The anti-WikiLeaks lies and propaganda campaign: Cutting through the bull shit fear-peddling

[Better Believe It]

Cut through the bullshit fear-peddling.



Anti-WikiLeaks lies and propaganda - from TNR, Lauer, Feinstein and more
December 7, 2010

In The New Republic today, Todd Gitlin writes an entire anti-WikiLeaks column that is based on an absolute factual falsehood. Anyone listening to most media accounts would believe that WikiLeaks has indiscriminately published all 250,000 of the diplomatic cables it possesses, and Gitlin -- in the course of denouncing Julian Assange -- bolsters this falsehood: "Wikileaks’s huge data dump, including the names of agents and recent diplomatic cables, is indiscriminate" and Assange is "fighting for a world of total transparency."

The reality is the exact opposite -- literally -- of what Gitlin told TNR readers. WikiLeaks has posted to its website only 960 of the 251,297 diplomatic cables it has. Almost every one of these cables was first published by one of its newspaper partners which are disclosing them (The Guardian, the NYT, El Pais, Le Monde, Der Speigel, etc.). Moreover, the cables posted by WikiLeaks were not only first published by these newspapers, but contain the redactions applied by those papers to protect innocent people and otherwise minimize harm. Here is an AP article from yesterday detailing this process:

(T)he group is releasing only a trickle of documents at a time from a trove of a quarter-million, and only after considering advice from five news organizations with which it chose to share all of the material.

"They are releasing the documents we selected," Le Monde's managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann, said in an interview at the newspaper's Paris headquarters. . . .

"The cables we have release correspond to stories released by our main stream media partners and ourselves. They have been redacted by the journalists working on the stories, as these people must know the material well in order to write about it," WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in a question-and-answer session on The Guardian's website Friday.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0Vruimmvy8loGklsz34QyGDKMDA?docId=120c7bf5d3a34dbaadf1280dace2e456

Just as they did prior to releasing the Afghanistan war documents, WikiLeaks -- according to AP -- "appealed to the U.S. ambassador in London, asking the U.S. government to confidentially help him determine what needed to be redacted from the cables before they were publicly released." Although the U.S. -- again -- refused to give such guidance, WikiLeaks worked closely with these media outlets to ensure that any material which has no valid public interest value and could harm innocent people was withheld. And Assange's frequent commitments to engage in "harm minimization" when releasing documents gives the lie to Gitlin's assertion that he is "fighting for a world of total transparency."

I understand that the media has repeated over and over the false claim that WikiLeaks "dumped" all 250,000 diplomatic cables on the Internet -- which is presumably how this falsehood made its way into Gitlin's brain and then into his column -- but that's no excuse for him and TNR editors failing to undertake the most minimal due diligence (such as, say, checking WikiLeaks' website) before publishing this claim. I've emailed Gitlin and TNR Editor-in-Chief Franklin Foer early this morning and advised them of the need for a correction, but have heard nothing. I will post any reply I get. They're entitled to condemn WikiLeaks all they want, but not to propagate this factual falsehood.

Read the full article at:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html

[Uncle Joe]

1. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Better Believe It.

[tekisui]

2. An important post. KNR!~

Cut through the bullshit fear-peddling.

[Better Believe It]

3. Thanks. I think I'll reword the caption for the post.

Progressives need to read this article.

[tekisui]

5. .

:thumbsup:

[struggle4progress]

4. Actually, it's entirely unclear what wikileaks has released, since

by August at least 100,000 had downloaded the "insurance file" which (at 1.4gb) is large enough to contain a quarter of a million cables and which everybody with adequate computational power will no doubt try to crack

[tekisui]

6. The encrypted file has not been 'released'. And, it can't be cracked.

[struggle4progress]

8. If 100K people have downloaded it, then it's been released. Whether or not

it's crackable is a different question. You might be correct that it can't be cracked practically, but it's probably more accurate to say "it can't be cracked quickly and easily." When such encryption standards are promulgated, there is often a great deal of vocalized suspicion that the standards have been chosen so an agency like the NSA has a chance at cracking an encoded communication. General arguments about crackability often depend on assumptions about the "randomness" of the key -- but of course nobody ever really picks keys at random: the keys themselves are computed, so to have a really "random" key one would first have to do a really gigantic computation of many many keys and then select one "at random." To crack the insurance file (assuming it's not just garbage) is almost certainly beyond the ability of casual hobbyist, but I'm not convinced it's completely out-of-the-question for expert cryptography teams with enough computational power. The proper attitude to take towards encryption is that it is a useful way to delay disclosure rather than a way of hiding something forever

[tekisui]

9. Oh please. It won't be un-encrypted until wikileaks un-encrypts it.

And, no. You are wrong. It has most certainly NOT been released.

[Better Believe It]

13. You're playing a word game and I'm not biting. The contents of that file have not been released.

We could engage in endless and totally useless discussion on the subject of cryptography which neither of us are experts on and which also totally avoids the subject matter of the leading post and article.

If you'd prefer debating the subject of cryptography you may want to start a new post in the "Computers and Internet" forum at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=416

Now back to the subject.

Do you have an opinion on the files that have actually been released?

I'm still listening.

[struggle4progress]

14. I made a careful and accurate comment; I am sorry if you do not like it.

I do not know what is in the Wikileaks insurance file, but Assange's lawyer has been using the unfortunate word "thermonuclear" in this regard. At least 100K copies of the file have been downloaded. If it is, in fact, an encryption of something, then the security of the encryption is currently unknown to most of us but would depend on how good the key is; I prefer to make no assumptions about that but say The proper attitude to take towards encryption is that it is a useful way to delay disclosure rather than a way of hiding something forever; I am sorry if you dislike that point of view. Meanwhile, the 251287 pages have been given to at least four newspapers, one of which originally announced it would publish them all immediately (but then pulled back), and another of which shared them with a fifth paper. Wikileaks subsequently decided only to put on its website what the newspapers published. For these reasons, I think it is appropriate to take the view that it's entirely unclear what wikileaks has released; again, I am sorry if you dislike that point of view

... WikiLeaks has also posted a massive, closely encrypted file, identified as "insurance" -- a file Assange's lawyer has described as a "thermonuclear device." ...
Assange ordered to jail while court decides on extradition
Posted: Dec 7, 2010 9:26 AM by CNN Wire Staff
Updated: Dec 7, 2010 10:55 AM
http://www.kpax.com/news/assange-ordered-to-jail-while-court-decides-on-extradition/

... According to the Associated Press, Wikileaks gave four news organizations (Le Monde, El Pais, The Guardian and Der Spiegel) all 251,287 classified documents before anything was released to the public. The Guardian subsequently shared its trove with The New York Times ... The Associated Press has reported that Wikileaks is only releasing cables in coordination with the actions of the five selected news organizations ... Wikileaks claimed in August that the insurance file had been downloaded more than 100,000 times ...
COMPUTING
Everything You Need to Know About Wikileaks
Two experts lay out the facts surrounding the controversy.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2010
BY JONATHAN ZITTRAIN AND MOLLY SAUTER
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26875/?mod=chfeatured&a=f


... Encryption with AES is based on a secret key with 128, 192 or 256 bits. But if the key is easy to guess it doesn’t matter if AES is secure, so it is as critically vital to use good and strong keys as it is to
apply AES properly. Creating good and strong keys is a surprisingly difficult problem and requires careful design when done with a computer. The challenge is that computers are notoriously deterministic, but what is required of a good and strong key is the opposite – unpredictability and randomness ...
About AES – Advanced Encryption Standard
A short introduction
2007-08-24
Copyright 2007 Svante Seleborg
Axantum Software AB
http://www.axantum.com/axcrypt/etc/About-AES.pdf

[struggle4progress]

15. ... The batch of 250,000 US classified documents were available free to users of the WikiLeaks

website before it was taken offline following pressures from authorities. However, the cables have now been repackaged by Amazon user Heinz Duthel and are available as an eBook for the Amazon Kindle – priced at £7.37 ...
Amazon backlash after website starts selling WikiLeaks cables
http://swns.com/amazon-backlash-after-website-starts-selling-wikileaks-cables-091456.html

I won't vouch for the accuracy of this story

[Better Believe It]

16. I got it as a free download just two days ago. It's not being sold by WikiLeaks or Assange.

So stop continuing to post attacks against WikiLeaks.

Would you like to get a free copy of the file you can't read?

[struggle4progress]

17. A moment ago, you wrote "The contents of that file have not been released"

Now you say, "I got it as a free download just two days ago" :crazy:

[Better Believe It]

18. The contents of the file have not been released. Just the closed encrypted file has been released.

I downloaded it but can't open it to see the documents.

Is that clear enough?

[Better Believe It]

7. It is absolutely clear what WikiLeaks has released for publication.

Why spread that claim which obviously is not accurate?

Not even governments can break the 258 digit password of the insurance file.

If you can, let everyone know.

So let's stick what is real and what is known, not useless speculation on what might or might not be in the insurance file which I and many others have.

So do you have a problem with the 960 files that have been released?

Well, speak up!

I'm listening.

But just don't repeat any of the slanders, lies, misrepresentations and distortions about WikiLeaks spread by opponents of a free press and our Constitution.

Because I'm not buying that snake oil.

OK?

[struggle4progress]

12. What has actually been published seems to be the result of extensive negotiation:

... Germany's Der Spiegel briefly published a story on its website Saturday saying that the documents include 251,287 cables and 8,000 diplomatic directives, most of which date after 2004. About 9,000 documents are from the first two months of this year, the newspaper said. About 6 percent of the documents were classified as secret, the newspaper said before taking down its story. The majority was unclassified, the newspaper said, but all were intended to remain confidential. The newspaper said it would release all the documents at 4:30 p.m. EST. WikiLeaks and the newspapers are expected to release the documents and their findings at the same time. However, the release time has changed several times over the past few days ....
Posted on Saturday, November 27, 2010
U.S. officials: New WikiLeaks release will do most harm yet
By Nancy A. Youssef | McClatchy Newspapers
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/27/104388/us-officials-new-wikileaks-release.html

... Before Sunday's release, news organizations given access to the documents and WikiLeaks took the greatest care to date to ensure no one would be put in danger. In statements accompanying stories about the documents, several newspapers said they voluntarily withheld information and that they cooperated with the State Department and the Obama administration to ensure nothing released could endanger lives or national security. The newspapers "established lists in common of people to protect, notably in countries ruled by dictators, controlled by criminals or at war," according to an account by Le Monde, a French newspaper that was among the five news organizations that were given access to the documents. "All the identities of people the journalists believed would be threatened were redacted," the newspaper said in what would be an unprecedented act of self censorship by journalists toward government documents ...
Posted on Sunday, November 28, 2010
Officials may be overstating the danger from WikiLeaks
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/28/104404/officials-may-be-overstating-the.html

So Wikileaks sent everything to a batch of newspapers, and Der Spiegel originally intended to put everything online. But then the newspapers instead organized a common vetting practice, and Wikileaks announced it would only post on its website materials the newspapers printed

[NoodleyAppendage]

10. CNN has been the worst about this. Hmmm...I seem to remember military PsyOps interns being posted.

Just so it doesn't disappear down the memory hole, please remember this:

Why Were Government Propaganda Experts Working On News At CNN?
(3/27/00). Reports in the Dutch newspaper Trouw (2/21/00, 2/25/00) and France's Intelligence Newsletter (2/17/00) have revealed that several officers from the US Army's 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN's Atlanta headquarters last year, starting in the final days of the Kosovo War

So, let's not kid ourselves. This media pile on is being prompted by government actors of one sort or another.

J

[laughingliberal]

11. K & R nt

[EFerrari]

19. Glenn has this one down cold.

:thumbsup: