Geographic Information Systems for the Masses: http://www.patchworknation.org/ Interesting site, with many usability features that will enhance it’s utility. Does not seem to be very web 2.0, but that could change, with user-generated searches and maps becoming more and more the center-piece of the site.
Is this quote from:
(a) A Report from the Richmond VA police department describing how to infiltrate protest organizations
(b) A report from Gaddafi’s secret services, just before the uprising started there
(c) A dispatch from Ben Ali’s security forces, just prior to his downfall,
The answer, as always, is “A” And the report was given to a protestor in answer to a FOIA request, by accident. It gives insight into the new thinking on the part of the government that equates dissent with terrorism and the exercise of First Amendment rights with criminality. After the government released it, it then tried to cover up the existence of the report, but too late–here it is. Covered by Will Potter at the ever-excellent blog Green is the New Red:
Richmond Cops Mistakenly Hand Over Anti-Protest Guides to Anarchist
by WILL POTTER on JANUARY 5, 2011
After filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the Richmond Police Department for police training documents, Mo Karn received much more than expected in return: homeland security and crowd control guides that show how the police target protests.
The police filed for an emergency court order yesterday to prohibit Karn from publicizing any of the documents, which should never have been released. The cops’ reasoning? “Defendant Mo Karn is a known and admitted anarchist.”
The documents, however, have already been published online. And buried in the training guides are insights into three trends in law enforcement that have been occurring not just in Virginia, but nationally: the demonization of protest, the militarization of police, and turning local cops into “terrorism” officials.
The Demonization of Protest
The Richmond Police Department’s Emergency Operations Plan
includes a section on “civil disturbances.” While this sounds innocuous, “civil disturbances” are defined so broadly as to include what the police call “dissident gatherings.”
“The City of Richmond is a target rich environment” for antiwar protesters, the document says. And it warns that police and homeland security have reason to be increasingly concerned:
“Current training and intelligence reveals that protestors are becoming more proficient in the methods of assembly.”
Militarization of Local Police
Such a depiction of “assembly” (a First Amendment right) as a “disturbance” and a threat is all the more troubling when put in the context of the other police department guides. Richmond’s Crowd Management Operating Manual is for the police unit assigned to large protests (no experience required). Among the tools that the crowd management team are issued include riot shields, chemical agents, cut tools, helmets, body armor, cameras, video cameras, batons, gas masks, and a “mass arrest kit.”
Deputizing Local Cops as Counter-terrorism Officials
This militarization of local police is accompanied by another trend in law enforcement since September 11th: deputizing local cops to becoming “homeland security” and counter-terrorism officials. According to the Homeland Security Criminal Intelligence Unit Operating Manual, “The Richmond Police Department is under contract with the FBI to provide assistance through staffing, intelligence and equipment.” And one member of the homeland security unit is assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.
The result? Documents like the Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment. The 2009 document was created by the Virginia Fusion Center, of which the Richmond Police Department is part. Fusion centers are ostensibly designed to gather terrorism intelligence from multiple police agencies, and make us safer. In practice, they routinely label activists as “terrorists.” Among the “terrorist threats” identified in Virginia were animal rights activists, environmental activists, and anarchists.
Obviously, donating to wikileaks is important. I have made major donations twice. But, political mobilization is also necessary. What is being missed by much of the establishment journalism is that wikileaks and Julian Assange are tremendously popular. Just look at the first 600 comments on the BBC sound off board–over 10 to one in wikileaks favor.
I would welcome any ideas here, please post.
One thing I have done recently is write to the Swedish embassy, asking that the possible political motivation of the charges there be investigated, and that Julian receive a fair and quick trial.
I hope to hear some good ideas.
Wikileaks domains currently online.
Wikileaks is currently under a heavy DDOS attack from unknown entities.
If a link is not working because of a DDoS attack, just try the next one. A lot of the EU domains are currently affected (03:45 GMT)
Spain wikileaks.es********* boom! another one bites the dust
British Virgin Islands wikileaks.vg
Canada wikileaks.ca********* boom! another one bites the dust. C’mon Canada — you’re better than this.
New Zealand wikileaks.co.nz
Sao Tome wikileaks.st
Wikileaks Mass Mirror Project http://220.127.116.11/mass-mirror.html
As of this evening (December 4th 2010)I could still get wikileaks here: http://wikileaks.nl/
It seems there is a meme out there that wikileaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down and killed. This noise is being spouted by US right-wing hate groups, as well as some semi-mainstream press figures (although the difference between those two groups is getting paper thin), and they seem to forget that freedom of speech is, like, in the Constitution. I won’t link to any of the pundits that are out there brazenly advocating murder, except to make the very obvious comment that they are very evil, and if anything should happen to Julian, they would obviously bear a great deal of the responsibility and should therefore also bear some punishment if Julian were to be harmed. Of course I am only advocating legal punishment, not extra-judicial killing or anything like that. That would be wrong.
But before anyone goes out and kills Julian they should take note of how very popular he is. Look at the comments from the BBC sound-off board. Pro-wikileaks comments are running about 10 to 1. And I feel quit certain that of the 10% of the population that doesn’t like what wikileaks has done, the majority would not favor his extra-judicial killing.
So, think before you sic your goons on Julian.
Don’t believe me? Just check below…
Here is a new way to donate to wikileaks, please do so today:
I have not seen yet an official release from wikileaks that the xipwire site is going to them; there is always the possibility of this payment not getting to wikileaks. I feel presently that risk is smaller than the risk of not donating to wikileaks, though.
As of this morning (December 12th 2010 18:01 GMT) I could still get wikileaks here: http://wikileaks.nl/
The datacell link will no longer allow you to make a credit card donation to wikileaks; it would appear that the credit card companies are to blame. IF you are upset, CALL YOUR CREDIT CARD COMPANY AND COMPLAIN.
Note in comments there is a description of how to donate using flattr.
I have not verified the flattr method with wikileaks; but it does seem to work, and is now almost the only opportunity to donate to wikileaks.
Everything below is a direct quote from the wikileaks site.
Share a Wikileaks release with a friend. Spread our wallpapers. Donate to support vital infrastructure. If you believe democracy and transparency go hand in hand, now is the time to stand and say: “The world needs Wikileaks.”
WikiLeaks brings truth to the world by publishing fact-based stories without fear or favour. You can help support our independent media by donating financially.
Our organisation exists because of the work of many volunteers who have contributed thousands of hours to building WikiLeaks from the ground up. You choose how much you can donate; we don’t recommend any particular amount. Just do what you think is right.
Your donations are vital to pay for Wikileaks’ servers and infrastructure, staff and travel expenses, and for the legal protections and advice Wikileaks needs to operate.
There are two ways to donate to the WikiLeaks Defence Fund and four ways to donate to WikiLeaks the organisation:
WikiLeaks Defence Fund
- Bank Transfer
- Postal Mail
- Online Transfer from selected European and UK banks
- Bank Transfer [option 1: everyone]
- Bank Transfer [option 2: tax deductible in Germany]
- Postal Mail
Julian Assange and WikiLeaks Defence Fund
Bank Transfer – via Julian Assange and WikiLeaks Defence Fund:
“FSI – Julian Assange Defence Fund”
Sort code: 20-77-67
Account number: 93842452
BIC/Swift code: BARC GB22
IBAN: GB86 BARC 2077 6793 8424 52
Via Postal Mail
You can post a donation or send a cheque via good old fashion postal mail made payable to:
“FSI – Julian Assange Defence Fund”
c/o Finers Stephens Innocent LLP
179 Great Portland Street
For the terms of the fund please visit http://www.fsilaw.com/
Online Transfer via selected European and UK banks
Using our friendly credit card processing partner Datacell Switzerland.
Bank Transfer – Option 1: via Sunshine Press Productions ehf:
Skulagötu 19, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland
Landsbanki Islands Account number 0111-26-611010
ACCOUNT/IBAN:IS97 0111 2661 1010 6110 1002 80
Bank Transfer – Option 2: via the not-for-profit Wau Holland Stiftung Foundation:
This support is tax deductible in Germany
Bank Account: 2772812-04
IBAN: DE46 5204 0021 0277 2812 04
BIC Code: COBADEFF520
Bank: Commerzbank Kassel
German BLZ: 52040021
Subject: WIKILEAKS / WHS Projekt 04
Via Postal Mail
You can post a donation via good old fashion postal mail to:
WikiLeaks (or any suitable name likely to avoid interception in your country)
Australia Post Office – University of Melbourne Branch
We cannot accept PayPal donations anymore.
Nor can we accept online transfers via credit cards via Visa and MasterCard any more either.
This is really unsettling, an article at a major US newspaper (The Washington Post) that advocates killing Julian Assange, the founder of wikileaks. It is also filled with lies about Julian. I wouldn’t believe it if I didn’t read it myself. There have been several organizations that advocated killing journalists, for example the Gestapo, and the NKVD/KBG , and Putin’s entourage. What august company Marc Thiessen is in:
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Let’s be clear: WikiLeaks is not a news organization; it is a criminal enterprise. Its reason for existence is to obtain classified national security information and disseminate it as widely as possible — including to the United States’ enemies. These actions are likely a violation of the Espionage Act, and they arguably constitute material support for terrorism. The Web site must be shut down and prevented from releasing more documents — and its leadership brought to justice. WikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange, proudly claims to have exposed more classified information than all the rest of the world press combined. He recently told the New Yorker he understands that innocent people may be hurt by his disclosures (“collateral damage” he called them) and that WikiLeaks might get “blood on our hands.”
With his unprecedented release of more than 76,000 secret documents last week, he may have achieved this. The Post found that the documents exposed at least one U.S. intelligence operative and identified about 100 Afghan informants — often including the names of their villages and family members. A Taliban spokesman said the group is scouring the WikiLeaks Web site for information to find and “punish” these informers.
Beyond getting people killed, WikiLeaks’ actions make it less likely that Afghans and foreign intelligence services (whose reports WikiLeaks also exposed) will cooperate with the United States in the future. And, as former CIA director Mike Hayden has pointed out, the disclosures are a gift to adversary intelligence services, and they will place a chill on intelligence sharing within the United States government. The harm to our national security is immeasurable and irreparable.
And WikiLeaks is preparing to do more damage. Assange claims to be in possession of 15,000 even more sensitive documents, which he is reportedly preparing to release. On Sunday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told ABC News that Assange had a “moral culpability” for the harm he has caused. Well, the Obama administration has a moral responsibility to stop him from wreaking even more damage.
Assange is a non-U.S. citizen operating outside the territory of the United States. This means the government has a wide range of options for dealing with him. It can employ not only law enforcement but also intelligence and military assets to bring Assange to justice and put his criminal syndicate out of business.
Some thoughts regarding the wikileaks leak of the Afghan war diaries:
First, Julian Assange is a first rate spokesman for wikileaks and the community should be proud of the work he has done. But not just the Hacker community, all the world, and Americans especially. He is doing exactly what Thomas Paine would be doing if he were alive today.
Second, the Hacker community needs to do a better job of exposing threats. The questioning of an MIT hacker several months ago should have been more widely publicized. What is needed is a site just like Who is sick? called Who’s been questioned? Anyone who had been questioned by the FBI or the CIA could post the questions that they have been asked.The questions and especially their aggregation would contain a lot of very interesting information. Patterns emerge, and the threats to freedom will be understood more clearly.
Third, the US military industrial public relations complex has/is about to declare war on freedom, in particular free software which they (wrongly, I might add) see as a threat. The fact that the RIAA and the MPAA and other strong-IP entities also harbor ill will towards free software will only add fuel to the fire. The exhibit number one is the questioning of Jacob Applbaum
July 31, 2010 4:16 PM PDT
Researcher detained at U.S. border, questioned about Wikileaks
LAS VEGAS — A security researcher involved with the Wikileaks Web site was detained by U.S. agents at the border for three hours and questioned about the controversial whistleblower project as he entered the country on Thursday to attend a hacker conference, sources said on Saturday.
He was also approached by two FBI agents at the Defcon conference after his presentation on Saturday afternoon about the Tor Project.
Jacob Appelbaum, a Seattle-based programmer for the online privacy protection project called Tor, arrived at the Newark, New Jersey, airport from Holland flight Thursday morning when he was pulled aside by customs and border protection agents who told him he was randomly selected for a security search, according to the sources familiar with the matter who asked to remain anonymous.
Appelbaum, a U.S. citizen, was taken into a room, frisked and his bag was searched. Receipts from his bag were photocopied and his laptop was inspected but it’s not clear in what manner, the sources said. Officials from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Army then told him he was not under arrest but was being detained, the sources said. They asked questions about Wikileaks, asked for his opinions about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and asked where Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is, but he declined to comment without a lawyer present, according to the sources. He was not permitted to make a phone call, they said.
After about three hours, Appelbaum was given his laptop back but the agents kept his three mobile phones, sources said.
Here’s an interesting wiki that has been created to fight astroturfing campaigns:
Daniel Ellsberg, who knows a thing or two about leaks, fears for Julian Assange’s safety. I do to. Our president has announced that he believes in extra-judicial assassination, and that such action is OK when taken against terrorists, now just couple that with the doctrine that terrorists are those who disagree with the USA administration, and basically anything goes.
Daniel Ellsberg, the former US military analyst who released the pentagon papers in 1971, appeared on MSNBC today with Dylan Ratigan. He said he fears for the safety of Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, who is reportedly on the verge of leaking secret State Department cables. The Daily Beast reports that Assange is currently being sought by the Pentagon, and Ellsberg advises him not to reveal his whereabouts.
“We have after all for the first time, that I ever perhaps in any democratic country, we have a president who has announced that he feels he has the right to use special operations operatives against anyone abroad, that he thinks is associated with terrorism,” says Ellsberg. “Now as I look at Assange’s case, they’re worried that he will reveal current threats. I would have to say puts his well-being, his physical life, in some danger now. And I say that with anguish. I think it’s astonishing that an American president should have put out that policy and he’s not getting these resistance from it, from Congress, the press, the courts or anything. It’s an amazing development that I think Assange would do well to keep his whereabouts unknown.”
RATIGAN: Do you see direct parallels between what’s developing here and what you went through?
ELLSBURG: Yes, there does seem to be an immediate parallel between me and whoever leaked the video on the assault on the 19 or 20 Iraqis. Someone–allegedly, it was Bradley Manning–did feel that that deserved to be out. the “Reuters,” whose newspapermen were killed in the course of that, had been trying to get that through the freedom of information act for two years, as I understand it and had been refused. Let’s say whoever did it, hypothetically, Bradley Manning, showed better judgment in putting it out than the people who kept is secret from the American people and from the Iraqis.
RATIGAN: What is your sense of disclosure of information to the American people today, compared to the period of time that you lived through, where there was similar issues with, with the perception of reality of information being withheld from the public?
ELLSBURG: Look, there’s no doubt at all, that enormous amounts of energy that should be made public are being withheld and that hundreds, probably thousands of people, I’m speaking now of the run-up to the Iraq war, which has a very great similarity to the lying and the secrecy that got us into Vietnam. I think if many people had recognized that their oath of office, which called them in to support the Constitution, really contradicted their promise to keep certain secrets, when those secrets concealed lies, concealed deception to the American public and getting us into a hopeless war, they should have given priority to the oath of office and they should have put that information out to Congress and the public. They should have done what I wish I had done much earlier than I did I had been in that position, too. I knew years before the Pentagon Papers came out that the Americans were being lied in to an essentially hopeless war. I’m not proud of the fact that it didn’t occur to me that my oath of office, which was to support the Constitution, called on me to put that information out and say, ‘64, when the war might have been avoided. But I certainly am glad that I finally came aware of what my real responsibilities were there. And I did put it out years later. At times, at that time, which published it, the “Times,” and the 18 other newspapers, which defied President Nixon’s injunctions and did put it out, were in the position of Julian Assange is in now. I’m very happy that he put it out and I congratulate him for it.