9 September 2010. Jeremy Kaplan's report:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/08/wikileaks-julian-assange-fights/

8 September 2010. Add exchanges with Alan Taylor, Stefania Maurizi message and kpoulsen and cryptomeorg tweets.

8 September 2010

Jeremy Kaplan called later. Said it's hard to get a handle on the Wikileaks illusions. We swapped acerbics of smoke and smears. He asked that his telephone numbers be removed. Okay. Said he had spoken to Julian. We asked him to give Julian Assange our kiss of support.

Thought to ourselves: there must be as many "Julians" now speaking for Wikileaks as "insiders," terrific pseudo- and anonymous whisperings to entrapped interceptors. Email, telephone, chat, Skype, TOR, disks, thumbs, lost laptops, seized computers, nothing reliable against imposters. It was amusing to read Ben Laurie (security wizard, Wikileaks advisor) saying there is no online confidentiality. Another person opined today on UK Crypto "security theater" is a tautology.

Fox News Nibbles the Wikileaks Insiders Bait

From: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
To: "jya[at]pipeline.com" <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:39:54 -0400
Subject: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Hoping to get to the bottom of the mystery surrounding the so-called wikileaks insiders. I suppose it would be a breach of confidentiality to put me in touch with these folks. Perhaps you could relay a message or something? Or is Alan the one receiving the initial messages? I'd just like some piece of evidence to confirm that they're real. They do seem to have the inside track on info WikiLeaks is about to leak….

What do you think?

Jeremy Kaplan
Science and Technology Editor, FoxNews.com
jeremy.kaplan[at]foxnews.com
Twitter: [at]fxnscitech

[Attached message from Alan Taylor, PGPBoard]

From: alan taylor [mailto:alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 4:21 AM
To: Kaplan, Jeremy; pgpboard[at]pgpboard.com
Subject: Re: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

On 08/09/2010 01:29, Kaplan, Jeremy wrote:

Alan, the wikileaks pr team tells me the calls for Juloian's resignation on PGPBoard are false, citing you guys as evidence. The site comments don't seem conclusive to me either way. I'd love to get the full stoery out. Can we chat?

Regards,

Jeremy Kaplan
Science and tech editor, FoxNews.com

Regards,

Jeremy Kaplan
Science and Technology Editor,
FoxNews.com

[Attached message from Alan Taylor, PGPBoard; Taylor sent a copy to Cryptome earlier.]

Hello Jeremy,

As far as I am concerned the "Wikileaks Insiders" are real, and appear to be a group of core activists in several locations. Our involvement is limited to forwarding their traffic, and in some cases tidying up their English prior to forwarding to their specified recipient, in this case John Young at Cryptome.

They wish to remain anonymous, and I respect this. However, it does leave the "Insiders" open to criticism concerning their motives, identity, and their approach in voicing their grievances. The irony of this, is that the Insiders desire to remain anonymous is criticised by Wikileaks supporters, when Wikileaks themselves was configured to protect the anonymity of the Whistle-blower. Could the "Insiders" be impostors? Yes of course they could, both John Young and I have mentioned this. However, in my opinion they are not, and some of their past messages have highlighted issues at Wikileaks which are only now being examined by the main stream media.

Their call for Assange to step aside is as you see it posted on PGPBOARD.

Birgitta Jónsdóttir email to PGPBOARD

https://eta.securesslhost.net/~pgpboar/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=50&sid=cecd17f1d69090dc8e2e0299a43eafb0

suggests an alternative path for Wikileaks to follow. This would be a general meeting of Wikileaks core activists and supporters. One that is not dominated by Julian Assange and Daniel Schmitt. I think that this would convince Wikileaks global activists that organised change is being considered, and not just a simple coup d'etat to oust Julian Assange.

I will respond to any additional written questions you may have.

Best Regards

Alan Taylor
PGPBOARD Administrator
London, England.

To:: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
From: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010
Subject: RE: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Jeremy,

No, the "insiders" who have sent messages to Cryptome via PGPBoard are not real. However, there is quite a bit about Wikileaks which is also not real. It may be that the insiders are another Wikileaks promotional gimmick to fake threat.

The loosely managed WL group does engage in diverse PR  strategies, to wit, the loose-lipped Iceland parliamentarian gambit. Every day or so another juicy leak.

Among many others since its beginning: The shutdown for lack of money, the roll-out of bombshells, the withholding of submissions claimed to be in the thousands per month, the accusations of USG plots to destroy, the braggardy of a $1million plus raised since the bombshell stunts, mysterious handling of funds, the hard to reach yet eager to exclaim at rigged press shows, the endless Tweets, the rascally spokesman, the sexual allegations, what a carefully calibrated show. Methinks a PR pro is orchestrating this.Assange is one such but appears to be getting professional guidance.

Consumers are agog, the media delirious, the USG pleased. A perfect storm.

Quote me.

Regards,

John
212-873-8700

From: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
To: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
CC: alan taylor <alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:19:13 -0400
Subject: RE: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Some people argue Assange should get professional help, not just guidance.

Jeremy Kaplan
Science and Technology Editor, FoxNews.com
jeremy.kaplan[at]foxnews.com
Twitter: [at]fxnscitech

To:: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
From: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010
Subject: RE: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Indeed, as with all authoritatives. The professional helpers mostso.

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:14:06 +0100
From: alan taylor <alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com>
To: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
CC: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Jeremy,

John and I have differing points of views about the Wikileaks Insiders. However, I do agree with his assessment of Wikileaks. Assange for the moment should stand aside until both the Swedish sex case issues are resolved, and the Wau Holland Foundation delivers it financial review of Wikileaks operations. There is a lot of money sloshing around within Wikileaks with no audit trail, and managed by a group of current and ex-hackers.

Regards

AT

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010
To: alan taylor <alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com>
From: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
CC: "Kaplan, Jeremy" <jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM>
Subject: Re: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

Alan,

While there are potentially thousands of participants in the Wikileaks initiative, and any could legitimately term themselves insiders under the loosely managed anarchism, the source of the "insider" messages sent to Cryptome are uniquely identifiable due to porous security along the path of communication as well as PGP implementation.

This dubious comsec is also a shortcoming of Wikileaks which I have publicly criticized. Ben Laurie, as you know a security wizard and Wikileaks advisor, has recently commented on WL comsec vulnerability although without specifics. I assume he does not want to be stung or sued for misrepresentation -- a risk faced by the Wikileaks advisors.

The comsec critique has been voiced privately by security experts who are reluctant to break the comsec magic spell of Wikileaks and governments -- the latter their prime customers in artifice and potential headbangers for unauthorized disclosure "to the enemies of the United States."

I think the insiders are well out of their league of competency and certainly not unknown. If I know so do others who watch these emails and PGP Board which is not exactly secure. Consider having a hard-eyed, unfriendly wizard do a check.

Regards,

John

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:11:03 +0100
From: alan taylor <alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com>
To: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Are the wikileaks insiders real?

John,

PGPBOARD has never pretended to be spook proof, in fact we include a sentence on our intro page; "If the state and the NSA commit their resources against you"...etc...etc. PGPBOARD does not promote such snake oil.

Let's see how this pans out, what is good is that the main stream media appear to be taking a more objective view of Assange and the Wikileaks set up.

Regards

AT

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 19:12:28 +0200
From: Stefania Maurizi <info[at]stefaniamaurizi.it>
To: alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com, jeremy.kaplan[at]FOXNEWS.COM, John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Subject: Italian journalist: WIKILEAKS INSIDERS

Dear Alan, Jeremy and John,

This is Stefania Maurizi, an Italian journalist working for the Italian newsmagazine L'ESPRESSO (http://espresso.repubblica.it/dettaglio/julian-il-terrore-del-pentagono/2130295 ), who covers Wikileaks (WL) .

I am sorry if I interfere in your email exchange, however your exchange is available in the Cryptome website, so I feel free to contribute to this sort of "open discussion".

Back in June, I got immediately interested in these "Wikileaks insiders".

I tried to understand genuinely whether the WL insiders' criticism was baseless or not. So I sent an email destined to the Wikileaks insiders, which is available in the Cryptome website, together with my harsh email exchange with John Young about WL:

http://cryptome.org/0001/wikileaks-views.htm

I am very interested in the debate about WL, and I find it "healthy". However, any debate must be open and honest.

If the Wikileaks insiders have any evidence to support their harsh criticism against Julian Assange and his leadership in WL, they should go ahead and let us know which evidences they have. And indeed they have all the rights to remain anonymous, as Alan Taylor writes, BUT they had to support their accusations against Assange with solid evidences. If they fail to do so, they are just trying to damage Assange.

Alan Taylor writes:

"The irony of this, is that the Insiders desire to remain anonymous is criticised by Wikileaks supporters, when Wikileaks themselves was configured to protect the anonymity of the Whistle-blower."

It's true that Wikileaks was certainly "configured to protect anonymity", as Taylor writes, BUT Wikileaks DOES provide hard evidences for what anonymous sources leak: WL publishes documents. As far as I know, so far no one said: those docs are fabricated. So keeping sources anonymous is fine, provided that you offer SOLID EVIDENCE for what anonymous sources sustain.

Hope the debate about WL will go ahead.

Kindest wishes,

Stefania Maurizi

Kevin Poulsen tweets 8 September 2010:

Cryptome chides Fox News for believing those false #WikiLeaks Insider posts that appear on, um, Cryptome. http://bit.ly/dj3wxp

Crytomeorg tweets its first ever:

@kpoulsen Cryptome works very hard to be the least believable outlet. Many contenders to beat but will do it, inshallah Terry Jones