Blogger Template by Blogcrowds.




Julian Assange
Australian-born WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange in London in July. Source: AFP
WIKILEAKS is at the centre of a new row after publishing uncensored police files from the investigation into a child killer.
The files include lurid evidence and wild accusations against one of Belgium's leading politicians.
A senior prosecutor vowed to try to block the 1235-page dossier, much of which is drawn from interviews with rent boys and with Marc Dutroux, a pedophile who was jailed for life in 2004 for killing four girls and a former associate.
It is the latest controversy to engulf the whistleblowing website, whose founder, Julian Assange, is being investigated in Sweden on suspicion of molesting a 30-year-old woman who helped to organise his lecture tour. Mr Assange denies any wrongdoing.
Last month WikiLeaks was widely condemned for publishing uncensored secret reports on the Afghan war, some of which named informants now said to be at risk of reprisals.
The Dutroux case left a deep scar on the Belgian psyche because it exposed a hidden world of child sex abuse but also triggered unproven conspiracy theories of a pedophile network reaching into the highest levels of society.
A leading Belgian politician was cleared of any suspicion of pedophilia or connection with Dutroux in 1996 after being named during the investigation. The dossier published by WikiLeaks revives those allegations against the politician, adding to the sense of outrage in Belgium.
"There is some true, some false, some very disparate information here, involving some people who have done nothing wrong, who have simply been mentioned in an investigation and are thus exposed to public contempt, whereas all this material should have remained classified," said Cedric Visart de Bocarme, the prosecutor general of Liege.
"There is some wild stuff in these documents. Some witnesses are prejudiced and would say anything to try to blacken their neighbour, to make themselves seem white than white."
Mr de Bocarme said that he was trying to find a way to block access in Belgium to the document on the WikiLeaks website but would not say how this might be possible. He rejected any suggestion that publication might be defended as in the public interest.
"This is a false defence in my view because WikiLeaks is giving information which is false and which invades private life," he said. "It is scandalous to use the explanation of transparency because inquiries of this kind should remain confidential."
Dutroux murdered two girls and, while he was in custody for three months concerning a car theft, another two starved to death locked in his cellar. Police had searched the house but failed to find Julie Lejeune and Melissa Russo, both aged eight.
Jean-Denis Lejeune, Julie's father, said that "exposing in full view" the contents of the investigations was "pure voyeurism". The dossier was originally posted on WikiLeaks in April last year but has only now come to the attention of Belgian authorities.
Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for WikiLeaks, said that he was surprised that the material had caused a stir now. "It comes at a time when there is a lot of controversy around WikiLeaks - it is very interesting," he said. "It is a bit of an old story."
Asked whether WikiLeaks would consider removing or redacting identities in the files, he said: "That has not been discussed."


Norway’s intelligence service had previously been criticised for its failure to keep track of suspected terror cells and the country was felt to be complacent about the prospect of a terror attack, secret cables from the WikiLeaks files reveal.

Smoke pours from a building in the centre of Oslo
Image 1 of 3
Smoke pours from a building in the centre of Oslo Photo: EPA
A memo written in 2009, describes the country’s security service as “in over its head” and adds “it simply cannot keep up.”
Separate cables state that the country felt “immune” from terrorism and that groups such as Al Qaeda were “not a direct threat”.
One memo describes how US authorities had to “press” their Norwegian counterparts to take terrorism seriously and says there was a feeling “that terrorism happens elsewhere, not in peaceful Norway.”
Talking about an attempt by the Police Security Service (PST) to track one particular suspected Al Qaeda terror cell, a cable written by the US Ambassador to Norway, Barry White, describes investigators as “committed, competent and co-operative, generally”.
But he goes on to describe how they refused the help of the UK authorities to put surveillance on a potential suspect and adds: “Not only will they not put their own resources on him…but they also just turned down the visiting UK intel service’s offer of two twelve-person surveillance teams.”
The cable goes on to say the UK and US intelligence services analysed coded conversation between terror suspects and decided it warranted surveillance.
But, says the cable, “PST instead found a way to interpret the same translated coded conversation in a rosier, less threatening light, an interpretation which makes little sense to the US or UK.”
The memo also reveals how, despite apparently having surveillance on the suspect, the PST lost track of bomb-making equipment which was being stored in an apartment after it was apparently removed without investigators noticing.
The PST then failed to track one suspect for 14 days because the investigator assigned to him was called away on another job.
The memo concludes: “The PST is in over its head…it simply cannot keep up.”
A second memo, written in 2007, is titled “Pakistani Norwegians ripe for radicalisation?”
It warns of the potential of Pakistani-Norwegian youths being radicalised and describes Norway as a “country that continues to feel immune from terrorism”.
The same memo adds: “The official police (PST) threat evaluation…states that international terror organisations are not a direct threat against Norway.
A memo written in 2008 shows how the US felt that Norway was not awake to the possibility of a potential terrorist attack. The cable reads: “We repeatedly press Norwegian authorities to take terrorism seriously.
“We will seek to build on this momentum to fight the still-prevalent feeling that terrorism happens elsewhere, not in peaceful Norway.”
And a cable written just last year adds: “The PST still viewed Denmark as more of a target than Norway, for reasons very specific to the cartoon controversy.”

Guantanamo Bay has been used to incarcerate dozens of terrorists who have admitted plotting terrifying attacks against the West – while imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people, top-secret files disclose.

Some 174 prisoners are currently being held at Guantánamo
Image 1 of 3
Guantanamo Bay has been used to incarcerate dozens of terrorists who have admitted plotting terrifying attacks against the West – while imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people, top-secret files disclose. Photo: AFP/GETTY
Al-Qaeda terrorists have threatened to unleash a “nuclear hellstorm” on the West if Osama Bin Laden is caught or assassinated, according to documents to be released by the WikiLeaks website, which contain details of the interrogations of more than 700 Guantanamo detainees.
However, the shocking human cost of obtaining this intelligence is also exposed with dozens of innocent people sent to Guantanamo – and hundreds of low-level foot-soldiers being held for years and probably tortured before being assessed as of little significance.
The Daily Telegraph, along with other newspapers including The Washington Post, today exposes America’s own analysis of almost ten years of controversial interrogations on the world’s most dangerous terrorists. This newspaper has been shown thousands of pages of top-secret files obtained by the WikiLeaks website.
The disclosures are set to spark intense debate around the world about the establishment of Guantanamo Bay in the months after 9/11 – which has enabled the US to collect vital intelligence from senior Al Qaeda commanders but sparked fury in the middle east and Europe over the treatment of detainees.
The files detail the background to the capture of each of the 780 people who have passed through the Guantanamo facility in Cuba, their medical condition and the information they have provided during interrogations.

Only about 220 of the people detained are assessed by the Americans to be dangerous international terrorists. A further 380 people are lower-level foot-soldiers, either members of the Taliban or extremists who travelled to Afghanistan whose presence at the military facility is questionable.
At least a further 150 people are innocent Afghans or Pakistanis, including farmers, chefs and drivers who were rounded up or even sold to US forces and transferred across the world. In the top-secret documents, senior US commanders conclude that in dozens of cases there is “no reason recorded for transfer”.
However, the documents do not detail the controversial techniques used to obtain information from detainees, such as water-boarding, stress positions and sleep deprivation, which are now widely regarded as tantamount to torture.
The Guantanamo files confirm that the Americans have seized more than 100 Al-Qaeda terrorists, including about 15 kingpins from the most senior echelons of the organisation.
The most senior detainee at the facility is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the operational commander of Al-Qaeda and the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, who will face a military tribunal later this year after plans for a full-scale trial in New York were abandoned.
His 15-page-file discloses that he was plotting Al-Qaeda attacks around the world in Asia, Africa, America and Britain. It concludes: “Detainee had numerous plots and plans for operations targeting the US, its allies, and its interests world-wide.”
It adds: “Detainee stated that as an enemy of the US, he thought about the US policies with which he disagreed and how he could change them. Detainee’s plan was to make US citizens suffer, especially economically, which would put pressure on the US government to change its policies. Targeting priorities were determined by initially assessing those that would have the greatest economic impact, and secondly which would awaken people politically.”
It can also today be disclosed that:
*A senior Al-Qaeda commander claimed that the terrorist group has hidden a nuclear bomb in Europe which will be detonated if Bin-Laden is ever caught or assassinated. The US authorities uncovered numerous attempts by Al-Qaeda to obtain nuclear materials and fear that terrorists have already bought uranium. Sheikh Mohammed told interrogators that Al-Qaeda would unleash a “nuclear hellstorm”.
*The 20th 9/11 hijacker, who did not ultimately travel to America and take part in the atrocity, has revealed that Al-Qaeda was seeking to recruit ground-staff at Heathrow amid several plots targeting the world’s busiest airport. Terrorists also plotted major chemical and biological attacks against this country.
*A plot to put cyanide in the air-conditioning units of public buildings across America was exposed along with several schemes to target infrastructure including utility networks and petrol stations. Terrorists were also going to rent apartments in large blocks and set off gas explosions.
*About 20 juveniles, including a 14-year old boy have been held at Guantanamo. Several pensioners, including an 89 year old with serious health problems were incarcerated.
*People wearing a certain model of Casio watch from the 1980s were seized by American forces in Afghanistan on suspicion of being terrorists, because the watches were used as timers by Al-Qaeda. However, the vast majority of those captured for this reason have since been quietly released amid a lack of evidence.
*Bin Laden fled his hideout in the Tora Bora mountain range in Afghanistan just days before coalition troops arrived. The last reported sighting of the Al-Qaeda leader was in spring 2003 when several detainees recorded he had met other terrorist commanders in Pakistan.
Guantanamo Bay was opened by the American Government in January 2002 at a military base in Cuba. The establishment of the controversial facility required a special presidential order as “enemy combatants” were held without trial.
A series of controversial torture-style techniques were also approved to be used on prisoners and many foreign Governments, including the British, pressed for their citizens to be released. However, the files disclose that British intelligence services apparently co-operated with Guantanamo interrogators.
Barack Obama had pledged to close the facility and hold open trials for those found to have committed crimes. However, the US President has failed to fulfil his pledge amid concerns over the admissibility of evidence collected during torture.
The files disclosed today also show that American military commanders implicitly acknowledged that dozens of people were incorrectly captured and sent to Guantanamo.
Many of the details are likely to be seized upon by human-rights campaigners and add to pressure of George W Bush, the former US President, to apologise for the operation of the camp.
For example, Muhammed al Ghazali Babaker Mahjoub, was the director of orphanages for a Saudi charity working in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The charity was suspected of having financial links to Al Qaeda and Mahjoub was therefore arrested and transferred to Guantanamo because of “his knowledge of displaced persons in and around Pakistan and Afghanistan, specifically the orphan population.”
But, after a year in detention, and several interrogations in which he co-operated fully, the US military concluded his information was “not valuable” and that the charity worker had no links to any terrorist organisation. He was released.
An analysis of the Guantanamo files shows that at least 150 people were assessed by the Americans as innocent and released.
A total of about 200 detainees are classified as genuine international terrorists by the American military, with the remainder being mid or low level foot-soldiers.
599 detainees have already been released – some to prisons in other countries. About 180 people are still held at Guantanamo.
In the coming days, The Daily Telegraph will expose the crucial role that Britain has played in the global terrorist network that has been documented by those held at Guantanamo – with London emerging as a key “crucible” where extremists from around the world are radicalised and sent to fight jihad.

Denmark's Defense Ministry says it wants to know if its troops abused prisoners in Iraq after a Danish newspaper and the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks published evidence.
The details of the alleged violations have not been forthcoming from any of the sources the ministry has tried to reach, including Denmark’s NATO allies.
Dagbladet daily refused to give any information to the government because of the need to protect its source. WikiLeaks has said it is ready to give part of the data.
Some fear the ministry needs the information to punish the informant, rather than the offenders, despite officials insisting they just want a clear picture of events.
“If anything had happened in the wrong way, of course, we should be open about that. But to be sure that there is no new information in Wikileaks’ documents, we ask that Wikileaks provide us the 400,000 documents so that we can actually work them through to compare with our own information,” said Gitte Lillelund Bech, Denmark's Defence Minister.
But the whistleblower website was not the first place Denmark went to in its supposed quest for the truth.
A Danish newspaper had the documents in its possession for quite some time – and not from the same source as Wikileaks.
“We did not give them the documents because it's a source protection thing for the newspaper,” says Danish investigative journalist Charlotte Aagaard from Dagbladet Information based in Copenhagen.
With the paper keen to protect informants' identities, the Danish military ran into another dead end.
After being refused access to the information by NATO and their American counterparts, Danish defense officials have been forced to turn to Wikileaks. Ironically enough, RT got to see those documents before they did.
None of the web logs on the topic have been seen by Danish military chiefs, something which journalists here find astonishing.
“They could get the documents from the Americans, because Americans are close allies of Denmark and these documents are American,” Charlotte Aagaard said.
Former military intelligence officer Frank Grevil thinks there is a different agenda at work.
“It only shows that the Danish government has a viewpoint regarding freedom of speech which is always bent to suit itself,” Frank Grevil says. “If it's embarrassing news that is leaked, they will do whatever they can to punish the messenger, but if it's leaks that will somehow support the government's politics, then they're legal.”
Grevil, himself, was arrested and jailed six years ago for leaking classified information which revealed there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And, if top military brass does not like what they discover this time, it might just be that once again it will be a website which tells the Danish people what their soldiers were really doing in Iraq.

 A 2007 cable from the US Embassy to Kiev, leaked by Wikileaks and quoted by HotNews.ro on Sunday, notes that Ukrainians were speaking of a theory according to which politicians in the Republic of Moldova promoting a pro-European policy were silently supporting Moldova's entry in the EU through Romania, with a possibility that Moldova on the right bank of Dniester eventually join Romania, while the left bank (Transdniester) turn to Ukraine. Instead of being absorbed by Romania, Moldova on the right bank of Dniester would unite 

with Romania in a supra-national structure cold "Romanova", according to the cable, which is classified confidential.

A long series of Wikileaks documents were published by HotNews.ro on Sunday. Other media in Romania also published cables later yesterday.

The cable, as quoted by HotNews.ro on the Romanian version of the website, notes that Andrey Veselovsky, then deputy Foreign Affairs Minister in Ukraine voiced his concerns  related to Moldova’s relations with Romania, a position which he said was shared by the another prominent Ukrainian official, Oleksandr Chaly, who has served as Ukraine’s Ambassador to Romania.

The Romanian version of HotNews.ro also quotes other cables from Ukraine regarding the country's relations with Romania.

The 2005 London bombings were a “natural consequence” of Britain’s policy of sheltering terrorists, and the U.K. government was warned in advance, newly leaked documents show.

WikiLeaks, London, bombings, train, terrorists, asylum, Islamic, immigrants, AP photoAmerican diplomats sent a cable just five days before the bombings saying Britain had ignored repeated warnings about the number of Islamic refugees making the country home, reports the Daily Telegraph.

Many of the refugees fled to England because they were wanted for terrorist outrages elsewhere, the cable, obtained by the website WikiLeaks, shows.

The bombs killed 52 people on London’s transport system in July 2005.

The cable came from a former military attaché at the Algerian embassy in Washington. It warned U.S. diplomats that Britain was “aligning itself with the devil” by giving asylum to members of two “very dangerous” terrorist groups. Washington passed the cable on to London.

“The British thought that sheltering terrorists was a good solution, but they did not realize that one can never align oneself with the devil, and they did precisely that for years and years,” warned the Algerian.

Lord West, security adviser to former British leader Gordon Brown, admitted the country was “very slow in realizing the danger of the radicalization that was going on.

“Some of these ghastly people said loathsome things about our nation and our way of life,” said West. “Yet when you tried to get them to return to their own country they stuck here like bloody limpets.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: WikiLeaks: UK Warned Ahead of London Bombings
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Embassy dispatches show America used spying, threats and promises of aid to get support for Copenhagen accord

WikiLeaks cables: Cancún climate talks doomed to fail, says EU president
Cancún climate change summit: Week one in pictures

A Greenpeace activist in a hot air ballon ahead of the UN climate summit in Cancún
A Greenpeace activist in a hot air ballon ahead of the current UN climate summit in Cancún. WikiLeaks cables expose US use of espionage before the 2009 Copenhagen summit. Photograph: Luis Perez/AFP/Getty Images
Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate changenegotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.
The US diplomatic cables reveal how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm opposition to the controversial "Copenhagen accord", the unofficial document that emerged from the ruins of the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009.
Negotiating a climate treaty is a high-stakes game, not just because of the danger warming poses to civilisation but also because re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.
Seeking negotiating chips, the US state department sent a secret cable on 31 July 2009 seeking human intelligence from UN diplomats across a range of issues, including climate change. The request originated with the CIA. As well as countries' negotiating positions for Copenhagen,diplomats were asked to provide evidence of UN environmental "treaty circumvention" and deals between nations.
But intelligence gathering was not just one way. On 19 June 2009, the state department sent a cable detailing a "spear phishing" attack on the office of the US climate change envoy, Todd Stern, while talks with China on emissions took place in Beijing. Five people received emails, personalised to look as though they came from the National Journal. An attached file contained malicious code that would give complete control of the recipient's computer to a hacker. While the attack was unsuccessful, the department's cyber threat analysis division noted: "It is probable intrusion attempts such as this will persist."
The Beijing talks failed to lead to a global deal at Copenhagen. But the US, the world's biggest historical polluter and long isolated as a climate pariah, had something to cling to. The Copenhagen accord, hammered out in the dying hours but not adopted into the UN process, offered to solve many of the US's problems.
The accord turns the UN's top-down, unanimous approach upside down, with each nation choosing palatable targets for greenhouse gas cuts. It presents a far easier way to bind in China and other rapidly growing countries than the UN process. But the accord cannot guarantee the global greenhouse gas cuts needed to avoid dangerous warming. Furthermore, it threatens to circumvent the UN's negotiations on extending the Kyoto protocol, in which rich nations have binding obligations. Those objections have led many countries – particularly the poorest and most vulnerable – to vehemently oppose the accord.
Getting as many countries as possible to associate themselves with the accord strongly served US interests, by boosting the likelihood it would be officially adopted. A diplomatic offensive was launched. Diplomatic cables flew thick and fast between the end of Copenhagen in December 2009 and late February 2010, when the leaked cables end.
Some countries needed little persuading. The accord promised $30bn (£19bn) in aid for the poorest nations hit by global warming they had not caused. Within two weeks of Copenhagen, the Maldives foreign minister, Ahmed Shaheed, wrote to the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, expressing eagerness to back it.
By 23 February 2010, the Maldives' ambassador-designate to the US, Abdul Ghafoor Mohamed, told the US deputy climate change envoy, Jonathan Pershing, his country wanted "tangible assistance", sayingother nations would then realise "the advantages to be gained by compliance" with the accord.
A diplomatic dance ensued. "Ghafoor referred to several projects costing approximately $50m (£30m). Pershing encouraged him to provide concrete examples and costs in order to increase the likelihood of bilateral assistance."
The Maldives were unusual among developing countries in embracing the accord so wholeheartedly, but other small island nations were secretly seen as vulnerable to financial pressure. Any linking of the billions of dollars of aid to political support is extremely controversial – nations most threatened by climate change see the aid as a right, not a reward, and such a link as heretical. But on 11 February, Pershing met the EU climate action commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, in Brussels, where she told him, according to a cable, "the Aosis [Alliance of Small Island States] countries 'could be our best allies' given their need for financing".
The pair were concerned at how the $30bn was to be raised and Hedegaard raised another toxic subject – whether the US aid would be all cash. She asked if the US would need to do any "creative accounting", noting some countries such as Japan and the UK wanted loan guarantees, not grants alone, included, a tactic she opposed. Pershing said "donors have to balance the political need to provide real financing with the practical constraints of tight budgets", reported the cable.
Along with finance, another treacherous issue in the global climate negotiations, currently continuing in Cancún, Mexico, is trust that countries will keep their word. Hedegaard asks why the US did not agree with China and India on what she saw as acceptable measures to police future emissions cuts. "The question is whether they will honour that language," the cable quotes Pershing as saying.
Trust is in short supply on both sides of the developed-developing nation divide. On 2 February 2009, a cable from Addis Ababa reports a meeting between the US undersecretary of state Maria Otero and the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi, who leads the African Union's climate change negotiations.
The confidential cable records a blunt US threat to Zenawi: sign the accord or discussion ends now. Zenawi responds that Ethiopia will support the accord, but has a concern of his own: that a personal assurance from Barack Obama on delivering the promised aid finance is not being honoured.
US determination to seek allies against its most powerful adversaries – the rising economic giants of Brazil, South Africa, India, China (Basic) – is set out in another cable from Brussels on 17 February reporting a meeting between the deputy national security adviser, Michael Froman, Hedegaard and other EU officials.
Froman said the EU needed to learn from Basic's skill at impeding US and EU initiatives and playing them off against each in order "to better handle third country obstructionism and avoid future train wrecks on climate".
Hedegaard is keen to reassure Froman of EU support, revealing a difference between public and private statements. "She hoped the US noted the EU was muting its criticism of the US, to be constructive," the cable said. Hedegaard and Froman discuss the need to "neutralise, co-opt or marginalise unhelpful countries including Venezuela and Bolivia", before Hedegaard again links financial aid to support for the accord, noting "the irony that the EU is a big donor to these countries". Later, in April, the US cut aid to Bolivia and Ecuador, citing opposition to the accord.
Any irony is clearly lost on the Bolivian president, Evo Morales, according to a 9 February cable from La Paz. The Danish ambassador to Bolivia, Morten Elkjaer, tells a US diplomat that, at the Copenhagen summit, "Danish prime minister Rasmussen spent an unpleasant 30 minutes with Morales, during which Morales thanked him for [$30m a year in] bilateral aid, but refused to engage on climate change issues."
After the Copenhagen summit, further linking of finance and aid with political support appears. Dutch officials, initially rejecting US overtures to back the accord, make a startling statement on 25 January. According to a cable, the Dutch climate negotiator Sanne Kaasjager "has drafted messages for embassies in capitals receiving Dutch development assistance to solicit support [for the accord]. This is an unprecedented move for the Dutch government, which traditionally recoils at any suggestion to use aid money as political leverage." Later, however, Kaasjager rows back a little, saying: "The Netherlands would find it difficult to make association with the accord a condition to receive climate financing."
Perhaps the most audacious appeal for funds revealed in the cables is from Saudi Arabia, the world's second biggest oil producer and one of the 25 richest countries in the world. A secret cable sent on 12 February records a meeting between US embassy officials and lead climate change negotiator Mohammad al-Sabban. "The kingdom will need time to diversify its economy away from petroleum, [Sabban] said, noting a US commitment to help Saudi Arabia with its economic diversification efforts would 'take the pressure off climate change negotiations'."
The Saudis did not like the accord, but were worried they had missed a trick. The assistant petroleum minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told US officials that he had told his minister Ali al-Naimi that Saudi Arabia had "missed a real opportunity to submit 'something clever', like India or China, that was not legally binding but indicated some goodwill towards the process without compromising key economic interests".
The cables obtained by WikiLeaks finish at the end of February 2010. Today, 116 countries have associated themselves with the accord. Another 26 say they intend to associate. That total, of 140, is at the upper end of a 100-150 country target revealed by Pershing in his meeting with Hedegaard on 11 February.
The 140 nations represent almost 75% of the 193 countries that are parties to the UN climate change convention and, accord supporters like to point out, are responsible for well over 80% of current global greenhouse gas emissions.
At the mid-point of the major UN climate change negotiations in Cancún, Mexico, there have already been flare-ups over how funding for climate adaptation is delivered. The biggest shock has been Japan's announcement that it will not support an extension of the existing Kyoto climate treaty. That gives a huge boost to the accord. US diplomatic wheeling and dealing may, it seems, be bearing fruit.

Postări mai noi Postări mai vechi Pagina de pornire