two-dollar bill, despite being sexually active with a subordinate, it might put Mr. Clinton’s conduct with a certain intern in a different light.” But nobody took the story and rqan with it like the Washington Post. A Post story maintained that Jefferson “almost certainly fathered a child with one of his slaves.” Columnist Bill Raspberry wrote, “After nearly two centuries, Thomas Jefferson’s secret is out.” Story after story took Thomas’ paternity as fact, some even speculating that Jefferson “maybe the father of the other four children as well.” Post coverage was so bad that in July, 1999, new ombudsman E.R. Shipp called the paper to account, writing, “In reporting on the Jefferson-Hemings story these six months, the Post often has failed to make clear what is fact…what is speculation and what is convenient.” Predictably, The New York Times wasn’t any better. A story by Neil A. Lewis was titled “Study Finds Strong Evidence Jefferson Fathered Slave Son.” Don Terry repeated the erroneous conclusion, writing that, “the recent release of DNA evidence indicating that Jefferson had probably fathered at least one child with Hemings,” and used it pick at the scab of black grievance. According to Terry, blacks – even black school kids –possess either a preternatural historical insight or clairvoyance, because they knew about Jefferson all along. “Why, he asked, did '’white society'’ need DNA evidence to accept what ‘ordinary people with common sense like me’ had recognized as fact long ago?” Terry ascribed the reluctance of scholars and white Jefferson defendants to accept the Jefferson-Hemings legend as “trying to hide” something. In an editorial , Brent Staples castigated white Jefferson family members who were reluctant to accept inconclusive evidence as conclusive. “If white Jeffersons cannot reach out to the black people whose ancestors built Monticello — and especially to those who share the founder's blood — then the prospects for harmony in this Jeffersonian Republic seem dimmer for all of us.” The truth and the great man’s reputation be damned. Thanks in no small part to the Times and the Post, assumptions of Jefferson’s guilt aren’t just for black high school students any more – they’ve become conventional wisdom.
Continue reading …
Twitter poll on release comes after site publishes 120,000 of its cache of diplomatic cables with almost no redactions WikiLeaks is conducting an online poll of its Twitter followers to decide whether the whistleblowing site should publish in full its unredacted cache of US diplomatic cables. The site last week released more than 120,000 of its cache of diplomatic cables, with almost no redactions to protect the identity of informants and other individuals. The huge scale of the release, compared with 20,000 cables disclosed in the past nine months, prompted fierce criticism from the Australian government and former US state department spokesman PJ Crowley. WikiLeaks appeared likely to use the Twitter responses, which it said favoured disclosure at a ratio of 100 to one, to pave the way for imminent disclosure of the remaining material from its cable archive. The majority of cables published in the past week by WikiLeaks were unclassified but the site released the full archives, including confidential and secret cables, from Sweden and Australia. The Australian cables, which unlike previous releases were not apparently redacted, included a document identifying 23 Australians alleged to have links with al-Qaida, prompting an angry response from Robert McClelland, Australia’s attorney general. “On occasions in the past, WikiLeaks has decided to redact identifying features where security operations or safety could be put at risk. This has not occurred in this case.” “The publication of any information that could compromise Australia’s national security, or inhibit the ability of intelligence agencies to monitor potential threats, is incredibly irresponsible,” he said. In a lengthy statement posted online, WikiLeaks said publishing its full cache of cables was necessary because an encrypted file containing the whole database was available online, and the password was in the public domain. It said the Guardian was responsible for this security breach, due to a password published in the Guardian’s book WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy, published in February 2011. The Guardian urged WikiLeaks not to publish the unredacted documents or to release any further details pointing to where they might be found, and denied involvement in their publication. “The Guardian calls on Wikileaks not to carry through its plan to release the unredacted state department cables. We believe this would be grossly irresponsible,” it said in a statement. “The paper utterly rejects any suggestion that it is responsible for the release of the unedited cables. The Guardian’s book about WikiLeaks was published last February. No concerns about security were expressed when the book was published or at any stage during the past seven months.” The statement added that WikiLeaks had contacted the Guardian’s editor-in-chief, Alan Rusbridger, within the last month about future projects – despite the site’s claim that it had been aware of security concerns for at least that long. Rusbridger and Assange met on 4 August, the statement reveals. “The two-hour meeting, which was filmed by Assange’s colleague, was cordial. Not only did Assange never mention the supposed security leak, he proposed working with the Guardian again on specific future projects. “The Guardian and its partners went to great lengths to protect potentially vulnerable sources identified in the WikiLeaks documents throughout their collaboration with the organisation. WikiLeaks should take responsibility for its own pattern of actions and not seek to deflect it elsewhere.” WikiLeaks’ allegations centred on details of how the Guardian’s investigations editor, David Leigh, obtained the cache of cables from Assange. The Guardian book revealed the diplomatic files were placed by WikiLeaks on a secure online server in July 2010, which it was agreed would only be online for a matter of hours. This server held a heavily encrypted file containing the unredacted embassy cables database. Assange had given Leigh the password to unlock this file once he had obtained it, and this password was included in the book – seven months after the temporary file was taken offline. No trace could be found through web links or Google’s archives of this file ever being visible through this secure server. However, at a later stage the same encrypted file and at least one other encrypted with the same password was posted on the peer-to-peer file-sharing network BitTorrent. One of these files was first published on 7 December 2010, just hours before Assange’s arrest. In the days running up to his arrest, Assange had spoken of “taking precautions” in the event of anything untoward happening to him. This file, it was later discovered, was the same file that had been shared with the Guardian via the secure server. It shared the same file name and file size, and could be unlocked using the same password as that given to Leigh. Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a former member of staff at WikiLeaks who is attempting to set up a rival whistleblowing website, discovered this republished file and shared information on WikiLeaks’s security breach with a small group of journalists. Avoiding the re-use of passwords and avoiding republishing temporary files are both considered basic security procedures among online security experts. However, the file was not discovered or downloaded by the public. By 10am on Thursday it had been accessed once in the previous 31 days, despite mounting speculation about its existence. Initial news stories did not give details of the location of files or of passwords. Later, WikiLeaks and some of its supporters published a series of hints about the passwords and files. At about 11pm on Wednesday an anonymous Twitter user discovered the published password and opened a separate file – not the one shared with the Guardian – that had also been circulating on file-sharing networks for several months. There was no evidence that any member of the public had sufficient information to find and decrypt the files even hours before their discovery. In the hours immediately before the document cache was unencrypted, the WikiLeaks twitter feed urged users to download a different encrypted file from BitTorrent, without giving any details as to its contents or password. WikiLeaks The Guardian Julian Assange Alan Rusbridger Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers The US embassy cables United States Twitter US foreign policy US national security Australia Sweden Europe Internet James Ball guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Twitter poll on release comes after site publishes 120,000 of its cache of diplomatic cables with almost no redactions WikiLeaks is conducting an online poll of its Twitter followers to decide whether the whistleblowing site should publish in full its unredacted cache of US diplomatic cables. The site last week released more than 120,000 of its cache of diplomatic cables, with almost no redactions to protect the identity of informants and other individuals. The huge scale of the release, compared with 20,000 cables disclosed in the past nine months, prompted fierce criticism from the Australian government and former US state department spokesman PJ Crowley. WikiLeaks appeared likely to use the Twitter responses, which it said favoured disclosure at a ratio of 100 to one, to pave the way for imminent disclosure of the remaining material from its cable archive. The majority of cables published in the past week by WikiLeaks were unclassified but the site released the full archives, including confidential and secret cables, from Sweden and Australia. The Australian cables, which unlike previous releases were not apparently redacted, included a document identifying 23 Australians alleged to have links with al-Qaida, prompting an angry response from Robert McClelland, Australia’s attorney general. “On occasions in the past, WikiLeaks has decided to redact identifying features where security operations or safety could be put at risk. This has not occurred in this case.” “The publication of any information that could compromise Australia’s national security, or inhibit the ability of intelligence agencies to monitor potential threats, is incredibly irresponsible,” he said. In a lengthy statement posted online, WikiLeaks said publishing its full cache of cables was necessary because an encrypted file containing the whole database was available online, and the password was in the public domain. It said the Guardian was responsible for this security breach, due to a password published in the Guardian’s book WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy, published in February 2011. The Guardian urged WikiLeaks not to publish the unredacted documents or to release any further details pointing to where they might be found, and denied involvement in their publication. “The Guardian calls on Wikileaks not to carry through its plan to release the unredacted state department cables. We believe this would be grossly irresponsible,” it said in a statement. “The paper utterly rejects any suggestion that it is responsible for the release of the unedited cables. The Guardian’s book about WikiLeaks was published last February. No concerns about security were expressed when the book was published or at any stage during the past seven months.” The statement added that WikiLeaks had contacted the Guardian’s editor-in-chief, Alan Rusbridger, within the last month about future projects – despite the site’s claim that it had been aware of security concerns for at least that long. Rusbridger and Assange met on 4 August, the statement reveals. “The two-hour meeting, which was filmed by Assange’s colleague, was cordial. Not only did Assange never mention the supposed security leak, he proposed working with the Guardian again on specific future projects. “The Guardian and its partners went to great lengths to protect potentially vulnerable sources identified in the WikiLeaks documents throughout their collaboration with the organisation. WikiLeaks should take responsibility for its own pattern of actions and not seek to deflect it elsewhere.” WikiLeaks’ allegations centred on details of how the Guardian’s investigations editor, David Leigh, obtained the cache of cables from Assange. The Guardian book revealed the diplomatic files were placed by WikiLeaks on a secure online server in July 2010, which it was agreed would only be online for a matter of hours. This server held a heavily encrypted file containing the unredacted embassy cables database. Assange had given Leigh the password to unlock this file once he had obtained it, and this password was included in the book – seven months after the temporary file was taken offline. No trace could be found through web links or Google’s archives of this file ever being visible through this secure server. However, at a later stage the same encrypted file and at least one other encrypted with the same password was posted on the peer-to-peer file-sharing network BitTorrent. One of these files was first published on 7 December 2010, just hours before Assange’s arrest. In the days running up to his arrest, Assange had spoken of “taking precautions” in the event of anything untoward happening to him. This file, it was later discovered, was the same file that had been shared with the Guardian via the secure server. It shared the same file name and file size, and could be unlocked using the same password as that given to Leigh. Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a former member of staff at WikiLeaks who is attempting to set up a rival whistleblowing website, discovered this republished file and shared information on WikiLeaks’s security breach with a small group of journalists. Avoiding the re-use of passwords and avoiding republishing temporary files are both considered basic security procedures among online security experts. However, the file was not discovered or downloaded by the public. By 10am on Thursday it had been accessed once in the previous 31 days, despite mounting speculation about its existence. Initial news stories did not give details of the location of files or of passwords. Later, WikiLeaks and some of its supporters published a series of hints about the passwords and files. At about 11pm on Wednesday an anonymous Twitter user discovered the published password and opened a separate file – not the one shared with the Guardian – that had also been circulating on file-sharing networks for several months. There was no evidence that any member of the public had sufficient information to find and decrypt the files even hours before their discovery. In the hours immediately before the document cache was unencrypted, the WikiLeaks twitter feed urged users to download a different encrypted file from BitTorrent, without giving any details as to its contents or password. WikiLeaks The Guardian Julian Assange Alan Rusbridger Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers The US embassy cables United States Twitter US foreign policy US national security Australia Sweden Europe Internet James Ball guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …