Thursday, December 16, 2010
'Conspiracy' or protection of news sources?
Federal prosecutors, seeking to build a case against the
WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange for his role in a huge
dissemination of classified government documents, are looking
for evidence of any collusion in his early contacts with an
Army intelligence analyst suspected of leaking the
information, reports the New York Times.
'Justice Department officials are trying to find out whether
Assange encouraged or even helped the analyst, Pfc.
Bradley Manning, to extract classified military and State
Department files from a government computer system. If he did
so, they believe they could charge him as a conspirator in
the leak, not just as a passive recipient of the documents
who then published them.'
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/16wiki.html?emc=na
Again, what about Siobhan Gorman, who, as a Baltimore Sun reporter, "colluded" with an NSA employee to receive secret documents via an encrypted email service? Gorman, now with the Wall Street Journal, was not charged though her source received a stiff prison sentence.
It seems probable that federal prosecutors are trying to get the accused leaker, Pfc. Bradley Manning, to give a statement implicating Assange in a conspiracy case in exchange for a milder sentence than the maximum.
First of all, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know how to download a cache of files onto a flash drive. That's routine stuff. Secondly, Manning -- who hasn't been charged let alone convicted -- once he decided to pass the data to Wikileaks, would have needed to know a secure means of transmission. You may call this conspiracy, but it's no different from the conspiracy engaged in by Times reporter Elisabeth Busmiller to receive calssified national intelligence information. She had to assure, as best she could, confidentiality in the transmission.
In other words, Assange's "conspiracy" is very likely simply a "conspiracy" to protect a news source.
The Air Force is still blocking news sites that show classified documents but other Pentagon units were not going that far. Still, what the Obama administration is doing is laughable, and hard to fathom.
To wit, the rest of the Defense Dept. was following guidance that has already been issued by the Obama administration and the Defense Department directing hundreds of thousands of federal employees and contractors not to read the secret cables and other classified documents published by Wikileaks unless the workers have the required security clearance or authorization.
“Classified information, whether or not already posted on public websites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. Government authority,” said a notice sent on Dec. 3 by the Office of Management and Budget, which is part of the White House, to agency and department heads, says the Times.
It also illustrates the contortions the military and other government agencies appear to be going through to limit the spread of classified information that has become widely available in the public domain, the Times observed.
My feeling is that the subversive invisible government is freaking out over the loss of face it is suffering over its ability to run its dirty system via "classified" information networks. It is trying to "show authority" somehow, somewhere, even though the horse is long gone from the barn.
“It is unfortunate that the U.S. Air Force has chosen not to allow its personnel access to information that virtually everyone else in the world can access,” said a spokeswoman for The Times, Danielle Rhoades Ha.
Biden chides Spain on Kosovo in secret cable newly published by Wikileaks.
Here is the cable:
WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange for his role in a huge
dissemination of classified government documents, are looking
for evidence of any collusion in his early contacts with an
Army intelligence analyst suspected of leaking the
information, reports the New York Times.
'Justice Department officials are trying to find out whether
Assange encouraged or even helped the analyst, Pfc.
Bradley Manning, to extract classified military and State
Department files from a government computer system. If he did
so, they believe they could charge him as a conspirator in
the leak, not just as a passive recipient of the documents
who then published them.'
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/16wiki.html?emc=na
Again, what about Siobhan Gorman, who, as a Baltimore Sun reporter, "colluded" with an NSA employee to receive secret documents via an encrypted email service? Gorman, now with the Wall Street Journal, was not charged though her source received a stiff prison sentence.
It seems probable that federal prosecutors are trying to get the accused leaker, Pfc. Bradley Manning, to give a statement implicating Assange in a conspiracy case in exchange for a milder sentence than the maximum.
First of all, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know how to download a cache of files onto a flash drive. That's routine stuff. Secondly, Manning -- who hasn't been charged let alone convicted -- once he decided to pass the data to Wikileaks, would have needed to know a secure means of transmission. You may call this conspiracy, but it's no different from the conspiracy engaged in by Times reporter Elisabeth Busmiller to receive calssified national intelligence information. She had to assure, as best she could, confidentiality in the transmission.
In other words, Assange's "conspiracy" is very likely simply a "conspiracy" to protect a news source.
The Air Force is still blocking news sites that show classified documents but other Pentagon units were not going that far. Still, what the Obama administration is doing is laughable, and hard to fathom.
To wit, the rest of the Defense Dept. was following guidance that has already been issued by the Obama administration and the Defense Department directing hundreds of thousands of federal employees and contractors not to read the secret cables and other classified documents published by Wikileaks unless the workers have the required security clearance or authorization.
“Classified information, whether or not already posted on public websites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. Government authority,” said a notice sent on Dec. 3 by the Office of Management and Budget, which is part of the White House, to agency and department heads, says the Times.
It also illustrates the contortions the military and other government agencies appear to be going through to limit the spread of classified information that has become widely available in the public domain, the Times observed.
My feeling is that the subversive invisible government is freaking out over the loss of face it is suffering over its ability to run its dirty system via "classified" information networks. It is trying to "show authority" somehow, somewhere, even though the horse is long gone from the barn.
“It is unfortunate that the U.S. Air Force has chosen not to allow its personnel access to information that virtually everyone else in the world can access,” said a spokeswoman for The Times, Danielle Rhoades Ha.
Biden chides Spain on Kosovo in secret cable newly published by Wikileaks.
Here is the cable:
VZCZCXYZ0003 OO RUEHWEB DE RUEHSG #0331/01 0972057 ZNY SSSSS ZZH O 072057Z APR 09 FM AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4766 INFO RUEHXQ/ALL EUROPEAN UNION POST COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
S E C R E T SANTIAGO 000331 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/07/2019 TAGS: OVIP BIDEN JOSEPH PREL ECON PGOV SOCI EU SUBJECT: VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN'S MARCH 28 MEETING WITH PRIME MINISTER JOSE LUIS RODRIGUEZ ZAPATERO Classified By: Ambassador Paul Simons for reasons 1.4 (b/d). ¶1. (U) March 28, 2009; 9:20 am; Vina del Mar, Chile. ¶2. (U) Participants: U.S. Joseph Biden, Vice President Antony Blinken, National Security Advisor to the Vice President Brian McKeon, Deputy National Security Advisor to the Vice President Dan Restrepo, Senior Director, Western Hemisphere Affairs, National Security Council Craig Kelly, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Dept. of State Brian Harris (notetaker), Political/Economic Chief, U.S. Embassy Guatemala City SPAIN Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Prime Minister Bernadino Leon, Secretary General of the Presidency Nieves Goicoechea, Deputy Secretary of State for Communications Trinidad Jimenez, Deputy Secretary of State for Latin America Maria Solanes, Presidential Counselor for International Affairs ¶3. (C) Summary: During a bilateral meeting on the margins of the Progressive Governance Leaders Summit in Chile, Vice President Joseph Biden and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero discussed the need for a strengthened relationship and greater collaboration between Europe and the United States. Vice President Biden pledged increased consultation with Europe and called on Spain and other European nations to follow through on commitments with action. He also criticized the lack of consultation prior to Spain's withdrawal from Kosovo and requested Spain consult the United States earlier and in a more transparent fashion in the future. Zapatero defended the decision to withdraw but allowed that Spain could have consulted earlier with the United States. End Summary. --------------------------------------------- ------- Expectations and New U.S. Approach to Foreign Policy --------------------------------------------- ------- ¶4. (C) PM Zapatero opened the meeting by congratulating Vice President Biden on the election victory and saying it had raised expectations in Spain and throughout Europe for a new relationship with the United States. Vice President Biden thanked Zapatero and added that expectations may be too high, and President Obama knows that high expectations have more to do with the failures of the previous administration than with his new administration. ¶5. (C) Vice President Biden added that we want to change our foreign policy paradigm. We know that most of our challenges lie beyond the scope of the United States to confront alone and that President Obama genuinely wants engage in dialogue with partners around the world to develop consensus around solutions. We know what the pillars of our policy are, but unless we listen and work with our partners, it will not matter much. ¶6. (C) Vice President Biden went on to say that Spain and the United States have worked as great partners in Iraq and we need to enhance the cooperation between our two countries. The relationship has not been all positive in recent years but there was no reason why it could not change instantly. ¶7. (C) Zapatero responded that managing the relationship between the United States and Spain under the Bush administration was easy for him. Whatever position the Bush Administration took, he would take the opposite and see his domestic poll numbers increase. Sarcastically, Zapatero said "for that I will always be grateful to the Bush Administration." Now, however, Spain, and Europe in general, want a change in the relationship with the United States. Europe is a group of countries that the United States can trust. We share the same general outlook and, to a great extent, the same strategic interests. Europe wants to see a United States that shares decision making on global issues and listens to everyone, rather than pushing a single dogmatic view as with the Bush administration. Europe is the world's greatest debating club which--despite numerous cultures, 27 countries, and 20 languages--can still reach consensus. Were Europeans to be a little bolder, they would have a great impact on world affairs. Now Europeans want to contribute to reinvigorated U.S. leadership by helping to contribute the best ideas and principles to help solve global challenges. ¶8. (C) Vice President Biden said that for eight years the doctrine of "my way or the high way" had been ascendant in American foreign policy and that he had long spoken against this in the Senate. In his recent speeches at the Munich Security Conference and at the North Atlantic Council he had been a consistent proponent of collaboration and consensus building. However, consensus building can have the drawback of leading to the lowest common denominator. Working together, Europe and the United States must reach agreement, then implement plans and enforce the rules of the road. Despite being an ardent Atlanticist, Vice President Biden noted that Europe has been reluctant to act to enforce the rules to which Europeans have ascribed. The Obama administration brings good news and bad news for Europeans. Unlike the Bush administration, the Obama administration will genuinely consult and listen to its European partners. However, once a decision is reached, the Obama administration will be more aggressive in asking Europeans to follow through on its commitments. ¶9. (C) Vice President Biden said regular Americans in places like Peoria and Albuquerque do not like being a superpower, they want others, such as Europe to help lead. When the idea of a European military force separate from the NATO command structure emerged, many in the Bush administration railed against it. However, Vice President Biden said he had been supportive of the idea and did not view it as a threat. In a light moment, when Zapatero said that the European Defense Force would happen, Vice President Biden extended his hand and said "I bet it won't." Vice President Biden said we view the U.S.-European relationship as an axis of world stability and we need to work together to strengthen it. ------ Kosovo ------ ¶10. (C) Vice President Biden said that we want to genuinely collaborate with Spain, but changing a relationship was difficult, and required reciprocal changes. For example, when Spain unilaterally withdrew its mission to Kosovo, we would have appreciated advanced warning and collaboration. The decision is a sovereign one for Spain to make and one that the United States respects, but we should discuss it in advance. ¶11. (C) Zapatero responded that there must have been a misunderstanding. Spain made the decision to withdraw a year ago and could not maintain participation in the mission once Kosovo declared its independence and was recognized by numerous nations. Spain is a fractious country with Basque (ETA) terrorist organization that has killed over 900 Spaniards in an effort to split from Spain. Any hint that the Spanish government would support the dissolution of a country into regional components would be sensitive politically and could embolden separatists. Therefore, Spain could not continue to support a mission to Kosovo. However, Zapatero allowed, Spain could have conducted more comprehensive consultations with the United States ahead of its withdrawal. ¶12. (U) The Office of the Vice President has cleared this message. SIMONS
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Politicos leak intel secrets
as Air Force bars Times site
No one is howling for the head of Elisabeth Bumiller, though she disclosed classified information in the New York Times. No one is out to get the leakers, who were all politically connected muckamucks.
However, the Air Force has prohibited access to the New York Times web site.
From Bumiller's story:
'WASHINGTON — As President Obama prepares to release a review of American strategy in Afghanistan that will claim progress in the nine-year-old war there, two new classified intelligence reports offer a more negative assessment and say there is a limited chance of success unless Pakistan hunts down insurgents operating from havens on its Afghan border.
'The reports, one on Afghanistan and one on Pakistan, say that although there have been gains for the United States and NATO in the war, the unwillingness of Pakistan to shut down militant sanctuaries in its lawless tribal region remains a serious obstacle. American military commanders say insurgents freely cross from Pakistan into Afghanistan to plant bombs and fight American troops and then return to Pakistan for rest and resupply.
'The findings in the reports, called National Intelligence Estimates, represent the consensus view of the United States’ 16 intelligence agencies, as opposed to the military, and were provided last week to some members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees. The findings were described by a number of American officials who read the reports’ executive summaries.'
You may say that the Times didn't publish actual copies of the summaries. But that is really a fine, in fact irrelevant, point. People who were not authorized to declassify the information did so.
Shouldn't the Obama group be in high dugeon? Where is the damn-the-leakers chorus of Gates, Clinton and Gibbs? Why isn't Lieberman threatening political retaliation against Times advertisers? Why isn't King urging that terrorism laws be used to get the leakers and Assange... er Bumiller?
Well, I suppose we could get a special prosecutor to look into the leaks, but why bother? Obama could always say he'd accidentally declassified the stuff by delegating declassification authority to Biden or somebody...
The Air Force has blocked the New York Times and Guardian web sites for hosting 'inappropriate' Wikileaks materials; meanwhile, top politicos are still spilling "national security" secrets to the Times.
From the Guardian:
'The US air force has blocked employees from accessing the websites of the Guardian, the New York Times and other news organisations carrying the WikiLeaks US embassy cables.
'At least 25 sites that have posted WikiLeaks files had been barred, said Major Toni Tones of the US air force's space command in Colorado. Tones said the action was taken in accordance with a policy that "routinely blocks air force network access to websites hosting inappropriate materials".
'According to the Wall Street Journal, staff who attempt to access the blocked sites instead see an on-screen message saying: "Access denied. Internet usage is logged and monitored."
'While the US defence department has issued orders against visiting WikiLeaks or downloading classified documents from the site, it has not ordered a blanket ban on visiting news organisations reporting on the contents of the classified cables. The army, navy and marines have not sought to block access to any websites.
'The air force's move follows instructions by the government that staff should not access the cables, with the Library of Congress instituting a bar on accessing WikiLeaks's website.'
Hey, I guess this blog has made the Air Force's no-go roster, in that I regularly publish secret cables found on Wikileaks.
Is Burma clandestinely building a nuclear site, possibly with the aid of North Korea? Taken as a whole, the reports are plausible, writes an envoy in a secret cable. And, the obvious question is: why the need for secrecy, unless Burma is planning to develop a nuclear weapon?
Here is the cable found on Wikileaks:
as Air Force bars Times site
No one is howling for the head of Elisabeth Bumiller, though she disclosed classified information in the New York Times. No one is out to get the leakers, who were all politically connected muckamucks.
However, the Air Force has prohibited access to the New York Times web site.
From Bumiller's story:
'WASHINGTON — As President Obama prepares to release a review of American strategy in Afghanistan that will claim progress in the nine-year-old war there, two new classified intelligence reports offer a more negative assessment and say there is a limited chance of success unless Pakistan hunts down insurgents operating from havens on its Afghan border.
'The reports, one on Afghanistan and one on Pakistan, say that although there have been gains for the United States and NATO in the war, the unwillingness of Pakistan to shut down militant sanctuaries in its lawless tribal region remains a serious obstacle. American military commanders say insurgents freely cross from Pakistan into Afghanistan to plant bombs and fight American troops and then return to Pakistan for rest and resupply.
'The findings in the reports, called National Intelligence Estimates, represent the consensus view of the United States’ 16 intelligence agencies, as opposed to the military, and were provided last week to some members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees. The findings were described by a number of American officials who read the reports’ executive summaries.'
You may say that the Times didn't publish actual copies of the summaries. But that is really a fine, in fact irrelevant, point. People who were not authorized to declassify the information did so.
Shouldn't the Obama group be in high dugeon? Where is the damn-the-leakers chorus of Gates, Clinton and Gibbs? Why isn't Lieberman threatening political retaliation against Times advertisers? Why isn't King urging that terrorism laws be used to get the leakers and Assange... er Bumiller?
Well, I suppose we could get a special prosecutor to look into the leaks, but why bother? Obama could always say he'd accidentally declassified the stuff by delegating declassification authority to Biden or somebody...
The Air Force has blocked the New York Times and Guardian web sites for hosting 'inappropriate' Wikileaks materials; meanwhile, top politicos are still spilling "national security" secrets to the Times.
From the Guardian:
'The US air force has blocked employees from accessing the websites of the Guardian, the New York Times and other news organisations carrying the WikiLeaks US embassy cables.
'At least 25 sites that have posted WikiLeaks files had been barred, said Major Toni Tones of the US air force's space command in Colorado. Tones said the action was taken in accordance with a policy that "routinely blocks air force network access to websites hosting inappropriate materials".
'According to the Wall Street Journal, staff who attempt to access the blocked sites instead see an on-screen message saying: "Access denied. Internet usage is logged and monitored."
'While the US defence department has issued orders against visiting WikiLeaks or downloading classified documents from the site, it has not ordered a blanket ban on visiting news organisations reporting on the contents of the classified cables. The army, navy and marines have not sought to block access to any websites.
'The air force's move follows instructions by the government that staff should not access the cables, with the Library of Congress instituting a bar on accessing WikiLeaks's website.'
Hey, I guess this blog has made the Air Force's no-go roster, in that I regularly publish secret cables found on Wikileaks.
Is Burma clandestinely building a nuclear site, possibly with the aid of North Korea? Taken as a whole, the reports are plausible, writes an envoy in a secret cable. And, the obvious question is: why the need for secrecy, unless Burma is planning to develop a nuclear weapon?
Here is the cable found on Wikileaks:
This record is a partial extract of the
original cable. The full text of the
original cable is not available.
Tuesday, 20 January 2004, 09:44 S E C R E T RANGOON 000088 SIPDIS NOFORN EO 12958 DECL: 01/09/2014 TAGS PGOV, PARM, PREL, BM, RS, KS, KNPP SUBJECT: BURMA: RUMORS OF CONSTRUCTION OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR NEAR MINBU REF: STATE 297614 AND PREVIOUS 03 RANGOON 1427 Classified By: COM Carmen Martinez for Reasons 1.5 (B,D) ¶1. (S/NF) An expatriate businessmanXXXXXXXXXXXX recently
volunteered to an Embassy Officer that he had heard
rumors that a nuclear reactor was being built near Minbu,
in central Magway Division on the Irawaddy River. The
businessman added that he personally had seen a
“massive” barge containing large-sized rebar being
unloaded on a trip to the area. After asking local
residents about the rebar’s purpose, he was told that
similar size barge shipments were arriving almost weekly
and that the rebar was to be used in the construction of
unnamed/unidentified factories. In the opinion of the
businessman, the quantities involved as well as the
diameter of the rebar suggested a project larger than
“factories.” Along these lines, the businessman noted
that there was a new airport near Minbu with a landing
strip that, based on its length and thickness, seemed
excessive, adding that “you could land the space shuttle
on it.” ¶2. (S/NF) Comment: Rumors of construction of a nuclear
facility in/near Magway Division date back to 2002 and
generally refer to alleged Goverment of Burma (GOB) and
Russian cooperation on a nuclear research reactor
project. Similar rumors, sans the “Russia” angle, have
been circulating with greater frequency within diplomatic
and expatriate circles since a November 2003 Far Eastern
Economic Review (FEER) article which described signs of
growing military ties between North Korea and Burma.
While we have no direct evidence of this alleged
cooperation, rumors of ongoing construction of a nuclear
reactor are surprisingly consistent and observations of
activity such as that described above appear to be
increasing, as are alleged sightings of North Korean
“technicians” inside Burma. Martinez
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
What about Siobhan?
A U.S. federal grand jury is reportedly meeting to consider possible criminal charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, according to a lawyer for Assange, writes Threat Level blog.
The grand jury has met secretly in Alexandria, Virginia, according to Mark Stephens, an attorney for Assange.
Now as I recall, Siobhan Gorman, while working as a reporter for the Baltimore Sun, published leaked material on National Security Agency surveillance technology. The leaker was convicted but Gorman, now with the Wall Street Journal, was let be. Gorman participated in getting the documents by agreeing to the transfer via an encrypted email service, Hushmail.
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/2010/04/15/justice-charges-ex-nsa-official-with-leaking-to-intelligence-reporter-siobhan-gorman.html
So the issue here is highly selective prosecution, in which officials distinguish among "acceptable" and "unacceptable" news organizations. This amounts to an unconstitutional licensing of the press.
BTW, the original purpose of a grand jury was to screen out bogus and political prosecutions.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder indicated last week that he had authorized “significant” actions in the criminal investigation into WikiLeaks, but would not go into details. The United States could bring charges against Assange under the Espionage Act for disseminating classified U.S. State Department cables and other information.
Or, the Justice Department could bring a conspiracy charge against Assange under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, if investigators have evidence that Assange incited or aided someone in obtaining the documents illegally. The latter charge would help prosecutors avoid First Amendment issues that come with charging Assange under the Espionage Act.
The Espionage Act, which dates to 1917, has never been successfully used against a media organization, but this doesn’t mean Assange is in the clear.
I found a copy of the "conspiracy" cable on the Guardian (see post below). Here's the page:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/226331
It seems there isnt outright censorship, but an attempt to slow people down.
Here is another link. Let me know whether it works.
http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/09/09LONDON2198.html
The grand jury has met secretly in Alexandria, Virginia, according to Mark Stephens, an attorney for Assange.
Now as I recall, Siobhan Gorman, while working as a reporter for the Baltimore Sun, published leaked material on National Security Agency surveillance technology. The leaker was convicted but Gorman, now with the Wall Street Journal, was let be. Gorman participated in getting the documents by agreeing to the transfer via an encrypted email service, Hushmail.
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/2010/04/15/justice-charges-ex-nsa-official-with-leaking-to-intelligence-reporter-siobhan-gorman.html
So the issue here is highly selective prosecution, in which officials distinguish among "acceptable" and "unacceptable" news organizations. This amounts to an unconstitutional licensing of the press.
BTW, the original purpose of a grand jury was to screen out bogus and political prosecutions.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder indicated last week that he had authorized “significant” actions in the criminal investigation into WikiLeaks, but would not go into details. The United States could bring charges against Assange under the Espionage Act for disseminating classified U.S. State Department cables and other information.
Or, the Justice Department could bring a conspiracy charge against Assange under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, if investigators have evidence that Assange incited or aided someone in obtaining the documents illegally. The latter charge would help prosecutors avoid First Amendment issues that come with charging Assange under the Espionage Act.
The Espionage Act, which dates to 1917, has never been successfully used against a media organization, but this doesn’t mean Assange is in the clear.
Whatever law the Justice Dept. uses against Assange, the First Amendment declares that "Congress shall make no law" abridging freedom of the press or speech, and clearly the idea is to retaliate against him for exercising press freedom.
I found a copy of the "conspiracy" cable on the Guardian (see post below). Here's the page:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/226331
It seems there isnt outright censorship, but an attempt to slow people down.
Here is another link. Let me know whether it works.
http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/09/09LONDON2198.html
Monday, December 13, 2010
War 'conspiracy' cable blocked
Dec. 14 2010 note: The hyperlink in the Wikileaks story was removed without my permission.
If anyone has a copy of the Wikileaks cable in which British officials assure Washington that the British Iraq war inquiry will be curbed in order to "protect U.S. interests," please send it along.
The URL to the cable is blocked from my server, which may be related to the fact that U.S. and British media have ignored or greatly played down this story.
The following news article is found on the Wikileaks site:
United Kingdom - Iraq Inquiry told to "protect US interests"
Alex Plough, 30 November 2010, 17.07 GMT
The Ministry of Defence decided to influence the official inquiry into the Iraq War in order to "protect US interests", according to a classified US diplomatic cable released by whistleblower website Wikileaks.
A dispatch sent by Ellen Tauscher, the US Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, describes a conversation with Jon Day, the MOD Director General for security policy, in which he "promised that the UK had ’put measures in place to protect your [US] interests’ during the UK inquiry into the causes of the Iraq War.
Day made the admission in late September 2009, during one of a series of meetings between Tauscher and senior British officials attending the London P5 Conference on Confidence Building Measures Towards Nuclear Disarmament.
The UK delegation also included David Miliband, then Foreign Secretary, although there is no evidence in the cable that he was aware of Day’s assurances.
On 6 January 2010, Day was called as a witness to the Iraq Inquiry where he was questioned about the MOD’s policy decisions from 2007 to 2009.
Day’s apparent knowledge of Whitehall interference into the Inquiry prior to his testimony contradicts the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s claim that it would be both "fully independent of Government" and "unprecedented" in scope.
At the news conference launching the Inquiry, chairman Sir John Chilcot was asked by Guardian Journalist Andrew Sparrow if the panel planned on taking evidence from American officials.
Chilcot replied, “Discussions and evidence sessions are not necessarily the same thing, and of course we have no power to compel witnesses here, let alone people in foreign governments. Nonetheless, I accept the thrust behind your question, that the Anglo-American relationship is one of the most central parts of this inquiry, and how that was conducted is something that we need to get a very strong understanding of.”
Between 17 and 21 May 2010, members of the committee held a series meetings in Washington DC with officials from the former and current US administrations. However, as the meetings were not formal evidence sessions, there is no published record of the discussions.
The Iraq Inquiry plans to deliver its final report at the end of the year.
On Nov. 4, I received this note:
Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:52 PM,
Iraq.InqSubmissions@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:
Dear Mr Conant
Thank you for your email and the material to which you directed us. I am afraid that the Inquiry Committee does not accept that it is within the Inquiry's terms of reference to reinvestigate the causes of 9/11 nor that it is within its scope to express a view on whether the US authorities have properly investigated those events.
Yours sincerely,
Clare Salters
Deputy Secretary, Iraq Inquiry
If anyone has a copy of the Wikileaks cable in which British officials assure Washington that the British Iraq war inquiry will be curbed in order to "protect U.S. interests," please send it along.
The URL to the cable is blocked from my server, which may be related to the fact that U.S. and British media have ignored or greatly played down this story.
The following news article is found on the Wikileaks site:
United Kingdom - Iraq Inquiry told to "protect US interests"
Alex Plough, 30 November 2010, 17.07 GMT
The Ministry of Defence decided to influence the official inquiry into the Iraq War in order to "protect US interests", according to a classified US diplomatic cable released by whistleblower website Wikileaks.
A dispatch sent by Ellen Tauscher, the US Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, describes a conversation with Jon Day, the MOD Director General for security policy, in which he "promised that the UK had ’put measures in place to protect your [US] interests’ during the UK inquiry into the causes of the Iraq War.
Day made the admission in late September 2009, during one of a series of meetings between Tauscher and senior British officials attending the London P5 Conference on Confidence Building Measures Towards Nuclear Disarmament.
The UK delegation also included David Miliband, then Foreign Secretary, although there is no evidence in the cable that he was aware of Day’s assurances.
On 6 January 2010, Day was called as a witness to the Iraq Inquiry where he was questioned about the MOD’s policy decisions from 2007 to 2009.
Day’s apparent knowledge of Whitehall interference into the Inquiry prior to his testimony contradicts the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s claim that it would be both "fully independent of Government" and "unprecedented" in scope.
At the news conference launching the Inquiry, chairman Sir John Chilcot was asked by Guardian Journalist Andrew Sparrow if the panel planned on taking evidence from American officials.
Chilcot replied, “Discussions and evidence sessions are not necessarily the same thing, and of course we have no power to compel witnesses here, let alone people in foreign governments. Nonetheless, I accept the thrust behind your question, that the Anglo-American relationship is one of the most central parts of this inquiry, and how that was conducted is something that we need to get a very strong understanding of.”
Between 17 and 21 May 2010, members of the committee held a series meetings in Washington DC with officials from the former and current US administrations. However, as the meetings were not formal evidence sessions, there is no published record of the discussions.
The Iraq Inquiry plans to deliver its final report at the end of the year.
On Nov. 4, I received this note:
Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:52 PM,
Iraq.InqSubmissions@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:
Dear Mr Conant
Thank you for your email and the material to which you directed us. I am afraid that the Inquiry Committee does not accept that it is within the Inquiry's terms of reference to reinvestigate the causes of 9/11 nor that it is within its scope to express a view on whether the US authorities have properly investigated those events.
Yours sincerely,
Clare Salters
Deputy Secretary, Iraq Inquiry
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Cable: Drug lords undermine Mozambique
The love of drug money is ruining yet another nation, a
U.S. diplomat tells superiors in a secret cable.
Money-laundering banks are proliferating in a nation
too poor to support such a financial center
with legitimate business, the cable relates.
Mozambique's lightly guarded coastline provides a
haven for transshipment of drugs, the cable says,
warning that Mozambique is well on the way into
turning into a full-fledged narco-state.
Ironically, some of the classified content came
from the Mozambique press.
Here is the cable:
VZCZCXRO3029
RR RUEHBZ RUEHDU RUEHMR RUEHRN DE RUEHTO #0713/01 1820455 ZNY SSSSS ZZH R 010455Z JUL 09 FM AMEMBASSY MAPUTO TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0443 INFO RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0430 RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC RUEABND/DEA WASHDC RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC RUCNFB/FBI WASHDC RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 MAPUTO 000713 SIPDIS NOFORN E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/25/2019 TAGS: SNAR EFIN KCOR PTER PGOV PREL MZ SUBJECT: RISING CONCERNS ABOUT NARCOTRAFFICKING AND MONEY LAUNDERING IN MOZAMBIQUE REF: A. 08 MAPUTO 1228 ¶B. 08 MAPUTO 1098 Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Todd C.Chapman, Reasons 1.4(b+d) ¶1. (S/NF) Summary: Large-scale narcotics shipments pass through Mozambique, taking advantage of a vast and lightly guarded coastline. Money laundering may be increasing. Narcotraffickers in the country have connections to South Asia, and some appear to have links to the ruling Frelimo party and the GRM. Using Department of State INL funds, the Embassy has led a successful border security program with the Portuguese Embassy that has resulted in the seizure of narcotics. The mission has also provided support via DoD and Treasury, and directed counternarcotic assessments by the Africa Command, LegAtt, and DEA. While not a thoroughly-corrupted narco-state, the trends in Mozambique suggest cause for concern unless the GRM takes quick action to address these growing problems. End Summary. ------------------------------- Large Scale Narcotics Shipments ------------------------------- ¶2. (S/NF) In a series of investigative reports late last year, Mozambique newsweekly Zambeze claimed Mozambique was considered by some estimates to be the second largest drug transit country in Africa after Guinea-Bissau. XXXXXXXXXXXX Recent incidents suggest that larger amounts of narcotics are indeed passing through the country, taking advantage of a coastline twice the length of California's with minimal control. Long-time commentator on Mozambique Joseph Hanlon publicly declared in May that the value of illicit drugs passing through the country probably surpasses combined legal external trade. In mid-May, police seized $5 million in heroin at the Ressano Garcia-Lebombo border with South Africa. In mid-June, police destroyed 7,000 liters of precursor chemicals discovered at the port of Maputo from China en route to South Africa; the United Nations Office of Drug Control indicates that this port is heavily used to import chemicals used for meth production. XXXXXXXXXXXX have described to P/E chief how Pakistani-owned trucking companies based in Sofala province over-declare imports at the Beira port as one way to hide the quantities of drugs coming into the country. Early on June 20, police discovered about one ton of hashish at Chongouene beach in Gaza province after receiving calls from local fishermen about suspicious vehicle movements in the area. ------------------------------------- Signs of Money Laundering Proliferate ------------------------------------- ¶3. (S/NF) A source inside the Frelimo party recently told the Embassy that Mozambique, with ten banks and thirty legally-registered exchange houses, has significantly more financial institutions than the market in such an impoverished country should be able to support with legitimate business. He also observed that 1500 construction projects are currently underway in Maputo--most financed with cash and mostly in real estate, and noted that it was unusual that housing prices in Maputo are increasing in spite of the world financial crisis. Separately, Hanlon indicates that the rapid growth in Mozambique's stock market is suspect, as the value of stocks listed on the exchange is predicted to reach $100 million within two years of opening. Finally, lax regulation of casinos has raised concern by local radio and TV commentators about that sector's role in money laundering. --------------------------- Criminal Ties to South Asia --------------------------- ¶4. (S/NF) A USAID report issued in 2006 notes that commerce in Maputo depends on the financial acumen of a small number of Muslims of South Asian-descent who contribute generously to the FRELIMO party. A major contributor to former President Chissano and President Guebuza from this community, who resides less than a hundred meters from the Presidential Compound, Mohamed Bashir Suleman (MBS), is the owner of the MAPUTO 00000713 002 OF 003 commercial MBS Group. Contacts at all levels have advised Emboffs that MBS is a known large-scale narco-trafficker. They indicate that MBS uses his FRELIMO party connections, as well as his shopping mall, supermarkets, and hotels to import narcotics and launder money without official scrutiny. Other South Asian businessmen with ties to FRELIMO also operate a vast network of loosely-regulated money changing houses, which reportedly maintain financial ties with more radical organizations in Pakistan and elsewhere. ¶5. (S/NF) A business contact recently shared with P/E chief a copy of a letter from Mozambique's Chamber of Business Associations (CTA) to the Prime Minister, expressing concern about one company selling imported vegetable oils at prices clearly below cost, noting that this type of price dumping could result in the withdrawal from the market of other companies and ultimately a monopoly to form. The contact said that the letter was in response to efforts by the MBS Group to consolidate control of this sector--but in reality the message had nothing to do with vegetable oil--rather, it was a veiled warning from the business community to the government that MBS Group's use of vegetable oil to cover the import of illicit drugs was so brazen that it was no longer tolerable. ------------------------------------ Narcotrafficking Connections in GRM? ------------------------------------ ¶6. (S/NF) The Frelimo source also told the Charge that MBS Group regularly uses phantom imports to launder money, and indicated that MBS and another immigrant, Ahmed Gassan (owner of the Home Center Furniture store) collude with the GRM's head of customs (who he called "the King of Corruption") to reduce scrutiny on imports. The source also indicated that Gassan's business interests are personally protected by Minister of Planning and Development Aiuba Cuereneia. --------------------------------------------- ---------- USG Border Security, OTA, DoD Support, Other Assessments --------------------------------------------- ---------- ¶7. (C) Using Department of State INL bureau funds, the Embassy has a highly-successful joint project with the Embassy of Portugal to provide training for GRM border guards. With a very small investment of less than $200,000, this program has led to the seizure of $2.5 million in cash and the arrest of two Pakistani smugglers (ref B). While the program was denied funding in FY09, it may receive support again in FY10. Mozambique's Tax Authority (AT) has garnered a reputation for honesty and transparency, and the AT's director has publicly criticized the head of Customs about smuggling concerns. Via the Department of Treasury's Office of Technical Assistance, the USG is providing training and capacity building to the AT, and is reviewing ways to specifically support the AT's Financial Intelligence Unit. DoD provided maritime training, small boats , and coastal monitoring systems to the FADM and more of this type of support is programmed for the future. Finally, at the request of the Embassy, Africa Command, DEA, Treasury and LegAtt representatives visited Maputo in early June to conduct a joint assessment of the drug trafficking problem and the GRM's capabilities. Initial findings validated the pervasiveness of the problem and identified the institutional weakness and level of corruption of Mozambican law enforcement agencies as core problems inhibiting a coherent government response. ¶8. (SBU) At the most recent mini-Dublin meeting chaired in late-May by the Portuguese Embassy, representatives from the Dutch, British and German embassies specifically pointed out weaknesses in the GRM's enforcement activities, highlighting that concerns are widespread in the international community. These concerns were quickly borne out, as in a presentation at the meeting, a representative of the GRM's Inter-agency Working Group on Narcotrafficking focused entirely on domestic consumption and addressing the health needs of local drug addicts. --------------------------------------------- ----------- Comment: Not Thoroughly-Corrupted, but Cause for Concern MAPUTO 00000713 003 OF 003 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ¶9. (S/NF) Mozambique most certainly is not yet a thoroughly-corrupted narco-state. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the magnitude of the drug shipments passing through Mozambique may be on a much larger scale than previously understood, taking advantage of the country's long and unprotected coast and the facility with which port and customs officials can be bribed. Money laundering, related government corruption (possibly even official support), and ties to South Asia mean that the problem has the potential to get much worse. While the mission has made initial steps to bring USG resources to bear, the road ahead will require a comprehensive and coordinated effort by the international community to staunch the flow of drugs, not to mention strengthen the political will of the GRM to take concrete action. CHAPMAN
Saturday, December 11, 2010
3 million had access to secret cables
An embassy dispatch marked SIPDIS is automatically downloaded on to its embassy classified website, reports the Guardian. 'From there, it can be accessed not only by anyone in the state department, but also by anyone in the US military who has a security clearance up to the 'Secret' level, a password, and a computer connected to SIPRNet - which astonishingly covers over 3m people. There are several layers of data in here - ranging up to the "SECRET NOFORN" level, which means that they are designed never be shown to non-US citizens. Instead, they are supposed to be read by officials in Washington up to the level of current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The cables are normally drafted by the local ambassador or subordinates. The "Top Secret" and above foreign intelligence documents cannot be accessed from SIPRNet.'
Either Washington wasn't particularly worried about the content of these cables, or President Obama's Defense and State departments had a mammoth security hole.
Plainly, Defense Secretary Robert Gates -- a former CIA chief -- would prefer that the attention be focused on Julian Assange rather than on the fact that the egregious security problem occurred on Gates' watch. Gates, who has spent a career as a security professional, would seem far more culpable than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who would have been far less familiar with the details of security issues.
As Washington lobbies foreign governments to hold Assange and prepare to deliver him to the United States for prosecution, secret cables show that U.S. officials quietly pressured German authorities to prevent them from issuing international arrest warrants for CIA operatives responsible for kidnapping Khalid al-Masri, who was wrongly identified as a terrorist. (See cable below.)
It's quite interesting BTW that Sweden demands the extradition of Assange -- though no charges have been filed -- but has, the Independent reports, told U.S. officials Sweden will only transfer Assange to U.S. custody if the United States files charges. This implies that the international arrest warrant was a gimmick meant to hold Assange until Washington could cook up something that was politically sellable to the American people.
Assange asked the State Dept. to indicate which cables it thought would endanger lives but a State Dept. official replied Nov. 27 that it would not "engage in negotiations regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained U.S. Government classified materials."
Sen. Diane Feinstein rejected Assange's offer as inadequate and yet the New York Times reported that the White House had worked with that newspaper in sifting the cables for true "national security" material.
See Judith Miller's latest column (sidebar) for a full account.
Either Washington wasn't particularly worried about the content of these cables, or President Obama's Defense and State departments had a mammoth security hole.
Plainly, Defense Secretary Robert Gates -- a former CIA chief -- would prefer that the attention be focused on Julian Assange rather than on the fact that the egregious security problem occurred on Gates' watch. Gates, who has spent a career as a security professional, would seem far more culpable than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who would have been far less familiar with the details of security issues.
As Washington lobbies foreign governments to hold Assange and prepare to deliver him to the United States for prosecution, secret cables show that U.S. officials quietly pressured German authorities to prevent them from issuing international arrest warrants for CIA operatives responsible for kidnapping Khalid al-Masri, who was wrongly identified as a terrorist. (See cable below.)
It's quite interesting BTW that Sweden demands the extradition of Assange -- though no charges have been filed -- but has, the Independent reports, told U.S. officials Sweden will only transfer Assange to U.S. custody if the United States files charges. This implies that the international arrest warrant was a gimmick meant to hold Assange until Washington could cook up something that was politically sellable to the American people.
Assange asked the State Dept. to indicate which cables it thought would endanger lives but a State Dept. official replied Nov. 27 that it would not "engage in negotiations regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained U.S. Government classified materials."
Sen. Diane Feinstein rejected Assange's offer as inadequate and yet the New York Times reported that the White House had worked with that newspaper in sifting the cables for true "national security" material.
See Judith Miller's latest column (sidebar) for a full account.
VZCZCXYZ0015 OO RUEHWEB DE RUEHRL #0242 0371748 ZNY SSSSS ZZH O 061748Z FEB 07 FM AMEMBASSY BERLIN TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6940
S E C R E T BERLIN 000242 SIPDIS NOFORN SIPDIS FOR S/ES-O, EUR AND L E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/06/2017 TAGS: KJUS PTER PREL PGOV GM SUBJECT: AL-MASRI CASE -- CHANCELLERY AWARE OF USG CONCERNS REF: A. BERLIN 230 ¶B. BERLIN 200 Classified By: DCM John M. Koenig for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (S/NF) In a February 6 discussion with German Deputy National Security Adviser Rolf Nikel, the DCM reiterated our strong concerns about the possible issuance of international arrest warrants in the al-Masri case. The DCM noted that the reports in the German media of the discussion on the issue between the Secretary and FM Steinmeier in Washington were not accurate, in that the media reports suggest the USG was not troubled by developments in the al-Masri case. The DCM emphasized that this was not the case and that issuance of international arrest warrants would have a negative impact on our bilateral relationship. He reminded Nikel of the repercussions to U.S.-Italian bilateral relations in the wake of a similar move by Italian authorities last year. ¶2. (S/NF) The DCM pointed out that our intention was not to threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German Government weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S. We of course recognized the independence of the German judiciary, but noted that a decision to issue international arrest warrants or extradition requests would require the concurrence of the German Federal Government, specifically the MFA and the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). The DCM said our initial indications had been that the German federal authorities would not allow the warrants to be issued, but that subsequent contacts led us to believe this was not the case. ¶3. (S/NF) Nikel also underscored the independence of the German judiciary, but confirmed that the MFA and MOJ would have a procedural role to play. He said the case was subject to political, as well as judicial, scrutiny. From a judicial standpoint, the facts are clear, and the Munich prosecutor has acted correctly. Politically speaking, said Nikel, Germany would have to examine the implications for relations with the U.S. At the same time, he noted our political differences about how the global war on terrorism should be waged, for example on the appropriateness of the Guantanamo facility and the alleged use of renditions. ¶4. (S/NF) Nikel also cited intense pressure from the Bundestag and the German media. The German federal Government must consider the "entire political context," said Nikel. He assured the DCM that the Chancellery is well aware of the bilateral political implications of the case, but added that this case "will not be easy." The Chancellery would nonetheless try to be as constructive as possible. ¶5. (S/NF) The DCM pointed out that the USG would likewise have a difficult time in managing domestic political implications if international arrest warrants are issued. He reiterated our concerns and expressed the hope that the Chancellery would keep us informed of further developments in the case, so as to avoid surprises. Nikel undertook to do so, but reiterated that he could not, at this point "promise that everything will turn out well." TIMKEN JR
Friday, December 10, 2010
Cable: Russian arms may reach Latin rebels
U.S. worries that the Kremlin is still arming revolutionaries in the Western hemisphere came to light in a secret cable from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Specifically, Washington has been lobbying Russia to steer clear of giving Hugo Chavez's leftist regime in Venezuela advanced shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, fearing they would be shipped to Marxist rebels in Colombia, the cable discloses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K38_Igla
Scroll down to read cable.
NOT POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?
U.S. and Swedish officials have quietly discussed delivering Assange into American custody, reports London's Independent. Assange faces an extradition hearing next Tuesday on sexual allegations raised in Sweden.
Citing unnamed diplomatic sources, the Independent revealed that “informal discussions” were underway between the American and Swedish authorities.
“Sources stressed that no extradition request would be submitted until and unless the U.S. government laid charges against Mr Assange, and that attempts to take him to America would only take place after legal proceedings are concluded in Sweden,” the newspaper said.
The Swedish government meanwhile is saying that the Assange allegations were not politically motivated. Yet, clearly, if a Swedish court throws out the charges, the internet journalist would then still be sent to the United States for trial on charges the Obama group is still mulling over.
A DNS provider that suffered backlash last week after it was wrongly identified as supplying and then dropping DNS service to Wikileaks has decided to support the secret-spilling site, offering DNS service to two domains distributing Wikileaks content, according to Wired's Threat Level blog.
EasyDNS, a Canadian firm, was attacked last Friday after media outlets mistakenly reported it had terminated its service for Wikileaks, Threat level reported. The company sent an e-mail to customers Thursday morning letting them know that it had begun providing DNS service for Wikileaks.ch and Wikileaks.nl, two of the primary domain names Wikileaks relocated to after Wikileaks.org stopped resolving.
“We’ve already done the time, we might as well do the crime,” Mark Jeftovic, chief of EasyDNS, told Threat Level.
French politicians have backed away from strong reactions to the Wikileaks disclosures, reports Le Monde's managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-cables-french-reaction-diplomacy
Columnist Paul Craig Roberts writes that Washington has begun using counter-terror tactics in order to muzzle the news organization Wikileaks, thwarting Wikileaks’ donations by placing the company that collects its money on its "watch list" and by "having the Australian puppet government blacklist Wikileaks."
"Wikileaks is now akin to a terrorist organization," Roberts said. He fears that Washington’s "practice of silencing critics will spread across the internet."
European press scorns U.S. hypcrisy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/world/europe/10wikileaks-react.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=wikileaks%20ehrlanger&st=cse
FBI stalling tactic seen in anthrax probe.
Lawmakers suspect the FBI, citing a sudden need to release new documents, is trying to derail an independent anthrax report about to be released by scientists, reports the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/us/10anthrax.html?hpw
Specifically, Washington has been lobbying Russia to steer clear of giving Hugo Chavez's leftist regime in Venezuela advanced shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, fearing they would be shipped to Marxist rebels in Colombia, the cable discloses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K38_Igla
Scroll down to read cable.
NOT POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?
U.S. and Swedish officials have quietly discussed delivering Assange into American custody, reports London's Independent. Assange faces an extradition hearing next Tuesday on sexual allegations raised in Sweden.
Citing unnamed diplomatic sources, the Independent revealed that “informal discussions” were underway between the American and Swedish authorities.
“Sources stressed that no extradition request would be submitted until and unless the U.S. government laid charges against Mr Assange, and that attempts to take him to America would only take place after legal proceedings are concluded in Sweden,” the newspaper said.
The Swedish government meanwhile is saying that the Assange allegations were not politically motivated. Yet, clearly, if a Swedish court throws out the charges, the internet journalist would then still be sent to the United States for trial on charges the Obama group is still mulling over.
A DNS provider that suffered backlash last week after it was wrongly identified as supplying and then dropping DNS service to Wikileaks has decided to support the secret-spilling site, offering DNS service to two domains distributing Wikileaks content, according to Wired's Threat Level blog.
EasyDNS, a Canadian firm, was attacked last Friday after media outlets mistakenly reported it had terminated its service for Wikileaks, Threat level reported. The company sent an e-mail to customers Thursday morning letting them know that it had begun providing DNS service for Wikileaks.ch and Wikileaks.nl, two of the primary domain names Wikileaks relocated to after Wikileaks.org stopped resolving.
“We’ve already done the time, we might as well do the crime,” Mark Jeftovic, chief of EasyDNS, told Threat Level.
French politicians have backed away from strong reactions to the Wikileaks disclosures, reports Le Monde's managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-cables-french-reaction-diplomacy
Columnist Paul Craig Roberts writes that Washington has begun using counter-terror tactics in order to muzzle the news organization Wikileaks, thwarting Wikileaks’ donations by placing the company that collects its money on its "watch list" and by "having the Australian puppet government blacklist Wikileaks."
"Wikileaks is now akin to a terrorist organization," Roberts said. He fears that Washington’s "practice of silencing critics will spread across the internet."
European press scorns U.S. hypcrisy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/world/europe/10wikileaks-react.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=wikileaks%20ehrlanger&st=cse
FBI stalling tactic seen in anthrax probe.
Lawmakers suspect the FBI, citing a sudden need to release new documents, is trying to derail an independent anthrax report about to be released by scientists, reports the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/us/10anthrax.html?hpw
O 141605Z FEB 09 FM SECSTATE WASHDC TO AMEMBASSY MOSCOW IMMEDIATE AMEMBASSY CARACAS IMMEDIATE
S E C R E T STATE 014070 NOFORN E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/29/2019 TAGS: ETTC MARR MCAP MOPS PARM PINR PREL PTER SUBJECT: RUSSIA'S ANTICIPATED TRANSFER OF IGLA-S (SA-24) MANPADS TO VENEZUELA REFS: (A) 2005 STATE 165022 (B) 2005 MOSCOW 11807 (C) 2005 STATE 117165 (D) 2005 MOSCOW 8915 (E) 2004 STATE 257697 (F) 2004 MOSCOW 15123 (G) 2004 STATE 188657 (H) 2004 MOSCOW 14726 (I) CIS DOC. CLASSIFIED BY EUR/FO ? IAN KELLY, REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D). ¶1. (U) This is an action request. Embassy Moscow, please see paragraph 8. BACKGROUND ¶2. (S) Over the past four years the USG has raised its concerns with the Government of Russia (GOR) about the Government of Venezuela's (GOV) possible acquisition of MANPADS and other conventional weapons. In particular, we have highlighted the risk these could be diverted to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) or other regional terrorists and non- state actors. ¶3. (S/NF) The Igla-S (SA-24) is Russia's most advanced MANPADS and considered one of the most lethal portable air defense systems ever made (Ref A). Currently, Venezuela's tactical air defense inventory consists of 1970s-era Swedish (RBS-70) and 1980s-era French systems (Mistral), which are both crew-served systems. If the SA-24 transfer occurs, it would be Venezuela's first man-portable air defense weapon. The United States and Russia have been very involved in efforts to prevent the proliferation of MANPADS and strengthen controls over their export. Of particular concern is preventing the transfer of such systems into regions known to foster unreliable end-users. We are concerned with Venezuela?s ability to properly secure and safeguard small arms and light weapons (SA/LW). We see no indication that Venezuela is prepared to implement adequate physical security and stockpile management practices for such systems consistent with international standards. ¶4. (S) In 2005, we reiterated U.S. concerns regarding arms sales to Venezuela during a meeting with Anatoliy Antonov, MFA Director for Disarmament and Security Affairs (Ref B). Antonov said that he and his Department's experts had carefully considered the points we had presented and had shared them with Russian services. Antonov stressed that there was no international restriction on selling arms, including MANPADS, to Venezuela. Russia recognized the U.S. as a competitor in the international arms trade, with the motivation of restricting Russia's market access. Antonov said Russia respected the U.S. right to determine U.S. policy on arms sales to Venezuela, but added, "that is your decision, not ours; we have our own policy." During the U.S.-Russia MANPADS Arrangement Expert Meeting in 2006, when we raised this issue with regard to Venezuela, the GOR offered no assurances that it would not sell Igla-S to the GOV. However, it was suggested that, if a transfer occurred, the system would likely be vehicle-mounted. ¶5. (U) On November 19, 2008 the Russian News & Information Agency Novosti (RIA Novosti) reported that Rosoboronexport signed a major contract for the sale of Igla-S MANPADS to Venezuela. The media report also revealed that a manager of LOMO, a partner company in the production of Igla-S, stated that this implied the contract for the delivery of several hundred Igla-S MANPADS. Copy of this media report can be found at http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081119/118406776 - print.html. ¶6. (S/NF) At the end of January we received reports that the GOV deployed ten Venezuelan specialists to Kolomna, Russia, to begin training on the Igla-S MANPADS. Reporting indicates that five of the ten specialists are to take part in Igla-S equipment acceptance inspections, sometime in the last ten days of February 2009. OBJECTIVES ¶7. (S) Post is requested to engage in a discussion on the types of weapons systems Russia is selling to Venezuela, and request details on procedures Russia believes Venezuela has in place to safely secure and safeguard these weapons systems, to better inform the new Administration as it prepares to engage Russia further on its concerns about this transaction. If the Russian Government acknowledges the transfer is imminent, Post should request the GOR to suspend the shipment until the United States and Russian Governments can discuss the matter more substantively at the appropropriate level. ACTION REQUEST ¶8. (S) Post is requested to approach appropriate host government officials to discuss the potential transfer of Igla-S missile systems to Venezuela. Post may draw upon the following points: (S/REL to RUSSIA) Begin Talking Points -- The U.S. and Russia have committed to enhancing the control of MANPADS to prevent their acquisition and use by non-state actors and the proliferation to countries that do not have strong export control and stockpile management procedures. -- In this context, we would like to discuss with you the reports indicating Russia may sell the Igla-S system to Venezuela. -- We have recently seen press reports indicating that Rosoboronexport has signed a contract with the St. Petersburg-based Leningrad Optical-Mechanical Association (LOMO) for the sale of Igla-S MANPADS to Venezuela. -- As we have previously discussed, our governments have a shared concern about FARC's activities, including the acquisition of lethal military items. -- We understand there are no international restrictions on selling arms, including MANPADS, to Venezuela. -- However, we have worked together to lead efforts multilaterally to control MANPADS because of their appeal to terrorists and insurgents and their threat to civilian aircraft. -- Most recently, we reached agreement in the Wassenaar Arrangement to tighten our national controls, particularly toward end-users who are unable to protect against theft, loss, misuse, or diversion. -- This is the basis of serious U.S. concern in this possible transaction, as Venezuela's ties to the FARC represent a serious proliferation/diversion risk. -- We appreciate the frank and useful exchanges we have had on Latin America during WHA A/S Thomas Shannon's visit to Moscow and our continuing cooperation on non-proliferation and counterterrorism. -- In previous discussions on this issue, Russia has advised that it has stringent end-use requirements (consistent with the Wassenaar guidelines) for such sales and requested more specific information on why the U.S. views this possible transaction as a risk. A/S Shannon advised in his meeting that information gleaned from FARC hard-drives obtained by the Colombian government in March 2008 indicate Venezuelan government officials have tried to facilitate black and gray arms market deals for the FARC. This information was widely disseminated in major mainstream international media outlets. -- More specifically, information on the hard-drives indicated specific discussions between the Government of Venezuela and FARC on the provision of MANPADS. This highlights the basis of U.S. concerns. -- In September 2008, the U.S. Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated two senior Venezuelan government officials, Hugo Carvajal Barrios and Henry de Jesus Rangel Silva, and one former official, Ramon Rodriguez Chacin, for materially assisting the narcotics trafficking activities of the FARC. This action was taken under the Kingpin Act. Carvajal is the director of Venezuela's military intelligence DIM); Rangel Silva is the head of civilian intelligence (DISIP). Chacin is the former interior and justice minister. He resigned September 8, 2008. (For more information, go to www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/hp1132.htm on Opennet) -- In light of Venezuela's relationship with the FARC, corruption within the Venezuelan military, and our assessment that Venezuela's stockpile and security management practices do not meet international standards, we are concerned there is a significant risk that these weapons could be diverted to the FARC. We also do not rule out the possibility that the transfer of the IGLA-S weapon system could displace and make available existing weapon systems for FARC?s use. -- Further, we fear that should these sophisticated systems fall into the hands of the FARC, they could possibly be sold or traded to drug organizations, including those in Mexico, which are actively seeking to acquire powerful and highly sophisticated weapons for use against government forces. -- The U.S. is particularly concerned about this possibility because FARC's acquisition of MANPADS would constitute a new capability for the group to undermine peace and security in the region as well as threaten counter-narcotics operations in Colombia. -- Given these serious risks, we have serious concerns about this transaction going forward. If this shipment is to be transferred imminently, we respectfully ask that your government suspend delivery of these sophisticated weapons so we may have a more substantive discussion. The United States also would welcome more details on the steps you have planned to take or assurances that you could share with us regarding Venezuela's procedures to safely secure and protect these types of weapons systems in order to prevent their proliferation or theft. End Talking Points. ¶9. (SBU) Washington appreciates Posts' assistance on this matter. Department points of contact are Lou Ganem, (202) 647-2329, ganemlc@state.sgov.gov. and Nate Young (EUR/PRA), 202-647-7278, YoungNH@state.sgov.gov. Please slug all replies to ISN/CATR, EUR/PRA, and WHA/AND. CLINTON
No comments:
Post a Comment