According to U.S. Government Assange not a journalist or a whistleblower, but a biased anarchic political actor with an 'agenda'

There is an awful fascination in watching a geo-political giant set out to eliminate one individual and website from any visible presence in cyberspace.

The fascination is heightened by the fact that Julian Assange was born in Townsville, Australia and spent some of his primary school years living in the NSW Northern Rivers region at Lismore.

The latest censorship effort resulted in the whistleblower website losing its U.S. domain name according to an Associated Press report.

In what may be considered the first World Wide Web information war, www.wikileaks.org appears to only be available in Google Cache at the time of writing.

However, this is cyberspace we are talking about and Wikileaks can now be accessed at http://88.80.13.160/ and Cablegate specifically at http://213.251.145.96/cablegate.html. While Wikileaks at Twitter is at http://twitter.com/wikileaks.

From the daily press briefing at the U.S. Department of State on 2 December 2010:

QUESTION: From your perspective, what is WikiLeaks? How do you define them, if it is not a media organization, then?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, as the Secretary said earlier this week, it is – one might infer it has many characteristics of some internet sites. Not every internet site you would call a media organization or a news organization. We’re focused on WikiLeaks’s behavior, and I have had personally conversations with media outlets that are reporting on this, and we have had the opportunity to express our specific concerns about intelligence sources and methods and other interests that could put real lives at risk.

Mr. Assange, in a letter to our Ambassador in the United Kingdom over the weekend, after documents had been released to news organizations, made what we thought was a halfhearted gesture to have some sort of conversation, but that was after he released the documents and after he knew that they were going to emerge publicly. So I think there’s been a very different approach. And Mr. Assange obviously has a particular political objective behind his activities, and I think that, among other things, disqualifies him as being considered a journalist.

QUESTION: What is his political objective?

QUESTION: The same letter --

MR. CROWLEY: Hmm?

QUESTION: What is his political objective?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, his – I mean he could be considered a political actor. I think he’s an anarchist, but he’s not a journalist.

QUESTION: So his objective is to sow chaos, you mean?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I mean, you all come here prepared to objectively report the activities of the United States Government. I think that Mr. Assange doesn’t meet that particular standard.

QUESTION: But just so I understand, P.J., what – I mean you just said the – that you thought he was --

MR. CROWLEY: Well, but I mean – let me – he’s not a journalist. He’s not a whistleblower. And there – he is a political actor. He has a political agenda. He is trying to undermine the international system of -- that enables us to cooperate and collaborate with other governments and to work in multilateral settings and on a bilateral basis to help solve regional and international issues.

What he’s doing is damaging to our efforts and the efforts of other governments. They are putting at risk our national interest and the interests of other governments around the world. He is not an objective observer of anything. He is an active player. He has an agenda. He’s trying to pursue that agenda, and I don’t think he can – he can’t qualify as either a journalist on the one hand or a whistleblower on the other.

QUESTION: Sorry. What is that agenda, that political agenda? Can you be more --

MR. CROWLEY: I’ll leave it for Mr. Assange to define his agenda. He has been interviewed by some of your news organizations. He has the ability to talk for himself. But you asked -- I was asked a specific question, “Do we consider him a journalist?” The answer is no.

* In an allegedly unrelated matter Interpol released this:

_____________________________________________

Sweden authorizes INTERPOL to make public Red Notice for WikiLeaks founder

---

ASSANGE Julian Paul

LYON, France - INTERPOL has made public the Red Notice, or international wanted persons alert, for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the request of Swedish authorities who want to question him in connection with a number of sexual offences.

The Red Notice for the 39-year-old Australian, which was issued to law enforcement in all 188 INTERPOL member countries on 20 November, has now been made publicly available by INTERPOL following official authorization by Sweden.

All INTERPOL National Central Bureaus (NCBs) have also been advised to ensure that their border control agencies are made aware of Assange's Red Notice status, which is a request for any country to identify or locate an individual with a view to their provisional arrest and extradition.

Many of INTERPOL's member countries however, consider a Red Notice a valid request for provisional arrest, especially if they are linked to the requesting country via a bilateral extradition treaty. In cases where arrests are made based on a Red Notice, these are made by national police officials in INTERPOL member countries.

INTERPOL cannot demand that any member country arrests the subject of a Red Notice. Any individual wanted for arrest should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

___________________________________________________

UPDATE:

Wikileaks now has a Torrent download of its 1.38GiB Cablegate file at:

http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/5723136/WikiLeaks_insurance.5723136.TPB.torrent

An interesting dilemma for one local newspaper

One of the persistent news items recently in a local newspaper has been the question of Wooli village and the potential effects of ongoing beach/land erosion.

What is interesting about this coverage is the fact that at least one senior staff member is reputed to own property there and, at the time of writing this post, one journalist (currently on leave) is listed as part of the 10 member media team on the Save Wooli website.

Readers could rightly suspect the motives of any published article on the subject which does not carry a byline and, when appropriate, a declaration of interest.

Medicalising social media in 2010

I suppose it had to happen. The medical profession and drug companies big and small have been redefining the human condition as dysfunctional and in need of pharmaceutical intervention for so long that any significant change in our social culture is bound to become the subject of scrutiny.

This week it was reported that:

According to the Cenovis Chill Pill Survey, 63 per cent of respondents feel social media is contributing to stress levels.

About a third (37 per cent) of these people feel under pressure to be in constant contact, and 35 per cent say there is an expectation to respond quickly to messages.

Thirteen per cent of stressed users say they feel pressure to be witty in writing status updates on Facebook.

Presumably Sanofi-aventis which owns the Cenovis brand is wanting to explore increasing its market share in relation to an allegedly stress-reducing substance which seems to be aimed at the younger end of the consumer spectrum.

What better way than by co-opting the media into doing a bit of free advertising for a small survey?

K-K-Keneally hits back at jibe about her alien birth

So.... it's not just the front bar at my local.

NSW Parliament Hansard 2^nd November 2010:

GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE

Mr ANDREW STONER: My question is directed to the Premier. After 15 years of Labor and a year of her Premiership, in which she has spent attacking the New South Wales Liberals-Nationals in the absence of any substantial policies, will she finally spell out her plans to fix the State, or is she still in denial about the problems?

The SPEAKER: Order! The House will come to order.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: I will answer that question but, as members know, in recent days I have spent a lot of time at my desk reading. I have an advanced copy—

Mr Barry O'Farrell: Point of order: I refer to Standing Order 129, relevance. In the spirit of the season, I have a book for the Premier with a few facts about Australia. It is the Little Aussie Fact Book; it has everything the Premier needs to know about Australia!

The SPEAKER: Order! Members will cease clapping. Members will come to order. I call the member for Lismore to order. I call the member for Wakehurst to order.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: What a remarkable contribution by the Leader of the Opposition!

[Interruption]

Hear me out, because I am about to pay the member for Murrumbidgee a compliment. A few years ago the member for Murrumbidgee made a private member's statement about how people should value the contribution of those who have immigrated to this country.

The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Epping to order.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: In a private member's statement in this House the member for Murrumbidgee talked about valuing the contribution of people, regardless of what country they come from or with which accent they speak. I acknowledge him and his leadership in doing so. Often on weekends I attend functions with the Leader of the Opposition. Every time he stands in front of a multicultural community group he gives a speech about valuing the contribution of migrants to this country.

The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Hawkesbury to order.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: He attends functions, whether it is the Korean community fair, the Chinese New Year—

Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order: I refer to Standing Order 129. I hate to interrupt the Premier's soliloquy, but this is a serious question to which the people of New South Wales deserve an answer.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will resume his seat. The Premier has the call.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: The point of order of the Leader of the Opposition deserves to be acknowledged and addressed, because he attends a number of multicultural community functions.

Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order—

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: Members opposite can try to use my time, but I will get this out.

The SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the point of order. Does the Leader of The Nationals wish to take a different point of order?

Mr Andrew Stoner: No, it is still relevance.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will resume his seat. I call the Leader of The Nationals to order.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: I find it extraordinary. The Leader of the Opposition attends multicultural functions and makes speeches about valuing the contributions of migrants and the contribution they make to the people of Australia. However, when there is a cheap political point to be made in this Chamber he is willing to make it.

Mr Adrian Piccoli: Point of order: I refer to Standing Order 129, relevance. If the Premier uses a prop to make a smart alec point, then she is asking for it.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Murrumbidgee will resume his seat. The Premier has responded to the point of order taken by the Leader of the Opposition, but I remind her of the question before the House.

Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY: I will end on this point: Today we have seen a gross example of hypocrisy. The Leader of the Opposition stands condemned.

The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Epping to order for the second time. As today is the last question time of the year, I have extended a degree of latitude. However, members are pushing the envelope way too far. I will not tolerate further unparliamentary behaviour. Members who continue to interject will be removed from the Chamber.

Cablegate highlights geo-political hypocrisy

Michael Rennie and Benno Hansen deserve a big thank-you for trawling through the Wikileaks Cablegate website for information on climate change geo-politics.

Michael is posting on Think About It and Benno’s document collection can be found at Scribd.

With DOS attacks being more frequently reported by Wikileaks during the last week and Amazon terminating its hosting service to the website, it may be that second party reports such as these will eventually become the blogosphere’s primary source on this subject.

While website connection problems drag on, Wikileaks’ Twitter account continues to offer intriguing hints on other international issue such as:

WikiLeaks reveals US Nuclear Weapons in the Netherlands http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/11/09BERLIN1433.html 1:43 PM Nov 29th via web

The Index of Censorship (of which Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent, who represents Julian Assange in the UK, is a trustee) also posted this pre-cable release correspondence:

26 November
Julian Assange, Editor in Chief, WikiLeaks
to
US Ambassador to London, Louis Susman

Subject to the general objective of ensuring maximum disclosure of information in the public interest, WikiLeaks would be grateful for the United States Government to privately nominate any specific instances (record numbers or names) where it considers the publication of information would put individual persons at significant risk of harm that has not already been addressed. PDF

27 November
Harold Hongju Koh, Legal Adviser, United States Department of State
to
Julian Assange, Editor in Chief, WikiLeaks

We will not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained U.S. Government classified materials. PDF

28 November
Julian Assange, Editor in Chief, WikiLeaks
to
US Ambassador to London, Louis Susman

I understand that the United States government would prefer not to have the information that will be published in the public domain and is not in favour of openness. That said, either there is a risk or there is not. You have chosen to respond in a manner which leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful and you are instead concerned to suppress evidence of human rights abuse and other criminal behaviour. PDF

It is interesting to note that in this exchange a U.S. Government (increasingly careless of international law and human rights) asserted that release of the diplomatic cables would:

Place at risk the lives of countless innocent individuals – from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers to soldiers to individuals providing information to further peace
and security.....

May the gods bless the Australian Broadcasting Commission.....

ABC News on Friday 26 November 2010:

The editor-in-chief of The Australian is threatening to sue a journalism academic over claims published on Twitter that he told a staff member what to write in regards to the paper's coverage of climate change.
In an article published on The Australian's website, Chris Mitchell says he will sue Julie Posetti for defamation because of tweets she made purporting to quote a former rural reporter for The Australian.
Ms Posetti tweeted alleged quotes made yesterday by Asa Walhquist at a journalism conference at the University of Technology, Sydney.
Ms Posetti posted: "Walhquist: 'In the lead up to the election the Ed in Chief was increasingly telling me what to write.' It was prescriptive."
In another tweet Ms Posetti claims Walhquist said: "'It was absolutely excruciating. It was torture': Asa Walhquist on fleeing The Australian after being stymied in covering #climate."......

ABC News has now published audio of a relevant section of Walquist's presentation to the 2010 JEAA Conference (on what I think is Day 2) which appears to support Julie Posetti:

Audio Part One

Audio Part Two

Since those tapes surfaced The Australian appears to be backing down from its hardline stance with this admission on its Media Diary Blog:
Her Tweets are a fair summary of what Wahlquist said.

Sadly (and probably due to those legal threats) the Twitter account julie_posetti appears to have been deleted by its owner, however I'm sure that this incident will make for great reading in Ms. Posetti's work-in-progress thesis The Twitterisation of Journalism.

Julie blogs at http://www.j-scribe.com/ and will be tweeting in future at JounTweet.

* Jonathon Holmes writing on this situation in 140 characters of legal nightmare

Update:

Julie Posetti's original Twitter account appears to be online once more.

Engel's word picture of the Australian Federal Parliament and Tony Abbott in 2010

Only the British media would approach the subject with this much bile, but there is more than an element of truth in Matthew Engel's article Up a Gum Tree in The Financial Times on 26 November 2010:

I have seen a few crazy parliaments. I have watched the Israeli Knesset, where one extreme would happily exterminate the other – and the Dáil in Dublin, the only known gathering of inarticulate Irishmen. I have seen the empty shell that constitutes the US Senate. I have done time at the Commons, and been appalled by the pathetic lack of individuality of the whipped curs. I thought I was unshockable. But Canberra’s House of Rep­resenta­tives is the worst. These curs only snarl as instructed.

Some of the kindly journalists in the Canberra press gallery asked me what I thought. This being a country that prides itself on candour, I told them. They looked at me as though I were crazy. “You should have seen it a few months ago,” they said. “It’s improved no end.”....

Unless they swing round, which Tony Abbott does all the time, turning his back on the PM to confer with his colleagues – especially when she is speaking, a gesture of contempt that would be recognised among primates. There is indeed something rather simian about Abbott: he is a hulking fitness fetishist-cum-exhibitionist, often photographed in the skimpy swimming trunks that Aussies call “budgie-smugglers”. The other week he was spotted running through the parliamentary corridors, past the coffee shop, in his tight black shorts: “It was like watching evolution in reverse,” said one latte drinker........

Under all the circumstances, Australian democracy is a kind of miracle. The country has a remarkable respect for the rule of law and a great sense of civic responsibility (greater than Britain’s, I would say). Quietly, good work does get done in parliament – speaker Harry Jenkins insists – although much of the legislative scrutiny is done by the less powerful Senate. The federal structure ensures that the decisions that affect people’s daily lives are largely made by the individual states.

The entire article can be found here.

Another wonderful Trioli blooper

Crikey and mUmBRELLA might have had it first after YouTube, but it's still worth another airing:



This clip now joins that other delightful gaffe from last year:

Cancún Climate Change Conference: yada, yada, yada

Right now in Cancún, Mexico, the United Nations Climate Change Conference COP16/CMP 6 is underway until 10 December 2010.

As national representatives get to their feet and (as they have done on so many occasions before) talk ineffectively of the need to address global warming, it is worthwhile looking at a visual representation of where Australia’s energy was being drawn from in November 2010.

These pie charts from The Climate Group's The Weekly Greenhouse Gas Indicator represent energy consumption in four of the eight states and territories over one 7 day period.

In descending order, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and Victoria:

Given that only South Australia has managed to consistently reduce greenhouse gas emissions below the 1990 baseline (10% below in this 7 day period), it is also the only state which could be said to be seriously addressing Kyoto commitments.

Victoria is 26% above the 1990 baseline, New South Wales 5.8% above and Queensland an almost unbelievable 109% above that same baseline.

Unfortunately, in Australia energy consumption is still predominately drawn from carbon-based resources and relies heavily on 'dirty' coal.

As the Gillard Government continues to drag its feet on an emissions trading scheme or carbon tax and the Coalition Opposition goes deeper into denial that global warming even exists, how is the average citizen going to respond?

I suggest that individual responsibility does not stop with reducing our personal carbon footprints, it extends to voting out of office every politician who blocks legitimate legislative response to global warming or seeks to water down bills addressing climate change so that carbon-reliant energy companies and industry can continue 'business as usual'.