Wikileaks: UK – Dumbing down with A D-Notice
THE FEIGN BEFORE THE STORM
As dawn breaks over the greatest declassification in history, the world awakens to a radiant truth: WikiLeaks is winning.
The looming WikiLeaks release, which promises to declassify almost three million documents, has already sent the world’s most prominent governments into a political frenzy. The United States is orchestrating a dozen-stringed political mission, sending diplomats ranging from aides to Norway, to ambassadors to Canada, to Hillary Clinton herself to Australia in order to mitigate a possible relational disaster. The US seems very well aware that the world will not like it quite as much after WikiLeaks exposes its unvarnished truth – according to the Israeli Haaretz, the Americans are “viewing the leak very seriously”, believing it might contain diplomatic cables – internal US communications that detail the real, unembellished US opinions on international political matters.
Admittedly, it is interesting to see how all U.S. efforts to mitigate the imminent WikiLeaks crisis have been directed at foreign governments, and not at their own people.
The UK government hasn’t bothered to conceal its panic as well as the United States, recently issuing a class 1 and class 5 DA-Notice that reprehensibly asks the British press to censor “military operations, plans, capabilities” and “security and intelligence special services” that may be contained in the next WikiLeak. The UK government’s blind, censoring fear may be understandable, what with the whistle-blower organization promising to redefine the entire world’s history very, very soon. What is incomprehensible, however, is how the UK is seemingly expecting to circumvent the Internet’s free flow of information with a simple censorship order.
Russia is concerned. Italy’s Berlusconi is scared. The United States has already “slammed” the leak with woefully unconvincing arguments, having one ambassador call it an “absolutely awful impediment to [his] business”, which raises the question as to what kind of business it is that transparency is likely to hurt.
According to WikiLeaks, this political fiasco began when the New York Times briefed the White House on the contents of the embargoed leak this Monday. WikiLeaks has since predicted to its Twitter followers to watch as “every tinpot dictator in the world briefed prior to release”, and was right: in less than two days, Norway, Iraq, Turkey, Israel, Canada, Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Australia and the UK have been briefed by US diplomats over the contents of a leak that may render the world’s superpower internationally red-faced.
In what may be a matter of days, or even hours, many are expecting nothing short of a political revolution. Reuters is quoting sources that claim the leak contains corruption allegations that may very well cause an international uproar, calling the leak more revealing than both the Afghanistan and Iraq war logs combined. The more politicians cower, the more the public sits on the edge of its seat, awaiting the next leak from an organization that so far has delivered more unvarnished truth in the last year than all of the world’s governments and press combined.
WikiLeaks is winning at the UN, convincing it and the European Union to launch a full Afghanistan torture investigation, and is losing only with parties that have some, or many, embarrassing truths to cover. But with the people, WikiLeaks is winning all the same – for while lies may blind from the truth, they cannot and do not hold as the truth shines.
The chill of an English winter is nothing compared to the icy response from the British government responding to the news that WikiLeaks is about to release an estimated three million more potentially embarrassing documents into the public domain http://wikileaks.org/ The organisation launched in 2006 prides itself “on providing an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists” (through an electronic drop box). It has become a haven for whistleblowers to impart their secrets to be shared with a waiting world. The UK government’s response to the latest threat from “Wiki” is to slap on a D- notice, (short for Defence notice) which serves as an official request for news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specific subjects for reasons of national security. So the question arises, what exactly are the government expecting?
Well, the White House has been working overtime on “damage limitation” learning from past revelations pertaining to events in Iraq and Afghanistan where there was evidence of complicity with regard to torture and alleged war crimes see Asia Despatch, “WikiLeaks Irresponsible Journalism Or Educating The Masses On The Reality Of War”
http://www.asiadespatch.com/2010/10/opinionwikileaksiraq-irresponsible-journalism-or-educating-folks-on-the-reality-of-war/ The Obama administration has condemned as “irresponsible” the exposure of classified diplomatic cables warning that this will endanger “lives and interests”. America has also predicted that the content of the messages “will probably erode trust in the United States as a diplomatic partner”.
Hilary Clinton has tried to brief allies on what to expect and the Washington Post reported US State Department spokesperson P. J. Crowley as saying, “State does not know exactly what WikiLeaks has or what they plan to do,” but the consequences to American interests could be severe. The cables, for instance, could reveal that senior government officials in other countries are the sources of embarrassing information about the inner workings of those governments, thus making it more difficult for the State Department to obtain such intelligence in the future.” Other governments warned that they could be affected by leaks are Italy, Canada, Israel, Turkey, Iraq, Denmark and Norway. The rest of the world must (at least for the moment) be heaving a great sigh of relief.
According to the Telegraph, “sources revealed that the documents include commentary on the likely fate of the Coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Transmitted in the early days of the Coalition, the messages are understood to predict that the Government was likely to prove ineffective and short-lived, ultimately doomed by tensions between Tories and Lib Dems”. There is every possibility that the previous Labour government as well as the current Coalition may also have been subjected to less than positive scrutiny and Gordon Brown could also be in for a rough ride.
Information sent to Norwegian newspaper Dagbadet released before an agreed time quoted US Ambassador to Norway,Barry White as saying that, “while he could not vouch for the authenticity of the documents, he expected them to contain U.S. officials’ candid assessments of political leaders and political movements in other countries” and that “diplomats had to be able to have private, honest discussions to do their jobs”.
WikiLeaks defends ongoing criticism by arguing for the need to uphold ever eroding freedom of speech and media publishing and has been supported by Daniel Ellsburg who was at the centre of leaked documents in 1971 known as the Pentagon Papers which contained a top-secret history of US involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967 http://www.ellsberg.net/ Ellsburg understands only too well the risks of being a whistleblower and has also spoken in support of Bradley Manning, a US military analyst who was arrested in June on suspicion of leaking classified documents and remains in custody awaiting trial. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS, “we live in a world where just a little bit of information can be added to a network of information and really open up an understanding that just wasn’t there before.” His interview is due to be aired on Sunday. He also expressed concerns that American troops and others engaged in supporting the US in Afghanistan and other countries were at risk of danger due to the unauthorised release of documents.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, a former computer hacker born in Australia is dealing with his own problems at present following allegations of a sexual nature which he has strenuously denied http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047811 Supporters of Assange have argued that the nature of his work puts him at risk of being discredited by those who impose him. Maintaining WikiLeaks requires detailed strategic planning. In the past Assange was quoted as saying, “in my role as WikiLeaks editor, I’ve been involved in fighting off many legal attacks. To do that, and keep our sources safe, we have had to spread assets, encrypt everything, and move telecommunications and people around the world to activate protective laws in different national jurisdictions.”
Those carefully thought out practises and the impact on governments will no doubt be causing headaches around the world. The Hurriyet Daily News reported that documents “are said to include proof of a reciprocal double-cross by both the United States and Turkey in aiding terrorist organisations” http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=new-wikileaks-files-tie-us-to-pkk-turkey-to-al-qaeda-post-reports-2010-11-26 It is not surprising then that there may be increasing pressure from the State on mainstream media not to publish their findings.
By Carol Grayson
Carol Grayson is Director Coordination Asia Despatch and a UK independent researcher/campaigner on global health/human rights
source:
http://www.asiadespatch.com/2010/11/wikileaks-uk-dumbing-down-with-a-d-notice/
As dawn breaks over the greatest declassification in history, the world awakens to a radiant truth: WikiLeaks is winning.
The looming WikiLeaks release, which promises to declassify almost three million documents, has already sent the world’s most prominent governments into a political frenzy. The United States is orchestrating a dozen-stringed political mission, sending diplomats ranging from aides to Norway, to ambassadors to Canada, to Hillary Clinton herself to Australia in order to mitigate a possible relational disaster. The US seems very well aware that the world will not like it quite as much after WikiLeaks exposes its unvarnished truth – according to the Israeli Haaretz, the Americans are “viewing the leak very seriously”, believing it might contain diplomatic cables – internal US communications that detail the real, unembellished US opinions on international political matters.
Admittedly, it is interesting to see how all U.S. efforts to mitigate the imminent WikiLeaks crisis have been directed at foreign governments, and not at their own people.
The UK government hasn’t bothered to conceal its panic as well as the United States, recently issuing a class 1 and class 5 DA-Notice that reprehensibly asks the British press to censor “military operations, plans, capabilities” and “security and intelligence special services” that may be contained in the next WikiLeak. The UK government’s blind, censoring fear may be understandable, what with the whistle-blower organization promising to redefine the entire world’s history very, very soon. What is incomprehensible, however, is how the UK is seemingly expecting to circumvent the Internet’s free flow of information with a simple censorship order.
Russia is concerned. Italy’s Berlusconi is scared. The United States has already “slammed” the leak with woefully unconvincing arguments, having one ambassador call it an “absolutely awful impediment to [his] business”, which raises the question as to what kind of business it is that transparency is likely to hurt.
According to WikiLeaks, this political fiasco began when the New York Times briefed the White House on the contents of the embargoed leak this Monday. WikiLeaks has since predicted to its Twitter followers to watch as “every tinpot dictator in the world briefed prior to release”, and was right: in less than two days, Norway, Iraq, Turkey, Israel, Canada, Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Australia and the UK have been briefed by US diplomats over the contents of a leak that may render the world’s superpower internationally red-faced.
In what may be a matter of days, or even hours, many are expecting nothing short of a political revolution. Reuters is quoting sources that claim the leak contains corruption allegations that may very well cause an international uproar, calling the leak more revealing than both the Afghanistan and Iraq war logs combined. The more politicians cower, the more the public sits on the edge of its seat, awaiting the next leak from an organization that so far has delivered more unvarnished truth in the last year than all of the world’s governments and press combined.
WikiLeaks is winning at the UN, convincing it and the European Union to launch a full Afghanistan torture investigation, and is losing only with parties that have some, or many, embarrassing truths to cover. But with the people, WikiLeaks is winning all the same – for while lies may blind from the truth, they cannot and do not hold as the truth shines.
The chill of an English winter is nothing compared to the icy response from the British government responding to the news that WikiLeaks is about to release an estimated three million more potentially embarrassing documents into the public domain http://wikileaks.org/ The organisation launched in 2006 prides itself “on providing an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists” (through an electronic drop box). It has become a haven for whistleblowers to impart their secrets to be shared with a waiting world. The UK government’s response to the latest threat from “Wiki” is to slap on a D- notice, (short for Defence notice) which serves as an official request for news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specific subjects for reasons of national security. So the question arises, what exactly are the government expecting?
Well, the White House has been working overtime on “damage limitation” learning from past revelations pertaining to events in Iraq and Afghanistan where there was evidence of complicity with regard to torture and alleged war crimes see Asia Despatch, “WikiLeaks Irresponsible Journalism Or Educating The Masses On The Reality Of War”
http://www.asiadespatch.com/2010/10/opinionwikileaksiraq-irresponsible-journalism-or-educating-folks-on-the-reality-of-war/ The Obama administration has condemned as “irresponsible” the exposure of classified diplomatic cables warning that this will endanger “lives and interests”. America has also predicted that the content of the messages “will probably erode trust in the United States as a diplomatic partner”.
Hilary Clinton has tried to brief allies on what to expect and the Washington Post reported US State Department spokesperson P. J. Crowley as saying, “State does not know exactly what WikiLeaks has or what they plan to do,” but the consequences to American interests could be severe. The cables, for instance, could reveal that senior government officials in other countries are the sources of embarrassing information about the inner workings of those governments, thus making it more difficult for the State Department to obtain such intelligence in the future.” Other governments warned that they could be affected by leaks are Italy, Canada, Israel, Turkey, Iraq, Denmark and Norway. The rest of the world must (at least for the moment) be heaving a great sigh of relief.
According to the Telegraph, “sources revealed that the documents include commentary on the likely fate of the Coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Transmitted in the early days of the Coalition, the messages are understood to predict that the Government was likely to prove ineffective and short-lived, ultimately doomed by tensions between Tories and Lib Dems”. There is every possibility that the previous Labour government as well as the current Coalition may also have been subjected to less than positive scrutiny and Gordon Brown could also be in for a rough ride.
Information sent to Norwegian newspaper Dagbadet released before an agreed time quoted US Ambassador to Norway,Barry White as saying that, “while he could not vouch for the authenticity of the documents, he expected them to contain U.S. officials’ candid assessments of political leaders and political movements in other countries” and that “diplomats had to be able to have private, honest discussions to do their jobs”.
WikiLeaks defends ongoing criticism by arguing for the need to uphold ever eroding freedom of speech and media publishing and has been supported by Daniel Ellsburg who was at the centre of leaked documents in 1971 known as the Pentagon Papers which contained a top-secret history of US involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967 http://www.ellsberg.net/ Ellsburg understands only too well the risks of being a whistleblower and has also spoken in support of Bradley Manning, a US military analyst who was arrested in June on suspicion of leaking classified documents and remains in custody awaiting trial. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS, “we live in a world where just a little bit of information can be added to a network of information and really open up an understanding that just wasn’t there before.” His interview is due to be aired on Sunday. He also expressed concerns that American troops and others engaged in supporting the US in Afghanistan and other countries were at risk of danger due to the unauthorised release of documents.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, a former computer hacker born in Australia is dealing with his own problems at present following allegations of a sexual nature which he has strenuously denied http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047811 Supporters of Assange have argued that the nature of his work puts him at risk of being discredited by those who impose him. Maintaining WikiLeaks requires detailed strategic planning. In the past Assange was quoted as saying, “in my role as WikiLeaks editor, I’ve been involved in fighting off many legal attacks. To do that, and keep our sources safe, we have had to spread assets, encrypt everything, and move telecommunications and people around the world to activate protective laws in different national jurisdictions.”
Those carefully thought out practises and the impact on governments will no doubt be causing headaches around the world. The Hurriyet Daily News reported that documents “are said to include proof of a reciprocal double-cross by both the United States and Turkey in aiding terrorist organisations” http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=new-wikileaks-files-tie-us-to-pkk-turkey-to-al-qaeda-post-reports-2010-11-26 It is not surprising then that there may be increasing pressure from the State on mainstream media not to publish their findings.
By Carol Grayson
Carol Grayson is Director Coordination Asia Despatch and a UK independent researcher/campaigner on global health/human rights
source:
http://www.asiadespatch.com/2010/11/wikileaks-uk-dumbing-down-with-a-d-notice/
Megjegyzések
Megjegyzés küldése