Egypt Update: Excellence Roundup

The protests that began on Jan 25th are still strong across Egypt. Millions of people are still in Tahrir Square. The army is still present, still doing very little. Mubarak is still entrenched.

I am still intently watching in awe of the women, children, men and youth of Egypt.


In honour of two weeks of protest, sacrifice and bravery for democracy and human rights, here's a roundup of what I've been seeing:
(And it's in turns brutal, unsurprising, and totally, totally sweet.)

Rampant government interference and violence against the press.

Egyptian State media blatantly refusing to broadcast tens of thousands of their people protesting.

The UN pretending nothing is happening.

Two continuing liveblogs--two weeks in, and still warranting continual coverage from the Guardian and AJE.

Coptic Christians forming human chains to protect Muslims at prayer--just like Muslims formed a human shield during Coptic Christmas marches.

A medical clinic set up in front of a KFC in Cairo.


Community-led barricades, checking IDs, disallowing weapons, and welcoming people to the protests with "The Egyptians are here!"

The first Western hip hop solidarity song for Egypt, released for free (download here--it's good), and the video mashed from AJE footage.

Overwhelming UNITY in a country whose opposition to Mubarak has previously been characterized by its fragmentation.

And finally, the widespread internet fame of a guy wearing bread as a hat. 

Mubarak, your argument is invalid.

Egypt: In Tahrir Square, People Are Dying.

Right now, in the chaos, of Tahrir Square and the Oct 6 Bridge, pro-democracy protesters are being shot in the head.

The pro-Mubarak goons that disrupted the week's inspirational peaceful protests are widely suspected--and reported--to be plainclothes cops and hired thugs, paid by the regime to terrify the masses and damage the resolve of the protesters. They've been targeting Al Jazeera staff (and any journalists, really) for violence.
They have been using homemade pipe bombs and molotov cocktails. The army appears to be doing very little to stop them, and reports are flying that they may be guilty of exacerbating the situation purposely.

And in the face of this ridiculous and shameful, shameful display of force, I can't think of anything that I can do to help these people that are risking and losing their lives in pursuit of something I was born into and take for granted every day of my life.
Except for tell you about it.


It is 5am in Cairo. Al Jazeera is liveblogging still. If you are like me, and find it difficult by geography and means to do anything more substantial, at least bear witness to the history happening tonight.

Stuff You May Have Missed in the Egypt Protests; In Other News, Egyptians Still Incredible.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Arab version of the Berlin Wall is falling.

And you, me, and everyone else with half an eye on the news, is watching.

I've been watching the Al Jazeera liveblog, refreshing every few nanoseconds. My love of AJE is the stuff of epic poetry, but it seems for once everyone else is watching it too, recognizing what good journalism looks like, and noting the sizeable difference between it and CNN. The President was watching it, and they barely even allow it on US cable.
I've also been following a fairly decent Guardian liveblog, which gives a slightly geopolitically-broader look at the whole crazy-inspirational Egyptian revolution story.

And it has been inspirational.

In case some of you have been under a rock waiting for me to sass about this, here's the extreme-Coles-notes-version: after Tunisia's regular folks overthrew their authoritarian government a few weeks ago, 30 years of regime under Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak is falling apart. There have been approximately 7 days of protests in major cities all over Egypt, with women, children, lawyers, judges, teachers, tradespeople and youth demanding free and fair elections and the removal of Mubarak. They've been withstanding police brutality, country-wide internet and SMS shutoff, increasingly early military curfews, and the stubborn refusal of their leadership to listen to their demands. They've decided that they're not budging until they get what they're entitled to as human beings.

Tahrir Square, in Cairo, on the 28th

Considering the coverage of this issue has been practically omnipresent on most major news networks, I get the rare opportunity to report on some stuff I've read that maybe isn't on the CBC basic breakdown at 6.

-You may have noticed footage of burning buildings in Cairo, and riots in Suez and Alexandria played over and over. What you might not have noticed is the community-led vigilante groups setting up roadblocks in Cairo suburbs, to prevent looting. Or the protesters stopping to pick up garbage, and distributing food during the marches. Clearly, these are dangerous anarchists.

in front of the Antiquities Museum.
Note the business attire. Incredible.

-What about the human chain of protesters preventing looters from getting into the National Antiquities Museum, where a few thousand years of human history lives?

-Or the sleepover of a few thousand people in Tahrir Square tonight with a "feeling of community", despite the fact that they had to defy curfew, step over barbed wire and avoid tanks and military helicopters to get there?

-Or the recent statement from the Egyptian military verbalizing their admirable practice thus far, saying that they will not attempt to harm protesters?

-Or the reports of soldiers defecting to join the protest?


Mubarak's first address to his country a few days ago paid the usual lipservice to freedom, democracy and the protesters, and hammered home that even though he's been identified as the problem, he wasn't going anywhere. But even though governments all over the world are cautiously, diplomatically issuing statements, it's become abundantly clear--it doesn't matter how much he shuffles his cabinet, the guy simply can't stay in office.

Today, the Egyptian government tried to shut down Al Jazeera, storming the office, temporarily arresting reporters, and taking all their gear. Because nothing says "We totally take your request for democracy seriously" like hobbling the most effective and visible agents of the free press with police goons. Sends just the right message.
The small amount of Egyptian government face that wasn't already covered with proverbial egg is now thoroughly smeared, with news organizations and international governments from all over the place making statements of support. Even Anonymous has sent out an open letter of support to Al Jazeera and to the Egyptian population in general. And they signed it with a "We love you", which might be the most genuine display of affection ever recorded from those cheeky trolls.

In the meantime, in the face of the continued internet shutdown, the folks at Skyne--er, Google, have developed a speech-to-tweet function so that people can call in their social networking updates.

Make no mistake, things are far from rosy. Police stations, National Democratic Party and other government offices have been burned to the ground. The death toll is rising from 150 (which is an admirably small number, considering the thousands that have been in the streets for a week). There are many, many people missing in Egypt (and many attempts to organize to find them).
The Egyptian army has troops in the Sinai peninsula for the first time since their peace treaty with Israel, which is making them anxious and causing a great deal of talk about the Islamization of the Middle East (though my personal opinion is that fear's a mite bit self-absorbed at this point, isn't it?). And considering it tends to happen every time someone Arab sneezes or stubs his toe, the price of crude oil is going through the roof again.

But considering the scale and consequence of this revolution--and the fact that a huge protest is planned for tomorrow that may wind up being a crux point for the government--it's looking rather positive.

And with the whole world watching, too.

Egypt Protests: Wow.

Last night, I found the pamphlet being distributed non-digitally throughout Egyptian cities, giving demonstrators some tips on how best to get out their message, and survive, during today's planned biggest-demonstration-yet. I looked at it, thought long and hard about posting it before now, decided against, and tried to go to sleep to blog another crazy news day.
I failed in the sleeping bit. It just felt like what was brewing was going to be really intense.

Lo and behold, within seconds of Friday prayers letting out, it was.

They detained ElBaradei after they saw him in the streets. They shut down the internet and texting functions again, "in select areas" (namely, anywhere a protest was likely--upwards of 8 cities all over the country). The UN issued a stern fingerwag, as they are wont to do.

Some selections from the excellent Guardian.co.uk liveblog that I am checking every 3 minutes:

A Human Rights Watch advocate on the scene says that police are withdrawing in the city he's in.

Journalists from every stripe have been beaten--AP, Reuters, the Guardian, Al Jazeera, CNN...mostly by plainclothes police.

In Suez, two soldiers were disciplined overnight for refusing to fire on demonstrators. Al Jazeera now has footage of police throwing tear gas canisters....and demonstrators throwing them back.

In Cairo, a female protester has been killed in the central plaza--but the police are throwing teargas canisters away and siding with the protesters.

In East Alexandria, as soon as security arrived they began shooting teargas and rubber bullets. When they ran out of those, the protesters blocked in police in the yard of a mosque. Now they're begging the protesters to stop--and the protesters are begging them to join them.

It's afternoon prayers, and police are putting down their weapons and praying with the people in the streets.

This whole situation is absolutely blowing me away--and I could wax poetic all day about the right to democracy or about how the Egyptian example is an amazing, brave and ballsy physical manifestation of the desire for government accountability in the face of overwhelming craziness. But everything that I could say turns into paltry internet crap--watch the footage. Be inspired that people from all walks of life care enough about their situation that they put their lives on the line to change it for the better.

Praying, in Alexandria. With the people previously trying to bash your head in.
Amazing.

The US and the UK are both on the fence, issuing largely ambiguous statements calling both sides to end the violence. This is probably due to the fact that their significant aid money to Egypt paid for every bullet being fired at those protesters--and to the fact that they already knew about the huge problem with police brutality in Egypt. Thanks, cables!


Meanwhile, a protest begins in Jordan...

Egypt Gets Concerning, with Yemen Not Far Behind

Things are crazy all across Egypt right now.

The protests that started on the heels of Tunisia's regime-overthrow are still raging, and they're not looking like they're going to stop. Suez, Giza, Cairo, North Sinai--they're all crammed with people vowing not to stop demonstrations until they get responsible government.
They're also crammed with police in the middle of an insane, brutalist crackdown on demonstrators. As of Wednesday, 800 people had been detained. Tear gas is flying all over the place, and police are trying everything they can think of to prevent marching.

Reuters has footage of a protestor being shot to death and dragged back into the crowd.

Apparently, this is the way Egyptian police
deal with permitless marches

Wide reports are surfacing that the government (or someone) has shut down internet and text message services across the entire country--something that's never happened before, ever.
Human Rights Watch is nervously watching, because they're worried that the police will open fire on the crowd. Which would be terrible.

Mohamed ElBaradei, Egyptian winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and former nuclear chief at the UN, is being seen as the best bet for alternative leadership after the Mubarak regime falls apart under the pressure.  He returned to Egypt after 30 years away, and is pledging to join the protests.

this is Yemen. this looks familiar.

Meanwhile, Yemen is brewing some protests of its own: tens of thousands of folks in the capital, calling for the disposition of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The difference here is that the president appears to have his own chunk of supporters running counter-marches. 

Yemen also has people serious enough about getting rid of the government that they're self-immolating.

To all you brave folks out there demanding what's right from your government: you're inspirational and excellent.

And please, please don't get shot or trampled.

Hey Canada: How much do you want your media to suck?

Cuz a few of our elected reps are really really into it.

Two big-ticket news items I've been foolishly sitting on while the east absolutely exploded are from right here at home, and they both have two things in common:

1) The CRTC (Canadian Radio and Television Commission) is behind them

2) They're both fucking terrifying.

so this is what the enemy looks like.

CRTC Nightmare the First: Internet Metering
The situation is this: while you were sleeping, going to work, and watching the game, major telecoms now have the right to charge you for -over-using the internet-. This makes per-byte billing for your home internet usage possible the same way we get gouged on smartphone data plans. It also makes any attempt at net neutrality (something that I think is as fundamental in this day and age as non-digital liberty, dag nabbit) basically unreachable.

Practically, this is what it looks like: loading data-intensive pages, streaming ANYTHING, listening to music, videos, or downloads of any kind, will get exorbitantly expensive. Because it's expensive, the internet will become more of the same sort of playing field as meatworld is now--where people with money get access to things that poor people can't.

You can't hear me, but I'm spitting in disgust by my shoes right now.

CRTC Nightmare the Second: Always At War with EastAsia.

While we were sleeping, watching the game and working like good polite little Canadians, the CRTC recently amended their broadcasting regulations to make it okay edit: EASIER to claim ignorance while broadcasting false or misleading news. (Thanks for keepin' me honest, Darryl)

What. 

The Harper government for the great and glorious 52nd state is already prepping for Fox News North; this is really just the first logical step.

I need to throw up now, but if this makes you angry/frightened/both, there's plenty you can do.



While I'm puking, feel free to make noise about this. Might be the last time we feel free in the media for a while.

In Which Egypt Takes Cues from Tunisia, and Loudly Demands Some Sense Up In Here

Hey, remember that thing I said about the Jasmine Revolution being important because of its potential for replication in other Arab states?

Yeah, this is happening. In Egypt. Right now.

Welp, in true I-told-you-so form, Egypt has erupted into "anti-government demonstrations" calling shenanigans on the past 30 years of "torture, poverty, corruption, unemployment," and uninterrupted rule by President Hosni Mubarak. Protests are raging in eight cities all over the country. Cops are using rubber bullets and tear gas to try and restore zen, and because Egypt has a standing ban on all gatherings without permits, anyone in the streets is liable for detainment. Isn't that just awesome.

Two civilians and a police officer have been killed. Thousands of folks in Arab countries are taking notice, and a small handful of ruling elites are probably booking passage to the Grand Caymans about now.

A protester with the before and after images of Saeed

Many of the Egyptians out in the streets are mobilized from the We Are Khalid Saeed movement that started on facebook (and here in meatworld) in 2009 after Saeed, an Alexandrian small businessman, was dragged from an internet cafe by cops and beaten to death in the street. The campaign posts the names of abusive cops, and acts as a watchdog and protest group against police and institutional brutality. It's also yet another reason why I wish I read Arabic.

Al Jazeera has an interesting twitter feed next to the first story linked above, fed largely by people involved with the protests (which there appears to be no shortage of). However, there are also reports that twitter and facebook have both been blocked by the Mubarak regime, who make it no secret that they hate all this techy bullcrap. They've got a special seat in hell reserved for dissident bloggers, too, which gives me the warm and fuzzies. It's so nice to be thought of...

Also to toss in the two cents of the resident superpower: Hillary Clinton is calling Egypt's government "stable".
I wonder if she heard that on Fox.

Wikirecap: Cables!

Let's see what cablelicious goodness we've got, courtesy of Wikileaks:

In a substantial dick move, the government of Botswana evicted Bushmen from the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, after years of being relocated into "economically absolutely unviable situations without forethought and follow-up support". The kicker? They kicked them off the ancestral land to hand it over to diamond mining companies. Come on, Botswana--who do you think you are, Canada?




The prominent Yemeni journalist that wrote about the US's happy-missile-scapegoating-scam that resulted in US drones levelling a village they weren't technically allowed to bomb was locked up, tortured and sentenced to 5 years in prison for "recruiting young people, including foreigners, to an illegal armed organization by communicating with them via the Internet". The journalist, named Abdul Elah Hayder Shae, had been two important things: 1) an expert on Al-Qaeda, and 2) a thorn in the side of the Yemeni government for years, doing that pesky press-supported-public-accountability thing good journalists do. Quote from him that sounds too familiar in this day and age:

"I do not stand now in front of a judiciary but in front of a gang belonging to the national security apparatus." 

So many parallels, I don't even know where to start.

Haitian Elections in 2010--haggard with cholera, still votin'.

From the Department of Shit Everyone Already Knew,  we've got more proof of America's fairly dirty imperial hands all over Haiti. It appears the US is obsessed with keeping Aristide out of the country, and is still insistent on maintaining their occupier status. Rumours that American, Canadian and French officials "overseeing" the most recent voting process skewed the results to bar Jude Celestin (successor to Rene Preval) for being too "independent". We can't have that, can we. Add that to the occupation and raiding of the Cité Soleil slums by the UN and the mysterious "suicide" of one of the seasoned UN veterans opposed to meddling in Cité Soleil, and the situation in Haiti gets more and more fluid and weird.
So why the pants is the world's biggest superpower worrying about little old unnecessarily-cholera-stricken Haiti? Gwynne Dyer speculates with the sort of sense he's known for:

"Aristide, currently living in South Africa, could play a role in the Caribbean similar to that of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela if he regained power, but that is not currently on the cards."

Aside from the cables, there's been buzz about the possibility of persecuting Wikileaks under the CFAA for "systematically crawling P2P networks for secret files that might be accidentally shared". There's question as to whether or it's illegal to do that. Which might be irrelevant, because there's even bigger questions about whether or not Wikileaks actually DID any of that. Which hasn't stopped people trying to sink Wikileaks in the past, but whatevs.

Wikirecap: because News is still happening

It is New Year's Eve tomorrow, which makes it ripe-for-scandal-o'clock on the wikifront.
As this blog is totally not about me (unless I'm somehow involved with important news), I won't explain why I'm so sluggish with updates. I WILL apologize, and warn thus: until the third week of January, this blog will be fairly quiet. And after the third of January, it will likely get very loud again.

Quick-and-dirty catch-up recap:

HUGE, huge fallout: Glenn Greenwald vs WIRED magazine over the Bradley Manning/Lamo chat logs. Apparently WIRED's editor Kevin Poulsen's been pals with Lamo for a long time, and a few opaque and important claims made by Lamo can't be confirmed with the sections of the chat logs they've already released. But Poulsen's pulling the (fairly legitimate in most cases, I think) journalistic card that says because the remainder of the chat logs don't have anything to do with wikileaks, it's in the interest of source privacy that they don't release them.
I'm fairly at odds about this myself, but I don't have much of a chance to sort it out on my head, because the whole thing fairly swiftly exploded into an all-out-internet-journalism-shit-slinging-bonanza, mostly over at WIRED. Thankfully, Rob Beschizza at boingboing begins to make sense of it all in a way that I love, and asks really excellent questions that manage to recalibrate it from a blood-and-pixels-feud back into a really important issue. Plus, some guy broke it down in one sentence. That deserves credit.


Aforementioned awesome-boingboing-Rob also notes that NPR loudly corrected the flurry of reporters still clinging to the "documents dump" myth:

"In recent weeks, NPR hosts, reporters and guests have incorrectly said or implied that WikiLeaks recently has disclosed or released roughly 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables. Although the website has vowed to publish "251,287 leaked United States embassy cables," as of Dec. 28, 2010, only 1,942 of the cables had been released."

Meanwhile, the press is suspiciously forgetting this whole wikileaks thing ever happened. The Guardian, formerly a bastion of awesomeness, is not reporting on them any more. The New York Times had been quiet on this front for a long time. Basically, it's internet-based journalism still following cablegate and its attendant nuttiness. Personally, this makes my brain go like crazy--if I was a pro journalist in a large publication, I'd be looking at the mounting legal proceedings against Assange for doing the same that that I pay bills by doing, and I'd put as much distance between my actions and him as possible.
Unless, y'know, I believed in the unavoidable responsibility of the 4th estate in a democratic society that makes something like the first amendment necessary. But whatevs.

Unsurprisingly, and on urging from Paypal, the FBI decided it was pertinent to look into Operation Payback, Anonymous and DDoS attacks in general. It confirms that they knocked down Paypal for at least a while. It also refers to 4chan as an "internet activist group", which made me spit coffee out of my nose. Apart from that, the affidavit linked up there makes good recap of the whole Operation Payback development. Interesting tidbits: Paypal gave the feds ISP addresses from people suspected of hosting IRC channels related to the Anonymous Ops, and one was in British Columbia. And by BC I mean California, as the RCMP figured out the ISP was only virtually based. And by California, I mean Dallas, Texas, where the FBI actually searched and seized server materials. Oh cyber"crime". You're so crazy.


Speaking of crazy, Assange told Al-Jazeera that the CIA have Arab officials that are basically American spies, and therefore BFFs. Then he allegedly showed them the documents he had to prove it. Which is interesting.


And probably the most overwhelming tick in the "crazy" box (that also earned a "wtf America" tag from this girl): The lawyer that won the Pentagon Papers case says Wikileaks is totally different.
And me, and hundreds of other, better-educated, more-familiar-with-the-case-and-US-law-in-general journalists and theorist wheeze "Whaaaaaaaaaaa???" and start looking into the possibility that the man's been body-snatched and replaced with a cyborg version designed to sell that tripe to the Washington Post. His argument makes that much sense.

Why I'm Worried about the Espionage Act.

these folks are most likely also breaking the Espionage Act.
It's a party in here.

One of the reasons I'm following the Wikileaks and Cablegate-craziness-and-attendant-f*ckery so closely is because I really believe that it's history in action: the way that the world reacts to Assange et al at Wikileaks and the information they released is going to change the way that free speech and freedom of the press work in very fundamental ways. Growing up in a democracy, I recognize the fact that the information I have access to as a citizen--the quality, connotation, frequency and validity of it--changes the way my country runs, and the way that I live my life. This is gonna change my day-to-day, and yours too. I thought I should maybe stay informed.

The problem is that this is fundamentally a question of information. And there seems to be some scary attitudes about the transmission of information from people in power these days. I want to talk about the reasons I'm fretting about the legal arguments happening about these questions of information.

Firstly: because the 1917 American Espionage Act could be interpreted to make me a National Security Risk for talking about the Cables, and YOU one for reading about them.

More after the break:

Fox "News" Skews truth to Avoid the Blues about Climate Change and Health Care

Or: Fox Management requires journalists to abandon sense, and instead mindrape their audiences.

That thud you heard was my forehead, hitting my desk.

A Fox News managing editor (one Mr. Bill Sammon) sent an email mere hours before the Copenhagen Climate Summit demanding that every time climate change was mentioned, reporters IMMEDIATELY said something to cast doubt on the veracity of global warming. From the Media Matters exposé:

"In addition to the email, it said Fox had tried to delegitimise the work of climate scientists in its coverage of the hacked emails from the University of East Anglia. The network had displayed a pattern of trying to skew coverage in favour of the fringe minority which doubts the existence of climate change, Media Matters said."

The email reads: "We should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question."

It goes on to say: "It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies."

...it's not your place as journalists to assert SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACTS as facts?!

I think I just threw up a little.

They were also at it in 2009 over the health care debate!

"At the height of the health care reform debate last fall, Bill Sammon, Fox News' controversial Washington managing editor, sent a memo directing his network's journalists not to use the phrase 'public option.'

Instead, Sammon wrote, Fox's reporters should use "government option" and similar phrases -- wording that a top Republican pollster had recommended in order to turn public opinion against the Democrats' reform efforts."

I mistakenly laboured under the impression that Fox News hired ready-made right-wingers--I never thought the management actually manufactured them.

If this is the state of First-Amendment-Protected news organizations, doesn't this make Wikileaks that much more important?

Wikileaks Roundup: The Bad News

It doesn't look good, folks.

Turns out the Swedes didn't have much to do with Assange's bail being appealed--apparently that call was made by the British prosecutor on the case. Could mean any number of three things: the UK government is not as sympathetic to Assange's cause as previously believed and therefore Assange is in trouble with extradition, that particular prosecutor just really wanted to make the Swedes happy, or someone is lying.

Meanwhile, the cost of keeping these lawyers fighting for him is straining Assange's budget--Wikileaks donations are for the organization, not for Assange, and all the guy's personal assets and accounts are frozen. If the Swedes win their appeal tomorrow, he'll be stuck in lockup in "Dickensian conditions" until extradited to Sweden, which could take months.

Found out what the New York Times was doing: a mildly investigative piece on what the US Justice Department has been up to. It's sneaky.

Having long run out of things that they can charge him with, US federal prosecutors are trying to find evidence that he conspired with Private Bradley Manning in the Afghan War Logs leaks. (Note: the New York Times has a damnable paywall to this report. I'll try and quote as much as possible--emphases are mine).

"Justice Department officials have declined to discuss any grand jury activity. But in interviews, people familiar with the case said the department appeared to be attracted to the possibility of prosecuting Mr. Assange as a co-conspirator to the leaking because it is under intense pressure to make an example of him as a deterrent to further mass leaking of electronic documents over the Internet. By bringing a case against Mr. Assange as a conspirator to Private Manning’s leak, the government would not have to confront awkward questions about why it is not also prosecuting traditional news organizations or investigative journalists who also disclose information the government says should be kept secret — including The Times, which also published some documents originally obtained by WikiLeaks.

“I suspect there is a real desire on the part of the government to avoid pursuing the publication aspect if it can pursue the leak aspect,” said Daniel C. Richman, a Columbia law professor and former federal prosecutor. “It would be so much neater and raise fewer constitutional issues.”

... Mr. Lamo said Private Manning also sometimes uploaded information directly to Mr. Assange, whom he had initially sought out online. Still, prosecutors would most likely need more than a chat transcript laying out such claims to implicate Mr. Assange, Professor Richman said. Even if prosecutors could prove that it was Private Manning writing the messages to Mr. Lamo, a court might deem the whole discussion as inadmissible hearsay evidence. Prosecutors could overcome that hurdle if they obtain other evidence about any early contacts — especially if they could persuade Private Manning to testify against Mr. Assange. But two members of a support network set up to raise money for his legal defense, Jeff Paterson and David House, said Private Manning had declined to cooperate with investigators since his arrest in May. Meanwhile, WikiLeaks is taking steps to distance itself from the suggestion that it actively encourages people to send in classified material. It has changed how it describes itself on its submissions page. 'WikiLeaks accepts a range of material, but we do not solicit it,' its Web site now says."

Some of my thoughts:

1) "Lamo" is the guy that Bradley Manning confided in when he was understandably worried about leaking the Afghan War Logs. Lamo is also who turned in Bradley Manning for whistleblowing on the military because of hundreds of innocent dead Afghani civillians. In my opinion, he's very aptly named.

2) I can't imagine a jury being chosen from Assange's actual peers would convict him. I also can't imagine the US Deptartment of Justice actually assembling a jury of his peers. I CAN see them assembling a jury of the 70% of Americans who think he's a terrorist and should be put in Quantico with Manning.

3)This prosecution path is scary for free speech, because if it wins, it would effectively criminalize whistleblowing. Which effectively criminalizes disagreeing with power. Which, to put it bluntly, essentially clips the balls off of any democracy.

Snip snip.

Speaking of Private Bradley Manning, my favourite Glenn Greenwald (ladies and gentlemen!) has a scary, well-researched insight into the conditions of his "stay" at the Marine base at Quantico. The long and short of it: Manning's in "high-security" solitary confinement 23 hours a day for well over four months, which ruins you psychologically in the same neurological ways that repeated, severe concussions do. He's not allowed to exercise, have sheets or a pillow on his bed, or talk to anyone. He's not on suicide watch, but he HAS been put on antidepressants to keep him from going off the deep end. He doesn't know when, or if, he's getting out. AND HE HASN'T BEEN CONVICTED OF ANYTHING.
The article turned my stomach--but it really puts a face on what we're talking about when we talk about military law. It also has excerpts from Wired's edited chat logs between someone purported to be Manning, and Lamo himself, including this about why he chose to leak:

Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .

Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter - because if it is… were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed.

I feel like Bradley Manning is the biggest tragedy in this whole Cablegate story, and it completely breaks my heart.

Also, BP practically owns Azerbaijan, steals their oil to the tune of $10 billion, and clearly doesn't mind explosions like the Gulf Spill happening in the Caspian region. Which is nice of them.

GLENN GREENWALD ladies and gentlemen!!

Glenn Greenwald, who I accused of accidentally trying to be my favourite person on the internet mere hours ago, is a lawyer, civil rights litigator, journalist and blogger. He writes for Salon, appears on television, and serves on the board of the watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

  Well, he used to. Until he wrote this letter:

 December 12, 2010

To the Board of Directors of CREW:

I am hereby resigning from the Board of Directors, effective immediately. I fully expected when joining the Board that CREW would periodically take positions with which I disagreed, and that was perfectly acceptable to me.

But the recent condemnation of WikiLeaks by Anne Weismann, purporting to speak on behalf of CREW, is both baffling and unacceptable to me. It is baffling because I cannot fathom how a group purportedly devoted to greater transparency in government could condemn an entity that has brought more transparency to governments and corporations around the world than any single other organization by far. And it is unacceptable to me because I believe defense of WikiLeaks has become one of the greatest and most important political causes that exists -- certainly one to which I intend to devote myself -- and I do not want to be affiliated with any group which works to undermine it.

I remain supportive of much of the work done by CREW and wish the organization nothing but the best.

Very truly yours,

Glenn Greenwald

Anyone with information on how I can personally thank Glenn Greenwald for being so unabashedly ballsy and awesome can contact me in the comments. I've gotta go cool down somewhere, I'm getting a case of the vapours.

Wikileaks: Roundup Harder

fruitycuties.com. Hilarious.

NATO beats the same dead horse trying to have it both ways: "Wikileaks is putting people in danger by releasing information that isn't at all important".

Glenn Greenwald continues his work on being my favourite person on the internet by twitter feed alone. Set 'em straight, Glenn Old Boy.

Anonymous rips a hole in Gawker for sassing about 4chan. I didn't need another reason to be wary of those folks, but hey, here it is. Also Amazon went down in Europe for a while...but they say it's a hardware issue. Merry Christmas, online shoppers!

The Nation's weekend liveblog made me laugh out loud in public. "Vatican responds to damaging cables carried by The Guardian. Calls them 'unreliable' of course.   Surprised they aren't just trying to transfer them to another parish." You win, sirs.

Assange has a barrister working for him that's got an interesting track record... his cases tend to change the world.

Donald Rumsfeld, the Skeletor of US Foreign Policy, is publishing 100 previously-classified US gov documents to support his new book (which I'm not linking, because it's going to be ridiculous). He is quick to point out on Facebook that it's not at all like wikileaks. Mostly because he's Donald Rumsfeld, his agenda is not going to go against state-secrecy interests, and the US government will declassify whatever he tells it to. Surprise!

Steve Yelvington writes a media blog that talks about Five Sad Reasons the American Press Isn't Outraged. Read it, it's good. If you need more coercing, read this:

"The network news organizations are hollow shells speaking to dying audiences, fearful of accelerating their own demise by taking a stand...It used to be that telling a lie about a person or a corporation could get you into trouble. Now governments and corporations can claim injury when someone states a fact, and, stunningly, act to enforce silence without any judicial oversight." 

Crazy world, folks.

No less than 6 New Leaking Sites make Leaking the new black

Y'know when someone has a good/interesting/profitable idea that gets a little press, and suddenly copycats spring up everywhere?

Well, we're never getting away from anonymous-sourced-leaking now.

Wikileaks, meet OpenLeaks, BrusselsLeaks, BalkanLeaks, WikiSpooks, Cryptome, and IndoLeaks. You have a lot in common.

The link above is a breakdown of each of these sites based on security, by understandably-paranoid techie-types mildly obsessed about encryption. It doesn't have an awful lot to say on the implications of the Wikileaks model of primary source journalism, but I think those implications are rather important. So here's my take:

US government, good luck stopping something that has proven so bloody useful and sensational that it's scattered and decentralized. It would take an effort, both human and electronic, so massive and unwieldy that's impractical. It still probably wouldn't work. And it would out you as crazy-fascist, leaving you looking quite a lot like China, who you've been benefiting from a comparison of difference with for some time now.

More than the Wikileaks mirrors, or even the insurance file, this makes the practice of leaking confidential documents so decentralized it's basically unkillable.

Wheeeeeee!

The spin-machine reaps what it sows: 70% of Americans believe the leaks do more harm than good.

from Jane Heller, who illustrates how I feel.

In a survey of 1,029 adults in the states, 59% of americans think those who publish the leaks should be prosecuted.  I found the results here. Things shake down predictably from there. I curtailed my automatic visceral-frustration reaction of "UGH, naturally" for a moment, and did some research. I wanted to know why.

A quick online survey of American news coverage and soundbites showed me a few trends: lots of talking-head American politicians talking ad nauseum about how the leaks "are putting American lives at risk", the "reckless dumping of information" endangering diplomacy and "the troops", and US politicians and the Attorney General looking for ways to prosecute Julian Assange.
If that picture was the only picture I was getting, I'd have these opinions too.

Unfortunately, most of the coverage people are basing their opinions on is BLATANTLY COUNTER-FACTUAL.


Let's recap, even though I'm making myself sick with how many times I've repeated this:

-the leaks have been heavily engineered to protect the people in them. Wikileaks has NEVER placed lives in danger in the four-year history they have been leaking documents, including those from the military.

-the leaks were redacted both by wikileaks staffers and the staff of five major international papers--thats edited-in-advance, pre-publication, to take out sensitive information--to protect the people in them. The US State Department was approached to help with this redaction process, and refused the offer to have a say in what went to print.  Less than half of one percent of the information Wikileaks possesses has been published. This is not what a "reckless publication" looks like.

-Julian Assange et al, in leaking the Cables, have not broken any laws in the United States. Not spying laws, not confidentiality clauses, not intellectual property statutes. The sources of the information may have obtained it illegally, but none of that has anything to do with the actions of Wikileaks. Journalistic organizations are not required to disclose their sources, nor are they required to only use information that has been obtained through legal means.

Which makes me even MORE inclined to believe the leaks to be "net-good". News aggregates, especially American ones, have clearly been disinclined to report facts for a long while, opting instead to cosy up to big government interests in order to... I dont know, ensure someone will actually talk to them at the Republican National Convention. The days of the Pentagon Papers are done, and major news networks don't seen to be missing them.

If I had to choose between so much spin that the news is basically useless, or huge volumes of leaked but true information, my choice is obvious.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Feel free to decide which is which.


Is something true just because power says it is?
"Let me be very clear, WikiLeaks is not a whistleblower website and Assange is not a journalist.”

Hillicon Valley (read: tech+politics blog) reports that since they can't find a law Assange actually broke, they're just gonna make one up.

An argument against the "continued infantilizing of the public"--and an assertion that the cables are going to change the way we listen to edited, elite-printed news bits in the future.

I think this is going to help divide news from spin. How would an earlier leak like this have changed the decision to go to war in Iraq, for example? 

Also, read this:

"It took a libertine to prove that information enriched the functioning of British society, a brave maverick who was constantly moving house – and sometimes country – to avoid arrest; whose epic sexual adventures had been used by the authorities as a means of entrapping and imprisoning him. The London mob came out in his favour and, supplemented by shopkeepers and members of the gentry on horseback, finally persuaded the establishment of the time to accept that publication was inevitable. And the kingdom did not fall."

That's the Guardian's Henry Porter. He's talking about John Wilkes, the guy who ostensibly created freedom of the press in the UK in 1774.

Porter also says this about the leaks:

"I don't argue for a free-for-all, regardless of the consequences. In the WikiLeaks cables, knowledge and the editing and reporting skills found in the old media, combined with the new ability to locate and seize enormous amounts of information on the web, has actually resulted in responsible publication, with names, sources, locations and dates redacted to protect people's identities and their lives."

 And finally: the screenplays and film treatments are only a matter of time--but we've already got the Wikileaks Video Game. Play a fictional Assange, waiting in the Oval office for Obama to fall asleep so he can steal government documents and do other things that have nothing to do with what actually happened.

(It'd be better if it was played as Bradley Manning seeing war crimes in action, fighting personal demons and Drill Sergeants as he obtains the Afghani War Logs and gets them to the anonymous dropbox, but whatevs.)

PDF Symposium Highlights, some Criticism, and a CableCount

-Some awesome stuff from the Personal Democracy Forum Symposium on Wikileaks today! CBS news sifted through some of the hours of live feed to give us some quotables--but video of the unfettered and non-diluted  awesomeness can be found here. Some stuff I liked, for your brain-churning pleasure:

Jay Rosen, NYU journalism professor: "In my mind, Wikileaks is the world's first stateless news organization...You've heard of voting with you feet? The sources are voting with their leaks. If they trusted the newspapers more, they would be going to the newspapers."

from personaldemocracy.com

Carne Ross, founder and director of the Independent Diplomat: If WikiLeaks and other emerging organizations continue, we need to develop a new discourse on the responsibility they must bear. 

Jeff Jarvis' Amended Bill of Rights in Cyberspace

I. We have the right to connect.

II. We have the right to speak freely.

III. We have the right to assemble and act.

IV. Information should be public by default, secret by necessity.

V. What is public is a public good.

VI. All bits are created equal.

VII. The internet shall be operated openly.

-I also found an article by a Ph. D in psychology that talks about what she discovered when she decided to do some research on that megalomaniac with the hair everyone's talking about, and the organization with all the state secrets. It's probably the best-worded and most comprehensive talk I've seen about why we should care about what's really going on--and it managed to communicate some things that I've been thinking for days and don't have the neurons to get out effectively.
Read Five Wikileaks Myths and their Disturbing Truths, by Elaine Shpungin, a woman with the greatest last name in the history of the planet. I might wind up re-posting it again on its own, it's so useful.


-Wikileaks criticism: Yes, that's right, I'm calling shenanigans. Reports are coming in that it looks like wikileaks is not living up to promises made to Private Bradley Manning, the 22 year old reputed-original-leak-source of the Afghan War Logs, locked up in Quantico for the last 200 days. There's confusion and anger about the amount of monetary compensation, or the timeliness in which that compensation is being delivered. I don't quite know what's going on, but I DO know this--if Manning was the source, I feel like wikileaks has a responsibility for him. I know your bank accounts were messed with and there's a lot going on in your court, but pull up your socks, guys.

-French Newspaper Liberation set up a wikileaks mirror--the first example of mirroring from a press company, and a rather strong show of solidarity. Wonder what'll happen if the States manage to work up a law that makes the publication of these things illegal...

Cable Count:  as of Dec 10th, Wikileaks has leaked 1,269 cables. That's half of one percent of the cables they possess. Meanwhile, accusations of "reckless publishing" still fly.




...Oh, and one last thing.
Report from one of the Cables says that North Korea wanted to increase diplomatic ties by inviting Eric Clapton to play a concert.
He is, of course, our only hope.

http://xcelenergycenter.blogspot.com/2009/02/
eric-clapton-steve-winwood-punch-xcel.html