52
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2012 07:44 pm
@wandeljw,
Quote:
Goebbels was a criminal ...


Numerous and sundry US presidents,vice presidents,other politicians,CIA, etc
are criminals in the very manner that Goebbels was a criminal.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2012 10:10 am
Quote:
Future of Internet freedom at stake, warns OSCE media freedom representative
(The Financial, February 17, 2012)

Dunja Mijatović, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, called for concerted global efforts to keep the Internet, as a platform for exercising free expression and for independent media, accessible and free.

Speaking on "Internet freedom after WikiLeaks" in Paris at a UNESCO conference on journalism ethics in the digital age on 17 February 2012, Mijatović warned that "unless companies, governments and individuals are truly committed to a free Internet, we are likely to see the open Internet become ever more restricted, the choice and control over content taken away from users and put in the hands of those aiming at limiting access to information."

"As citizen reporters, bloggers, and social media activists are increasingly using technology to speak up and voice their opinion, their right to free expression through online media must be better protected,” she added.

According to OSCE, the Representative was joined on the panel by Frank La Rue, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion, and Expression and Mark Stephens, a former attorney for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

The two-day conference brought together media representatives, professional and “citizen” journalists and media law experts to discuss how the Internet and social media have changed journalism ethics.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2012 07:53 am
Quote:
Occupy the Truth conference to occur at UC Berkeley
(By Maria Bolanos, The Daily Californian, February 17, 2012)

Occupy the Truth, a conference on information and media transparency, will be held this weekend at UC Berkeley and will feature speakers such as Daniel Ellsberg, the former military analyst who released the Pentagon Papers in the early 1970s.

The conference will be held from Friday to Sunday at UC Berkeley’s International House and will feature a discussion panel on Bradley Manning, the former U.S. Army soldier currently imprisoned for allegedly sharing national defense information on WikiLeaks, according to the Fresh Juice Party organization website.

The party — which will co-sponsor the event with 94.1 FM KPFA Pacifica Radio — is “a politically progressive media group” comprised of activists who “write, record and perform music, design visuals and create happenings,” according to its website.

The website states that the conference will begin at 6 p.m. Friday with a mixer, followed by a 7 p.m. panel discussion on Manning. Ellsberg — who stayed overnight at the Occupy Cal demonstration on Nov. 15 — will be a panelist.

The night will close with a sermon from Reverend Billy, who currently leads a performance group of “wild anti-consumerist gospel-shouters” known as the Church of Earthalujah, according to the group’s website.

According to UC Berkeley senior Navid Shaghagi, it is unknown whether Occupy Cal protesters will attend the weekend’s events. As of 2:50 p.m. Friday, the protesters were meeting on the steps outside of Sproul Hall to discuss their course of response after 18 protesters were detained Friday morning outside of Doe Library.

A main goal of the conference is “to create an environment where individuals who find truth and transparency crucial to a healthy, balanced and functional society can gather,” according to Pratibha Gautam, event coordinator and a leader of the party.

“Our greatest hope is that dynamic networks are born this weekend, which will continue beyond the scope of the conference,” Gautam said.

Confirmed attendees include former FBI Special Agent and ACLU Policy Counsel Mike German, activist and former porn star Annie Sprinkle, ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern and protesters from Occupy Oakland. The activist group Anonymous will also join in via Skype, according to the event website.

The rest of the weekend’s agenda is not yet determined but will be decided by Saturday morning, according to Gautam.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2012 09:55 am
@wandeljw,
Ellsberg never was found guilty, was he? The Washington Post and the New York Times didn't even get prosecuted - and Ellsberg's documents were highly classified, unlike WikiLeaks. It' s too bad he's taken to hanging out with leftists but I'm interested in what he has to say. This from recent interview:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/07/daniel_ellsberg_interview

Quote:
DiA: Do you think the government is actively working against Wikileaks?

Mr Ellsberg: I'm sure they are, in the sense of trying to discover the sources of truth-telling from within. This administration has shown more eagerness to prosecute leaks than any other administration in our history. As a matter of fact, Barack Obama has now, with the prosecution of Bradley Manning, indicted as many people for whistleblowing or leaks as all previous presidents put together. Did you realise that?

DiA: I did not.

Mr Ellsberg: Well it's a small number. It's three. It's that small because we don't have an official secrets act the way that the British and most countries do. And therefore we've only had three such prosecutions in the past. I was the first, with Tony Russo, under Richard Nixon. And two other presidents each brought one case. Obama has now prosecuted three people......
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2012 10:03 am
@wandeljw,
That entire article is a farce - if you actually watch that hearing you'll see the speaker has trouble keeping a straight face. Often it's government agencies leaking like crazy to avert yet more losses in blood and treasure for the sake of foreign countries who are nothing to us except a bottomless pit:
Quote:
....The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah -- a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children. ...

..........The report then made its way to the White House, according to the currently serving U.S. intelligence officer. The officer said that Bush "went absolutely ballistic" when briefed on its contents.

"The report sparked White House concerns that Israel's program was putting Americans at risk," the intelligence officer told me. [
/quote]
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false_flag
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------

PS (mine to Wandel, sorry can't edit now)
Speaking of the murders in Iran, you are more qualified than I am to comment on article by a law professor - would be interested in your opinion:
http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/34202/
wandeljw
 
  2  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2012 10:47 am
@High Seas,
Thanks for the link, High Seas. The article looks interesting.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2012 11:25 am
@High Seas,
How are things going with you, Ann?
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Feb, 2012 04:33 pm
@wandeljw,
The more interesting of the 2 articles is on the 1st link. Excerpt:
Quote:
.. the level of anger among senior intelligence officials about Israel's actions. "This was stupid and dangerous," the intelligence official who first told me about the operation said. "Israel is supposed to be working with us, not against us. If they want to shed blood, it would help a lot if it was their blood and not ours. You know, they're supposed to be a strategic asset. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people now, important people, who just don't think that's true."
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Feb, 2012 04:58 pm
@High Seas,
I read Daniel Ellsberg's book many years ago that reveals all the lies of the Johnson administration that was concealed to start the war in Vietnam.

He revealed the lies at personal risk to himself, and I admire him greatly for that. Our government never learns from our mistakes.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Feb, 2012 05:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Yes - it took courage on his part to publish, and it may have helped end the Vietnam disaster sooner. But now there are other people out there desperately trying to get information out before it's too late - read the whole article, it's well worth it: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false_flag

Oh, and in case you wondered who is this "Jundallah" organization that Israel got so cosy with over the last several years - it's another name for Al Qaeda.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 19 Feb, 2012 05:24 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
You know, they're [Israel] supposed to be a strategic asset.


And here I thought all along that Israel was a friend of the US. Yup, piss the US off enough and you'll lose your friend/strategic asset designation.

Look what happened to Saddam and Osama binLaden.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2012 07:35 am
Quote:
WikiLeaks, a Postscript
(By BILL KELLER, Opinion Essay, The New York Times, February 19, 2012)

This is apparently the revenge of Julian Assange: everyone who runs afoul of the rock-star leaker is condemned to spend eternity discussing the cosmic meaning of WikiLeaks. As the editor of The Times during our publication of many articles based on that treasury of military and diplomatic secrets, and as the lucky man the WikiLeaks founder singled out as his Least Favorite Journalist, I have participated in half a dozen panel discussions, and turned down at least that many. I can’t complain about the one in Madrid, where, after holding forth in a packed auditorium, the American, British, German, French and Spanish editors who broke news based on WikiLeaks commemorated the collaboration with an after-hours prowl through the Prado Museum and a 27-course meal cooked by master chef Ferran Adrià. (If Europe is dying, Spain is where I plan to go for the wake.) Unforgettable in a different way was the retrospective in Berkeley, where Assange himself, then as now awaiting an extradition ruling in England, was Skyped in on a giant screen, like the mighty Oz, to pontificate on Western media’s failure to turn the files into a kind of Nuremberg trial of American imperialism. About half the audience seemed on the verge of tossing their underwear at the screen.

Add to that the three or four documentaries on the WikiLeaks adventure, the dozen books — including, weirdly, Assange’s unauthorized autobiography — and a couple speculative Hollywood projects, in which I have a twofold interest. (1. The very slight possibility that I might make some money for my small piece of the story. 2. The exceedingly remote chance that a director will take up my wife’s brilliant idea that Assange be played by Tilda Swinton.)

It’s amazing they keep inviting me to these things, since I’m a bit of a spoilsport. My consistent answer to the ponderous question of how WikiLeaks transformed our world has been: really, not all that much. It was a hell of a story and a wild collaboration, but it did not herald, as the documentarians yearn to believe, some new digital age of transparency. In fact, if there is a larger point, it is quite the contrary.

With the subject showing no signs of going away — one more documentary melodrama of our WikiLeaks adventure will be featured at next month’s South by Southwest festival — I decided to check up on the lingering fallout from what may be the nation’s all-time greatest cascade of blown secrets.

Assange himself, who gave a handful of journalists early access to the pilfered data, has moved from a supporter’s country mansion to much more modest digs while he fights extradition to Sweden on sexual abuse charges. An American grand jury is believed to still be mulling an indictment for his role in the leaks. He compiled many hours of interviews for an autobiography, then backed out of the project, but his publisher — in the proper anarchist spirit of WikiLeaks — published it over his objections. (Evidently not for profit. It is No. 1,288,313 on the Amazon list of best-selling titles.) Assange’s newest project, announced last month, is a television talk show in which he will interview “iconoclasts, visionaries and power insiders.” So says the proud buyer of this series, RT (formerly Russia Today), the Kremlin’s English-language propaganda arm and keeper of the cult of Putin. No, not kidding.

Kremlin TV aside, Assange has declined from global notoriety to B-list celebrity: he lacks enough star power for a hosting gig on “Saturday Night Live,” but he did have a cameo in Sunday’s episode of “The Simpsons.”

Bart: “How ya doin’, Mr. Assange?”

Julian: “That’s my personal information, and you have no right to know about it.”

Bada-bing.

The Army private accused of divulging three-quarters of a million secret documents to WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning — who was at first kept in such inhumane custody that the State Department spokesman quit in protest — is scheduled to be arraigned Thursday on charges that could mean life in prison. You don’t have to excuse his alleged crime to think the original sin in the whole drama is that this tormented soul had access to so many secrets in the first place.

What we cannot know for sure is the fate of the many informants, dissidents, activists and bystanders quoted in the American cables. Assange published source names over the strong objections of the journalists who had access to the data (we expunged the names from our reports) and to the horror of human rights groups and some of his WikiLeaks colleagues. I’ve been told that a few exposed sources fled their countries with American help, a few others were detained by authorities, and none are known to have been killed. But would we even know? When I read stories like the Reuters account last week of the three men beheaded in Yemen for giving information to Americans, I worry anew about the many innocent witnesses named in the WikiLeaks cables.

The publication of so many confidences and indiscretions did not bring U.S. foreign policy to a halt. But it did, at least temporarily, complicate the lives of U.S. diplomats. American officials say that foreign counterparts are sometimes more squeamish about speaking candidly, and that it is harder to recruit and retain informants around the world.

As raw material for journalists, the cache of secrets has had a phenomenal afterlife. It’s been 10 months since The Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel and the other partners in this project filed their last major extracts from the files. And still, literally every day, stories based on the trove appear somewhere in the world, either because local news organizations are catching up with morsels of scandal that did not attract major newsrooms, or because new events cast the cables in a more interesting light. Notably, State Department dispatches reporting on the dissolute lifestyles of Mideast autocrats provided a little extra kindling for the bonfires of the Arab Spring.

But the idea that this was the opening of a floodgate has proved exactly wrong. In the immediate aftermath of the breach, several news organizations (including this one) considered creating secure online drop-boxes for would-be leakers, imagining that new digital Deep Throats would arise. But it now seems clear that the WikiLeaks breach was one of a kind — and that even lesser leaks are harder than ever to come by.

Steven Aftergood, who monitors secrecy issues for the Federation of American Scientists, said that since WikiLeaks the government has elevated the “insider threat” as a priority, and tightened access to classified material. Nudged by an irate Congress, the intelligence agencies are at work on an electronic auditing program that would make illicit transfer of secrets much more difficult and make tracking the leaker much easier.

“A lot of attention has been focused on WikiLeaks and its colorful proprietors,” Aftergood told me. “But the real action, it turns out, is not at the publisher level; it’s at the source level. And there aren’t a lot of sources as prolific or as reckless as Bradley Manning allegedly was.”

For good reason. The Obama administration has been much more aggressive than its predecessors in pursuing and punishing leakers. The latest case, the arrest last month of John Kiriakou, a former C.I.A. terrorist-hunter accused of telling journalists the names of colleagues who participated in the waterboarding of Qaeda suspects, is symptomatic of the crackdown. It is this administration’s sixth criminal case against an official for confiding to the media, more than all previous presidents combined. The message is chilling for those entrusted with keeping legitimate secrets and for whistleblowers or officials who want the public to understand how our national security is or is not protected.

Here’s the paradox the documentaries have overlooked so far: The most palpable legacy of the WikiLeaks campaign for transparency is that the U.S. government is more secretive than ever.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2012 11:24 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
What we cannot know for sure is the fate of the many informants, dissidents, activists and bystanders quoted in the American cables. Assange published source names over the strong objections of the journalists who had access to the data (we expunged the names from our reports) and to the horror of human rights groups and some of his WikiLeaks colleagues. I’ve been told by my wife's uncle's gardener that a few exposed sources fled their countries with American help, a few others were detained by authorities, and none are known to have been killed. But would we even know? When I read stories like the Reuters account last week of the three men beheaded in Yemen for giving information to Americans, I worry anew about the many innocent witnesses named in the WikiLeaks cables.


Now this guy really knows his trade. Might he be the chief propagandist for some US rag?
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2012 01:12 pm
Quote:
The brass neck of Julian Assange
(Nick Cohen,The Spectator, 21st February 2012)

On 1 March, the Old Vic theatre in London is hosting the première of Europe’s Last Dictator — a film documenting torture and state-sponsored murder and kidnap in Aleksandr Lukashenko’s Belarus. I don’t know if it looks at the brilliantly subversive Belarus Free Theatre, which has been at the forefront of the dissident movement, but I have been heartened to see British actors — Ian McKellen, Jude Law, Sienna Miller, Samuel West — responding to appeals for solidarity from their fellow performers in Belarus by taking up the cause of the opposition. Given this admirable record, it is no surprise to learn that Joanna Lumley will be co-hosting the evening at the Old Vic.

It is more of a surprise to learn that standing alongside her will be Julian Assange.

For every example of principled artistic activism one can find, there is a Jemima Khan or Bianca Jagger: preposterous celebs, who insist that Wikileaks is a force for good. Perhaps they are beyond saving, but someone needs to sit down the management of the Old Vic, and explain just how well the ‘freedom fighter’ has fought for freedom in Belarus.

Getting information from the Belarusian security apparatus is a hard task. But here is what we know.

Assange allowed Israel Shamir, a genuinely sinister Holocaust denier, to take unredacted US State Department cables to Belarus. These were pure gold for Lukashenko’s KGB because they contained the names of opposition figures who had spoken to American officials.

Shamir boasted in the far-left US magazine Counterpunch that Wikileaks had ‘revealed how… undeclared cash flows from the US coffers to the Belarus “opposition”.’ (His scare quotes.)

Lukashenko’s goons could not have been more appreciative. Shamir arrived in Belarus shortly after street protests against the dictator’s theft of the rigged 2010 general election. The KGB beat, arrested and imprisoned hundreds of demonstrators. The Belarusian state media said that Shamir had allowed the KGB to ‘show the background of what happened, to name the organizers, instigators and rioters, including foreign ones, without compromise, as well as to disclose the financing scheme of the destructive organizations’.

Among the figures the state press said Wikileaks had ‘exposed’ as America’s collaborators were Andrei Sannikov, widely regarded as the true winner of the election; Oleg Bebenin, Sannikov’s press secretary, who died in suspicious circumstances, as Lukashenko’s opponents are wont to do; and Vladimir Neklyayev, a writer and former president of Belarus PEN, who is now under house arrest.

Shamir’s anti-Semitic conspiracy theories clearly did not bother Assange — in a furious phone call to the editor of Private Eye Assange claimed that Jewish journalists in Britain, several of whom weren’t Jews at all, were conspiring against him. He has also proved himself a loyal friend to post-communist autocrats — as he showed when he took a job on Russia Today — Putin’s English-language propaganda station.

Meanwhile Wikileaks’ grassing up of the Belarusian opposition is hardly a secret, although Assange tried to cover it up. When reporters and rebellious staff inside Wikileaks protested, Assange tried to pretend that Shamir had never worked for him. Privately Assange told Shamir that he could avoid embarrassment by working under an assumed name. When the BBC’s Panorama revealed Assange’s double-dealing, his lawyers accused the BBC of using stolen documents to expose their client — a priceless accusation for the apostle of openness to level after he had received 250,000 stolen US cables.

In the advance publicity for Europe’s Last Dictator, Ms Lumley says, ‘Like many people in the UK, I had no idea of the oppressive nature of the present administration of Belarus until I was invited to join in a protest about the detention and disappearance of one of that country’s many political prisoners’.

But Assange did know, and his agent still helped the regime.

His brass neck is shocking but not surprising to anyone who has watched his megalomania grow. The behaviour of the organisers is more depressing; a sign of how even intellectuals — or perhaps I should say especially intellectuals — fall for the crass simplifications of the modern media. It is almost a truism now for political commentators to say that once a public figure has his or her image established, they can never escape it.
High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2012 07:13 pm
@wandeljw,
Amazing how Mr Cohen keeps re-hashing same old, same old, even after his own motives have long been discredited.

FYI the exact same story was printed in The Guardian of London last year [ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/18/julian-assange-wikileaks-nick-cohen ] and promptly disproved in every particular - not sure why The Spectator (your link) dusted it off again but the timing is exceedingly suspicious. Sometimes it takes decades to find out the truth but fortunately the truth is very persistent - read this:
http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2012/02/21/what-made-deep-throat-leak/
Quote:
Leak overturns once and for all the romantic, popular interpretation of the Watergate saga of one inside source risking it all to save democracy. “Nixon’s downfall was an entirely unanticipated result of Felt’s true and only aim,”

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2012 08:12 pm
@wandeljw,
Quote:
Assange allowed Israel Shamir, a genuinely sinister Holocaust denier, to take unredacted US State Department cables to Belarus. These were pure gold for Lukashenko’s KGB because they contained the names of opposition figures who had spoken to American officials.


I'm still puzzled as to how you can be such a hypocrite, Wandel.

The US has, numerous times, given lists to all manner of brutal dictators and death squads. Hundreds of thousands have died because of these actions and still you trot out this nonsense.

What the hell is wrong with you?



0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Feb, 2012 06:16 am
Quote:
WikiLeaks smear effort to reveal Bildt as US 'spy'
(The Local: Sweden's News In English, February 22, 2012)

WikiLeaks is planning a smear campaign against Sweden to halt the extradition of founder Julian Assange to the United States, including releasing documents allegedly showing that Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt has acted as an informant for the United States since the 1970s.

According to an internal WikiLeaks memo reviewed by Swedish tabloid Expressen, WikiLeaks plans to release more classified documents, organize blockades of Swedish embassies and consulates as well as boycotts of Swedish companies.

“This is going to hurt Sweden more than the debate about the Mohammad cartoons,” a source with knowledge of the matter told Expressen.

As Assange enters the final stages of his legal battle to avoid extradition to Sweden, his colleagues at WikiLeaks have begun preparing for how to prevent the Swedish government from extraditing the founder of the whistle-blower website to the United States.

“That the Swedish government doesn't take this seriously but rather makes it easier for the American government means Sweden finds itself among the countries that don't support transparency, the rights of the individual, and human rights,” the internal WikiLeaks memo reads.

“That puts Sweden and the country's reputation in great danger and the Swedish government is going to be forced to answer to global public opinion which will hold them responsible for not letting people around the world access information to which they have a right.”

WikiLeaks officials are convinced that Sweden has already made a deal with the United States that would see Assange extradited there to testify against Bradley Manning, the US soldier suspected of leaking thousands of classified US diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks.

There are also fears that Assange could be arrested and put on trial for espionage against the United States, WikiLeaks sources tell Expressen.

“If he's extradited, we fear for his life and that's something Sweden will pay a high price for,” a source said.

Among the documents WikiLeaks plans to make public is a US diplomatic report showing that Carl Bildt has served as an informant for the United States since the 1970s.

“There are secret documents that reveal that Bildt cooperated with the American administration in a way that violates Swedish law,” a WikiLeaks source told the paper.

“He'll be forced to resign. It will be the end of his political career.”

According to WikiLeaks, Bildt's original contact is political consultant Karl Rove, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, and someone who Bildt has openly referred to as “an old friend”.

While WikiLeaks spokesperson Kristinn Hrafnsson refused to comment on the details of the report about Bildt, she told Expressen “it's going to be released soon”.

Swedish foreign ministry spokesperson Anders Jörle said Bildt had nothing to say about the claims.

“We're going to hold off on commenting. We want to see what sort of document it is before we comment,” he told the paper.

However, Bildt acknowledged the Expressen report on his official Twitter account.

"Media reports that Wikileaks is planning what they describe as a 'smear campaign' against Sweden. Good to know," Bildt wrote, alongside a link to the Expressen article.

He also reacted to the report on his blog, challenging WikiLeaks "this in their opinion damning report".

"When that happens, this part of their planned 'smear campaign' will quickly fall apart," he wrote.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Feb, 2012 02:53 pm
@wandeljw,
We'll have to see who falls apart first. A country's reputation is more important than one government official who has broken his own country's laws.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Feb, 2012 03:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The official spokesman for Wikileaks is Kristinn Hrafnsson. The only confirmation he made to the press was: "We have a document that shows the close relationship between Carl Bildt and Washington insiders. I am sure that this information will soon be available to the public."
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Feb, 2012 10:24 am
Quote:
Bildt 'worried' over WikiLeaks smear plans
(The Local: Sweden's News In English, February 23, 2012)

Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt said on Thursday he is taking very seriously WikiLeaks' plans to launch a smear campaign against Sweden to stop the potential extradition of founder Julian Assange to the United States.

”I have noted what (daily) Expressen has written about Wikileaks preparing a smear campaign. You can imagine my thoughts on that,” Bildt told the paper from a press conference in London.

According to an internal WikiLeaks memo reviewed by the paper, WikiLeaks is planning to release more classified documents, organize blockades of Swedish embassies and consulates as well as boycotts of Swedish companies.

”It worries me that there are those who pursue smear campaigns and if WikiLeaks does, that says more about WikiLeaks than anything else,” said Bildt to Expressen.

However, Bildt also said that he was not worried about a document WikiLeaks claims to have in its possession which shows he acted as an informant for the US since the 1970s.

”I haven't got a clue what it could be about. But let's see if they have something to publish,” said Bildt to the paper.

”If they do publish these documents we'll probably see a quick end to this story.”

Assange is currently in Britain fighting extradition to Sweden where he is wanted for questioning on rape and sexual assault allegations, and WikiLeaks has long expressed concern that if he is sent to Sweden, Stockholm would quickly send him on to the United States.

Washington is eager to lay hands on the WikiLeaks founder after the organization's publication of hundreds of thousands of classified US diplomatic files, and according to Expressen the group's "smear campaign" against Sweden would be aimed at blocking Assange's further extradition.

"Julian Assange will most probably be freed from the sex crime suspicions, because that is just a trap," the unnamed person with insight into WikiLeaks told Expressen on Wednesday.

Speaking on Thursday, Bildt also completely repudiated WikiLeaks' claims that US political consultant Karl Rove, a former adviser to President George W. Bush and someone who Bildt previously has referred to as “an old friend”, had recruited him as an informant.

”No, of course he didn't. I know very many people around the globe. It is part of the duties of a foreign minister to brief other countries about sensitive topics,” Bildt told Expressen.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/19/2014 at 03:23:59