24 November 2010. Add count of Wikileaks offerings.
23 November 2010. Add three Wikileaks mail list messages.
Wikileaks 7X Silver
Wikileaks tweets biblically: "The coming months will see a new world, where global history is redefined."
Wikileaks says it will release 7X the Iraq War data dump. It is not clear if that means number of files (~2.8MB) or total size of the files (~2.5GB) -- the largest previous single release, ~2.6GB, consisted of 6,700 Congressional Research Service reports.
Earlier giant Afgan and Iraq dumps by Wikileaks have led to a series of innovative uses of selected parts of the data or ingenious applications of all the data reduced to human-consumable narratives, videos, jokes and ridiculous grandstandings. Latest emanation in Google fusion tables provides no greater scrutibility than the incomprehensible multi-thousand-fold arrays published by Wikileaks.
Wikileaks and a few supporting and oppositional media have provided nutshells of what the data is or might be or may turn out to be -- or may not.
What to make of 2.8 million data or 2.5GB mash-up -- words, titles, sentences, names, dates, numbers, lies, stats, bits of junk?
Research libraries brag of their millions of holdings of which a few hundred will be used by an individual or perhaps a few thousand by a dedicated scholar. Wartime officers and TLAs claim to be swamped with spy data which they are unable to process, so ignore to rely upon their own direct sources. Computers process large amounts of data when provided with algorithms to manage the purpose of the job. High-speed stock market computers process data so fast that humans cannot follow so slow hand-helds generate human-consumable summaries which all too often are no more than best and worst guesses of what the data signifies amply coutured in the best financial investment public relations finery.
Big dumps are like big libraries, big millions killed in war, big billions made on the market, big threats to nations, to health, to peace of mind. For that spy agencies were invented and luxuriously funded in secret.
Wikileaks says that it is the intelligence agency for the people -- a peculiar comparison due to the customary exaggeration, deception and betrayal of bloated and wasteful intelligence agencies. Billions spent spent on them for quadrillions of data classified, lost, misunderstood, abused, covered-up with public relations narratives of biblical fire and brimstone pretension.
For most of its years Wikileaks attacked journalism as untrustworthy while regularly issuing press releases and complaining of being ignored by the press, now it claims to be journalism for official protection from officials. For most of its years Wilileaks attacked spies as treacherously self-serving, now it voluminously big tweets as a public interest spy service trustworthy for faith-based investment while maintaining paranoid secrecy about its allegedly threatened operations, a spies-like-us signal to its big-brother role model which excells at marketing black magic arts and sciences.
7X is in that patois of whispering promises of manifold return on investiment for riches to come. Open your wallet. "Keep us strong."
7X sounds like evangelical code for seven pieces of silver.
From: Julian Assange <julian[at]sunshinepress.org> To: volunteers[at]lists.wikileaks.org Cc: "Julian Assange." <julian[at]wikileaks.org> Subject: [WL-Volunteers] two letters re wikileaks Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:00:36 +0000 (GMT) Some notes as investigations editor. Please comment and proof, and I may submit it as an editorial. Two letters. The first letter is an assult on censorship and a call to harmonize the speech and press laws of nations by summing their freedoms rather than subtracting them. The second letter is a sceptical view of both traditional and alternative media behavior and the Wikileaks experience in dealing with both. ---- First Letter Censorship, like communism, seems like a reasonable enough idea to begin with. While "from each according to his ability and to each according to his need" sounds unarguable, the world has learned that these words call forth a power elite to administer them with coerisive force. Such elites are quick to define the needs of themselves and their cronies as paramount. Similarly, "from each mouth according to its ability and to each ear according to its need" seems harmless enough, but history shows that censorship also requires an anointed class to define 'need' and to make violence against those who do not agree and continue talking. Such power is quickly corrupted. The first ingredient of a democracy is the people's right to know, because without such understanding no human being can meaningfully choose to support anything, let alone a political party. Knowledge is the driver of every political process, every constitution, every law and every regulation. The communication of knowledge is without analog. It is not a piece of furniture and it is not a man throwing a ball. It is unique and demands its own place at the summit of society. Since knowledge is the creator and regulator of all law, it must be placed beyond law. When speech is not free and knowledge of how society operates is restricted, each man becomes an atom, unaware of his own destiny and that of those around him. That the world will change if there is ever truly free speech is not something to be afraid of, rather it is a cause for celebration. Mankind has successfully adapted changes as monumental as electricity and the engine. It can also adapt to a world where state sponsored violence against the communications of consenting adults is not only unlawful, but physically impossible. As knowledge flows across nations it is time to sum the great freedoms of every nation and not subtract them. It is time for the world as an international collective of communicating peoples to arise and say 'here I am!'. ---- Second letter. Wikileaks has been a substantial success, yet with a couple of exceptions, both mainstream and alternative media are paralyzed unless we write press releases or aggressively "lobby" for pickup of our material -- no matter how good the material is. Everything from the main manual for Guantanamo Bay to sensitive reports on Kenyan corruption can sit out in the open before 100,000 readers, including many journalists, and there will be no re-reportage without additional work from us. Such is the demand to control the public that forums of influence behave as fresh faced coquettes with too many suiters. These coquettes long ago stopped cooking their own food and now expect everything to be done for them and lovingly presented on a silver platter with a kiss. When Wikileaks releases documents not in small embargo pools, but immediately to the world, impact is very substantially reduced. Making document supply unlimited while journalistic demand remains fixed pushes perceived (but not actual) journalistic self-interest beneath the threshold of story "profitability". Wikileaks has released substantial scoops recently without using an embargo pool and all have been unreported. Observe that the selection criteria for what is reported is akin to what laws get passed, where voters are replaced by high income readers and lobbyists are replaced by more lobbyists. Do you think books are popular because of what they say? Think again, even the greatest work is franchise operation that bribes everyone from the author to the book store into its promotion. The seething internet is also not a solution, indeed, far from it. While professional investigative journalists are losing their jobs en-mass to press-releases, bloggers, syndication, email, websites, language and cultural homogenization (the daily demand for words is almost fixed, but supply has increased tremendously so value per word has fallen), their analytical abilities have not been replaced. It is easier for Wikileaks to push material into the New York Times or the Guardian than it is to generate original reportage in less influential papers. This is counter-intuitive, but lesser known outlets only reprint press releases, opinion, or thieve stories, while the Times and the Guardian just do it most of the time. The blogosphere, with few exceptions, is no better and merely cuts and pastes what is in the professional press and adds "I agree" together with some flourish, such as reminding the reader how their pussy cat predicted it all along. The primary motivation of bloggers appears to be an intense desire to demonstrate an in-group position on the issue de jour. We can see this with great clarity at somewhere like dailykos.org. Bloggers have, despite all the rhetoric, little or no interest in revealing a new truth before they know which way the wind blows, even when it is thrust before them and all that is required is some hours to make it look pretty. A good example of this latter phenomena is the Wikileaks release of a high level classified intelligence report on the battle of Fallujah -- one of the most important events in the Iraq post war environment. We gave it to thousands, but it was our writers and professional journalists at traditional media bodies who wrote about it. Everyone else cut & pasted. Western bloggers are not failing investigative journalism merely because they don't have sources. Wikileaks throws freshly leaked classified documents into their laps and says "go!". They are failing because they just don't give a damn. If they really gave a damn about the truth they'd throw in their jobs as technicians, librarians, waiters, teachers and bureaucrats and become journalists, historians, intelligence analysts, cosmologists, activists, anti-corruption analysts etc (and it is from these last groups that all Wikileaks writers derive). Some say this miserly response is about source credibility, but it is the publications most respected for credibility that carry Wikileaks material. Any decent journalist can look at a complicated leaked document, such as a manual for Guantanamo Bay, and say within minutes that it is what it claims to be sans subtle modifications, call up the designated authoring organization and ask 'Do you deny it? Will you investigate the leak?" and find themselves with an interesting story for every possible response, which is exactly what Reuters, The New York Times and even Wikinews have done with Wikileaks sourced material. Real credibility, being a cousin of the truth, it is the call of all but the game of the few. For most, the call to credibility is merely an excuse to keep on cut & pasting press releases, fangless opinion articles, and thieved material from other publications. Apparently cut & paste and blather pushes out more words per second than actually writing something useful. The bulk of the media class does not seek real credibility. What it longs for is "blame-ability" which is something altogether different. It is blame-ability that permits smiling while reprinting egregious lies -- safe in the knowledge that the buck may be passed. Whether it is to the mouth of Colin Powel or the pen of Judith Miller is is blame-ability that ensures a ready supply of calumny and catastrope without apology. _______________________________________________ Volunteers mailing list Volunteers[at]lists.wikileaks.org https://lists.wikileaks.org/mailman/listinfo/volunteersDate: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:59:43 +0000 (GMT) From: Wikileaks Press Office <press-office[at]wikileaks.org> Subject: [WIKILEAKS] Wikileaks letter The Sunshine Press (Wikileaks) is in a dire financial position. We need your letter of support. Although we expect to receive some $2M in funding later this year, there has been no formal funding since last year. This organization's positive world impact has never been higher, but it is, as a consequence, also more expensive run and ran out of formal funding four months ago. Since that time our staff and lawyers have funded the entire organization from their modest personal savings and anyone else they can find to assist. The reason that impartial, revelatory investigative journalism has been traditionally funded by readers is that governments and billionaires alike will not support groups which are tasked to expose and reform them. Despite being universally recognized as being the most important stimulus of democratic reforms, government funding for such organizations is non-existent. At the same time organizations which are guaranteed to have no domestic political impact are well funded. On-line donations, an important buttress to our ability to take on all governments and companies with total independence, have amounted to around $10,000 since the beginning of the year. Costs outside of court actions are almost $400,000 per year. Our $2M funding injection later this year will support a radical expansion of our mission. Until then, your support, and that of your friends and colleagues, will mean the difference between continuing to fight the good fight and shutting down. If you support our work or have benefited from our cause, please write a strong letter of recommendation we can to present to additional funding bodies. You may examine our front page or google news for ideas. Also consider an easy on-line donation; every contribution, no matter how small, will directly extend the number of months and days we can continue taking on the world: https://secure.wikileaks.org/ Send support letters to wl-supporters[at]sunshinepress.org Thank you. +-------------------------------------------------- | Why you receive this mail and what to do with it: | | You are receiving this mail because you were invited to | the Wikileaks Press Release list run by the transparency group Sunshine Press. | | Releases ensure you are aware, before the rest of the world, | of significant geopolitical and other disclosures released | by Wikileaks, an international platform for the first release of | of classified, confidential or censored materials of political, | diplomatic, ethical or historical interest. | | We rely on you to distribute the content of this mail to your | community, industry, press and regulators, to defend us in your | country and to invite people of integrity and commitment via | via https://lists.riseup.net/www/subscribe/wl-press | | Our materials range from secret Guantanamo documents to political | assassinations to confidential reports of children's hospital | corruption, and have spawned tens of thousands of press articles, | many reforms and changed electoral outcomes. | | Releases average one per week but can be higher or lower depending on | events. You can easily set the frequency to monthly or change your | subscription via https://lists.riseup.net/www/sendpasswd/ | | If you know people that have access to sensitive documents of public | interest, tell them about us. We have an unbroken record of protecting | sensitive sources and defeating censorship attacks from all corners of the globe. | See https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:Submissions | | If you are about to release an investigative report or article, we can release the | underlaying source material concurrently to substantiate the allegations, | draw attention away from the true source, deflect legal or censorship | attacks and promote secondary investigations and public awareness. | | Live bank-grade encrypted chat to the office is available via | https://secure.wikileaks.org/chat/irc2.cgi (multiple languages spoken) | | Inquiries for speaking engagements, comment, interventions, | investigations,