P. 1
Wikileaks Leak 2 From John Young Cryptome

Wikileaks Leak 2 From John Young Cryptome

|Views: 9|Likes:
Published by maryroseeng

More info:

Published by: maryroseeng on Jun 28, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/28/2012

pdf

text

original

Donate $25 for two DVDs of the Cryptome collection of files from June 1996 to the present

Natsios Young Architects

21 February 2007. Name, email address and phone number removed at request of one correspondent. 10 January 2007. Name, email address and phone number removed at request of one correspondent. 9 January 2007 Related: http://cryptome.org/wikileaks/wikileaks-leak.htm

To: John Young <jya[a t]pipeline.com> From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: martha stuart pgp Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 12:20:25 -0500 -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----Version: None J. We are going to fuck them all. Chinese mostly, but not entirely a feint. Invention abounds. Lies, twists and distorts everywhere needed for protection. Hackers monitor chinese and other intel as they burrow into their targets, when they pull, so do we. Inxhaustible supply of material. Near 100,000 documents/emails a day. We're going to crack the world open and let it flower into something new. If fleecing the CIA will

assist us, then fleece we will. We have pullbacks from NED, CFR, Freedomhouse and other CIA teats. We have all of pre 2005 afghanistan. Almost all of india fed. Half a dozen foreign ministries. Dozens of political parties and consulates, worldbank, apec, UN sections, trade groups, tibet and fulan dafa associations and... russian phishing mafia who pull data everywhere. We're drowing. We don't even know a tenth of what we have or who it belongs to. We stopped storing it at 1Tb.

Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 18:22:16 +0000 From: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]links.org> To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net, Hanna <snow[a t] xs4all.nl> Subject: Re: [WL] What words and phrases should we be using? [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Hanna wrote: > [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for wi-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. >  Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. >  This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer >  and plenty of backbone.] > > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > Fwd from Julian: > > We should be consistent in our use and invention of language. A word or > a phrase extracts meaning from its resonance with other usages and our > experiences.  For instance in the FAQ we sometimes use the phrase > "ethical leaking". Should we always use this phrase? 'leak' by itself > carries a negative. 'ethical' a strong positive. 'ethical leaking' a > positive. But it does isolate 'leaks' as being non-ethical unless we > stick 'ethical' on them. Can we make a movement from this phrase and > others? 'The ethical leaking movement'. Powerful. Can it survive the > heat of our vision? Ethical leaking has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? The obvious attack on this is that WL cannot distinguish ethical from unethical leaking. However, emphasising that WL seeks to enable ethical leaking is a good idea, it seems to me. > > We must find our own 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' s -- blessings and > sanctifications that even our most diseased and demonic opponents will > find themselves chanting to each other in the night. > > We need a phrases for 'leak facilitator', 'mail drop volunteer', > 'ethical leaker', 'wl server operator' etc, etc. > > --

http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html           http:// www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 19:19:08 +0000 From: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]links.org> To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net, Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: Re: [WL] media contact volunteers [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Wikileaks wrote: > [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for wi-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. >  Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. >  This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer >  and plenty of backbone.] > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > > For the coming media storm next week, we need time zone local telephone > contact points, with number (but not name) listed > on WL.ORG.

> > In interviews, this just means explaining/interpreting the "official > position" that's written up on wl.org. You always represent yourself -> someone who's an interested party "on the advisory board", but do not > speak for wl as a whole. If they ask what about X and it's not on WL.ORG > etc, then give can your personal opinion if you think it's helpful, but > re-iterate that you're speaking for yourself. > > This delegation carries some risks (to wl), but we are in a romance with > journalists hearts; if our voices sweet are not easily reachable on the > phone when their desire and deadlines peek, others voices, less honeyed > but always, always available will replace them. > > Ben, are you happy to handle the UK? Yes, but not so sure about having my phone number posted. How about an email address I can alias? ukrep[a t]WL, say. Being the geek I am, I like to talk about the (potential/vague) technical architecture, too. Is this to be avoided? I personally think its a good idea, especially for more technical publications (e.g. New Scientist). BTW, I was rather enjoying the fact that I didn't really know who else was on this list, given the mission, but gradually that's being eroded. It's not too late to fix, though (I must blog about this: people keep claiming you can't refund privacy. It's not true) - we could restart the list with some unknown subset of the current subscribers plus some new people all using anonymous email addresses. OTOH, I'm guessing the path

from me to any of you is pretty damn short, so perhaps not worth the effort :-) > R / Jake -- central europe? > > pde / dvm us west coast? > > jya, is there someway we can obscure you for the east coast? > > Chen/Lim are you happy to handle Tiawan/SEA and Mandarin language > interviews? Lim, do you speak cantonese too? > > Jamie -- africa? > > Julian / Sue / John S -- oz/english asia? > > David, are you still busy with your conference? > > -http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html           http:// www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Hanna <snow[a t]xs4all.nl> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 22:13:32 -0500 Subject: [WL] We're all CIA stooges, apparently. [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer

and plenty of backbone.]

John Young has leaked the content of this list, sans most identifying  info to cryptome.org It's clear from his recent messages that he's been losing it for some  time. We should have checked his current mental state more thoroughly rather than relying  on previous experience. The impact maybe positive. It's certainly very mysterious and  exciting to read. I don't think there's much dissonance between our public and private positions.

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 09:36:00 +0000 From: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]links.org> To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net, Hanna <snow[a t] xs4all.nl> Subject: Re: [WL] We're all CIA stooges, apparently. [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Hanna wrote: > [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for wi-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. >  Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. >  This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer >  and plenty of backbone.] > >

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > > John Young has leaked the content of this list, sans most identifying > info to cryptome.org Not in my case, for the astute reader, assuming New Scientist publish the interview. > It's clear from his recent messages that he's been losing it for some > time. We should have > checked his current mental state more thoroughly rather than relying on > previous experience. > > The impact maybe positive. It's certainly very mysterious and exciting > to read. I don't think there's > much dissonance between our public and private positions. Why was his final message to this list filtered? And does anyone understand wtf it means? -http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html           http:// www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

To: jya[a t]pipeline.com From: sympa[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: Removed from funtimesahead Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 04:35:54 -0800 (PST)

Your address (jya[a t]pipeline.com) has been removed from list funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net, probably because we received non-delivery reports for your address. You can subscribe again : mailto:sympa[a t]lists.riseup.net?subject=sub%20funtimesahead

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:21:19 +0000 From: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]algroup.co.uk> To: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org>, funtimesahead[a t] lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] [Fwd: MySociety's Comment on This and wikileaks] [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

-http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html           http:// www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff Return-Path: <ben[a t]mail.links.org> Received: from murder ([unix socket]) (authenticated user=ben bits=0) by mail.links.org (Cyrus v2.2.13) with LMTPA; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 20:59:25 +0000 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mail.links.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled

version=3.1.6 X-Original-To: ben[a t]ben.algroup.co.uk Delivered-To: ben[a t]ben.algroup.co.uk Received: from chainmail.thebunker.net (chainmail.thebunker.net [213.129.64.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.links.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B959333C1E for <ben[a t]ben.algroup.co.uk>; Sun,  7 Jan 2007 20:59:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from router.foriru.co.uk ([82.152.78.249] helo=sebastian.foriru.co.uk) by chainmail.thebunker.net with esmtp (TLSv1:DHE-RSAAES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1H3f6X-000GqB-C8 for ben[a t]algroup.co.uk; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 20:58:57 +0000 Received: from sebastian.foriru.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sebastian.foriru.co.uk (8.13.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l07KwhZo018271 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ben[a t]algroup.co.uk>; Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:58:44 GMT Received: from localhost (sams[a t]localhost) by sebastian.foriru.co.uk (8.13.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id l07Kwbem006790 for <ben[a t]algroup.co.uk>; Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:58:43 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: sebastian.foriru.co.uk: sams owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:58:37 +0000 (GMT) From: Sam Smith <S[a t]mSmith.net> X-X-Sender: sams[a t]sebastian.foriru.co.uk To: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]algroup.co.uk> Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0701072053030.16450[a t] sebastian.foriru.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-ALD-MailScanner: Believed clean X-ALD-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=0, required 5) Subject: MySociety's Comment on This and wikileaks Hey Ben, A long shot, but do you have anything to do with wikileaks?

There's a conversation in their cryptome posted log about commentonthis.com, and, if they're credible (John Young suggests not), I'd would be happy to have a conversation if they had questions or wanted to engage with CoT. Regards Sam -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:20:09 -0500 Subject: [WL] Fwd: The Times of London/Request [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Ben, you want the first bite? Begin forwarded message: From: "Richards, Jonathan" <jonathan.richards[a t] thetimes.co.uk> Date: 8. Januar 2007 05:08:32 GMT-05:00 To: <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: The Times of London/Request Hi,   I'm a tech reporter at The Times of London.   I heard about your initiative. Sounds v. interesting.

  Would any 'Wikileaker' be available for a chat at some point today (Mon)?   I'd like to know when you're planning to post the first of your 1.1 million documents. Not to mention where they all came from. But there's a couple of other things too - where the idea sprang from etc. Just a general interview about the site, I guess.   I look forward to hearing from you.   Kind Regards,   Jonathan Richards Reporter, The Times +44 207 782 5303     The Newspaper Marketing Agency:  Opening Up Newspapers:   www.nmauk.co.uk   This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may be privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately. Do not use, disseminate, store or copy it in any way. Statements or opinions in this e-mail or any attachment are those of the author and are not necessarily agreed or authorised by News International (NI). NI Group may monitor emails sent or received for operational or business reasons as permitted by law. NI Group accepts no liability for viruses introduced by this e-mail or attachments. You should employ virus checking software. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701

From: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:40:14 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] cryptome disclosure [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.

Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

No idea what JYA was saying! It's clear to me however, that he was not trying people's  identities with his xxxxx'ing, but rather trying the  sexiness of the document. Perhaps he feels WL is the  central status mechanism in his life? I think he controversy. to protect to increase a threat to just likes the 

He may have done us a great favor. There's a lot of movement in that  document. It's a little anarchist, but I think it generally reads  well and sounds like people doing something they care about. Btw, I suggest we be careful with Wayne Madsen too. He seems to be  another case of someone who was fantastic a few years ago, but  recently has started to see conspiracies everywhere. Both cases  possibly age related. I am not spending any more thought on it. Next week is going to be  busy. The weeks earlier stories will be already done and that'll set  the agenda for the rest of the week, not jya's attention seeker. I'm willing to handle calls for .au, although my background may make  S a better bet.

From: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:01:13 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net

Subject: [WL] Venezuela [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

This guy any good? Begin forwarded message: > From: "Klaus Jaffe" <kjaffe[a t]usb.ve> > Date: 8 January 2007 00:26:44 GMT+00:00 > To: "Julian Assange" <me[a t]iq.org> > Subject: Re: Wikileaks needs you. > > I congratulate you, Julian, for your work > We very much need an outlet for transparency, shining onto the  > arbitrary oppressions of our authoritarian regime in Venezuela. I  > am happy to help in whatever I can > Cheers > Klaus Jaffe > http://atta.labb.usb.ve/Klaus/klaus.htm

From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:11:35 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] Andrew Clausen [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message: > From: Andrew Clausen <clausen[a t]econ.upenn.edu> > Date: 8 January 2007 07:10:38 GMT+00:00 > To: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> > Hi Julian, > > This photo might remind you of who I am: > > www.econ.upenn.edu/~clausen > > (I am from Melbourne.) > > Interesting project, even if the hyperbole is a little excessive! > > Have you got a mailing list? > > I wonder if there are any interesting economics research projects  > to be > done here. > > If you don't have good democratic institutions -- like most of Africa > and China -- how does good information help?  (Got any examples?) > > What are the potentially perverse effects of leaks?  Blackmail? > (Is anonymity in blackmail a big deal?  To effectively blackmail > someone, you need to collect regular small payments, which makes it  > easy > to trace anyway.) > > Cheers, > Andrew

From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:14:37 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] Amir Butler (www.amitbutler.com) [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Muslim (british/indian) public affairs guy. phd comp. sci. speaks in  arabic. former hacker Begin forwarded message: > > I don't know how much or what I can > learning more as it certainly seems > beneficial project. I can help with Muslim  > issues etc. and promote the site to something  > to contribute.

do, but I'm interested in  like a worthwhile and  analysis of Middle East/ others who might have

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Hanna <snow[a t]xs4all.nl> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 16:48:25 +0000 Subject: [WL] web pages updates [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

updates look good

From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 23:10:37 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] Fwd: [E-SPCH] Julian Assange: Wikileaks needs you. [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message: > From: "Danny O'Brien" <danny[a t]eff.org> > Date: 8 January 2007 21:09:09 GMT+00:00 > To: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> > Subject: Re: [E-SPCH] Julian Assange: Wikileaks needs you. > Reply-To: danny[a t]eff.org > > Julian > > Danny O'Brien from EFF here. Is there anything specific we can help  > out > with? Our key competence is legal assistance within the United States, > but there may be other contacts and resources we can throw your way. > > Best, > > d. > > > On Jan 7, 2007, at 5:28 PM, John Gilmore wrote: >> >>> EFF should consider helping -- they need all kinds of help. >>> >>>     John

From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 23:11:55 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] advice from publicist [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Obvious really, but interesting to note another vote for "ethical  leaking" Begin forwarded message: > From: [Cryptome removed at request of author.] > Date: 8 January 2007 22:49:21 GMT+00:00 > To: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> > Subject: Re: Wikileaks needs you. > > I'd say just pass over it with a fine tooth comb and try to  > eliminate all the segments that could be misquoted by the press.   > In other words whenever you say leaks, say ethical right next to  > it, so they would need to make a very concerted effort to misquote  > you. > > Best of luck, > [Cryptome removed at request of author.] > > > On Jan 8, 2007, at 8:56 AM, Julian Assange wrote: > >> Zero budget for the next few months! But we'd appreciate any  >> comments you may have on the website [it's not production -a 

>> holding page to deal with the intense media interest] >> >> On 7 Jan 2007, at 19:55, wrote: >> >>> Hi Julian, >>> >>> I received your email (though I'm not sure how we are  >>> connected).  Regardless, your project is very interesting.  I'm a  >>> professional publicist, and my business  (Group 113) does Total  >>> Branding through: Public and Media Relations (including crisis  >>> management), Marketing Strategy and Implementation, Event  >>> Production and Design (Graphic, Web, Interactive, and  >>> Traditional).  I don't know if you're looking to keep everything  >>> in house and what kind of a revenue stream you're working with,  >>> but I'd be happy to discuss our services with you.  All of my  >>> info is below. >>> >>> best of luck, >>> [Cryptome removed at request of author.] >>>

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 17:16:34 -0600 Subject: [WL] Fwd: RSS Feed Please [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Jordet, Trevor" <TJordet[a t]seic.com> Date: 8. Januar 2007 19:02:10 GMT+00:00 To: "wikileaks" <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: RSS Feed Please I love the idea for wikileaks.  If you pull it off the right way it will definitely be a massive success!!!   One thing you really need to add is an RSS feed for your articles.  I tried to find one and could not. (Maybe because you have not officially launched the site yet)   Trevor   To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 17:38:50 -0600 Subject: [WL] Dan ellsberg responds [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Can someone craft a delicate witty reply to the following. In doing so, perhaps discover what Dan thought about Abbie (they would have crossed circles -- Abbie has a large ego, it's not clear Dan would have taken to him -- similar politics, but I suspect Dan would have thought Abbie showy) Begin forwarded message: From: Daniel Ellsberg <ellsbergd[a t]cs.com> Date: 8. Januar 2007 15:04:01 GMT-06:00 To: wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org Cc: "P. Jeffrey Black" <airmarshalwhistleblower[a t]gmail.com>

Your concept looks terrific and I wish you the best of luck with it.  I am honored to be quoted but that quotation is actually from Abbie Hoffman.  I may have been foolish and arrogant, but I was not that young in the period Abbie was talking about. Yours, Dan Ellsberg

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 17:39:09 -0600 Subject: [WL] Fwd: COX NEWSPAPERS INTERVIEW REQUEST [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message: From: Rebecca Carr <rebeccac[a t]coxnews.com> Date: 8. Januar 2007 15:36:08 GMT-06:00 To: <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: COX NEWSPAPERS INTERVIEW REQUEST Wikileaks: I am a national correspondent based in Washington with Cox Newspapers.  I am interested in interviewing the founder of wikileaks about your website and plan to disclose government leaks to the public.  I write about government secrecy issues and would like to highlight your site in a story that I am writing about leaks. Here is

backgrounder on me: http://www.coxwashington.com/reporters/content/reporters/ carr_r.html Can you please call me? I can be reached at 202-887-8362. Thanks. Rebecca Carr

Rebecca Carr National Correspondent Cox Newspapers 400 N. Capitol Street, NW Suite 750 Washington, D.C. 20001-1536 202.887.8362-direct 202.744.9911-cell ---

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 17:39:24 -0600 Subject: [WL] Fwd: Media request [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message: From: [Cryptome removed at request of author.] Date: 8. Januar 2007 16:24:46 GMT-06:00

To: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Subject: Re: Media request Hi, Sorry for the tardy reply. I've been on deadline with another story. You can reach me at [Cryptome removed at request of author.] (the number reaches me at home as well when I'm there). [Cryptome removed at request of author.] On 1/5/07, Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> wrote: On 05.01.2007, at 10:08, [Cryptome removed at request of author.] wrote: I'm a freelance reporter who writes for Wired News, Salon, and other publications. I'm interested in writing a story about the Wikileaks site and was wondering if there's someone available to speak with me about it. You can reach me at [Cryptome removed at request of author.] or send me a number where I can reach you and I'll call you. Regards, [Cryptome removed at request of author.] Hi [Cryptome removed at request of author.]. We'd be happy to talk to you. Are you working over the weekend? Can you give us weekend contact details and we'll get someone to call you? What is your deadline? Best, WL Here are some answers to questions you might have: What is WikiLeaks.org? Why "wikify" leaking? WikiLeaks is an uncensorable version of wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. It combines the protection and anonymity of cutting-edge cryptographic technologies with the transparency and simplicity of a wiki interface. Principled leaking has changed the course of history for the better; it can alter the course of history in the present; it

can lead us to a better future. Consider Daniel Ellsberg, working within the US government during the Vietnam War. He comes into contact with the Pentagon Papers, a meticulously kept record of military and strategic planning throughout the war. Those papers reveal the depths to which the US government has sunk in deceiving the population about the war. Yet the public and the media know nothing of this urgent and shocking information. Indeed, secrecy laws are being used to keep the public ignorant of gross dishonesty practiced by their government. In spite of those secrecy laws and at great personal risk, Ellsberg manages to disseminate the Pentagon papers to journalists and to the world. Despite facing criminal charges, eventually dropped, the release of the Pentagon papers shocks the world, exposes the government, and helps to shorten the war and save thousands of lives. The power of principled leaking to embarrass governments, corporations and institutions is amply demonstrated through recent history. Public scrutiny of otherwise unaccountable and secretive institutions pressures them to act ethically. What official will chance a secret, corrupt transaction when the public is likely to find out? What repressive plan will be carried out when it is revealed to the citizenry, not just of its own country, but the world? When the risks of embarrassment through openness and honesty increase, the tables are turned against conspiracy, corruption, exploitation and oppression. Open government answers injustice rather than causing it. Open government exposes and undoes corruption. Open governance is the most cost effective method of promoting good governance. Today, with authoritarian governments in power around much of the world, increasing authoritarian tendencies in democratic governments, and increasing amounts of power vested in unaccountable corporations, the need for openness and democratization is greater than ever. WikiLeaks is a tool to satisfy that need. WikiLeaksreduces the risk to potential leakers and improves the analysis and dissemination of leaked documents. WikiLeaks provides simple and straightforward means for anonymous and untraceable leaking of documents. At the same time, WikiLeaks opens leaked documents up to a much more exacting scrutiny than any media organization or intelligence agency could provide: the scrutiny of a worldwide community of informed wiki editors.

Instead of a couple of academic specialists, WikiLeaks will provide a forum for the entire global community to examine any document relentlessly for credibility, plausibility, veracity and falsifiability. They will be able to interpret documents and explain their relevance to the public. If a document is leaked from the Chinese government, the entire Chinese dissident community can freely scrutinize and discuss it; if a document is leaked from Somalia, the entire Somali refugee community can analyze it and put it in context. And so on. WikiLeaks may become the most powerful "intelligence agency" on earth -- an intelligence agency of the people. It will be an open source, democratic intelligence agency. But it will be far more principled, and far less parochial than any governmental intelligence agency; consequently, it will be more accurate, and more relevant. It will have no commercial or national interests at heart; its only interests will be truth and freedom of information. Unlike the covert activities of state intelligence agencies, WikiLeaks will rely upon the power of overt fact to inform citizens about the truths of their world. WikiLeaks will be the outlet for every government official, every bureaucrat, every corporate worker, who becomes privy to embarrassing information which the institution wants to hide but the public needs to know. What conscience cannot contain, and institutional secrecy unjustly conceals, WikiLeaks can broadcast to the world. WikiLeaks will be a forum for the ethical defection of unaccountable and abusive power to the people. How will WikiLeaks operate? To the user, WikiLeaks will look very much like wikipedia. Anybody can post to it, anybody can edit it. No technical knowledge is required. Leakers can post documents anonymously and untraceably. Users can publicly discuss documents and analyze their credibility and veracity. Users can discuss interpretations and context and collaboratively formulate collective publications. Users can read and write explanatory articles on leaks along with background material and context. The political relevance of documents and their verisimilitude will be revealed by a cast of thousands. WikiLeaks will also incorporate advanced cryptographic technologies for anonymity and untraceability. Those who provide leaked information may face severe risks, whether of political repercussions, legal sanctions or physical violence.

Accordingly, extremely sophisticated mathematical and cryptographic techniques will be used to secure privacy, anonymity and untraceability. For the technically minded, WikiLeaks integrates technologies including modified versions of FreeNet, , PGP and software of our own design. WikiLeaks will be deployed in a way that makes it impervious to political and legal attacks. In this sense it is uncensorable. Who is behind WikiLeaks? WikiLeaks was founded by Chinese dissidents, mathematicians and startup company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa. Our advisory board, which is still forming, includes representatives from expatriate Russian and Tibetan refugee communities, reporters, a former US intelligence analyst and cryptographers. There are currently 22 people directly involved in the project and counting. What is your relationship to wikipedia? WikiLeaks has no formal relationship to wikipedia. However both employ the same wiki interface and technology. Both share the same radically democratic philosophy that allowing anyone to be an author or editor leads to a vast and accurate collective intelligence and knowledge. Both place their trust in an informed community of citizens. What wikipedia is to the encyclopedia, WikiLeaks will be to leaks. Wikipedia provides a positive example on which WikiLeaks is based. The success of wikipedia in providing accurate and up-todate information has been stunning and surprising to many. Wikipedia shows that the collective wisdom of an informed community of users may produce massive volumes of accurate knowledge in a rapid, democratic and transparent manner. WikiLeaks aims to harness this phenomenon to provide fast and accurate dissemination, verification, analysis, interpretation and explanation of leaked documents, for the benefit of people all around the world. What is WikiLeakss present stage of development? WikiLeaks has developed a prototype which has been successful in testing, but there are still many demands required before we have the scale required for a full public deployment. We require additional funding, the support of further dissident communities, human rights groups, reporters and media

representative bodies (as consumers of leaks), language regionalization, volunteer editors/analysts and server operators. We have received over 1.1 million documents so far. We plan to numerically eclipse the content of the English wikipedia with leaked documents. Anyone interested in helping us out with any of the above should contact us by email at [insert address here]. When will WikiLeaks go live? We cannot yet give an exact date. We estimate February or March 2007. Couldnt leaking involve invasions of privacy? Couldnt mass leaking of documents be irresponsible? Arent some leaks deliberately false and misleading? Providing a forum for freely posting information involves the potential for abuse, but measures can be taken to minimize any potential harm. The simplest and most effective countermeasure is a worldwide community of informed users and editors who can scrutinize and discuss leaked documents. Concerns about privacy, irresponsibility and false information also arise with wikipedia. On wikipedia, irresponsible posting or editing of material, or posting of false material, can be reversed by other users, and the results have been extremely satisfying and reassuring. There is no reason to expect any different from WikiLeaks . Indeed, as discovered with wikipedia to the surprise of many, the collective wisdom of an informed community of users may provide rapid and accurate dissemination, verification and analysis. Furthermore, misleading leaks and misinformation are already well placed in the mainstream media, as recent history shows, an obvious example being the lead-up to the Iraq war. Peddlers of misinformation will find themselves undone by WikiLeaks , equipped as it is to scrutinize leaked documents in a way that no mainstream media outlet is capable of. An analogus example is this excellent unweaving of the British government's politically motivated additions to an intelligence dossier on Iraq. The dossier was cited by Colin Powell in his address to the United Nations the same month to justify the pending US invasion of Iraq. In any case, our overarching goal is to provide a forum where embarrassing information can expose injustice. All policy will be formulated with this goal in mind. Is WikiLeaks concerned about any legal consequences? Our roots are in dissident communities and our focus is on nonwestern authoritarian regimes. Consequently we believe a politically motivated legal attack on us would be seen as a

grave error in western administrations. However, we are prepared, structurally and technically, to deal with all legal attacks. We design the software, and promote its human rights agenda, but the servers are run by anonymous volunteers. Because we have no commercial interest in the software, there is no need to restrict its distribution. In the very unlikely event that we were to face coercion to make the software censorship friendly, there are many others who will continue the work in other jurisdictions. Is leaking ethical? We favour, and uphold, ethical behavior in all circumstances. Every person is the ultimate arbiter of justice in their own conscience. Where there is a lack of freedom and injustice is enshrined in law, there is a place for principled civil disobedience. Where the simple act of distributing information may embarrass a regime or expose crime, we recognize a right, indeed a duty, to perform that act. Such whistleblowing normally involves major personal risk. Just like whistleblower protection laws in some jurisdictions, WikiLeaks provides means and opportunity to minimize such risks. We propose that every authoritarian government, every oppressive institution, and even every corrupt corporation, be subject to the pressure, not merely of international diplomacy or freedom of information laws, not even of quadrennial elections, but of something far stronger: the individual consciences of the people within them.

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 16:07:46 -0800 From: "David Zetland" <dzetland[a t]gmail.com> To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] Suggestions for reputation-building... [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Hi WL Folks, I am the David "at the conference". I have just skimmed ~30

emails. Congratulations on your success to date. I have a few suggestions: 1) $5million is a bad idea. $1 million or less. This project will get respect if it's shoestring -- not dotcom -- in financial dimensions. 2) You MUST get a working site. The reporters will lose interest if there is nothing to see -- ie, hot air/vaporware. wl.org doesn't seem to have anything up... 3) The wiki format is attractive for ease of use and group editing. I have not seen a working version, but there are (potential) significant problems with edit-wars, spamming, agents-provocateurs. The idea of an online archive, OTOH, is EXCELLENT. (How is it different than http://www.thememoryhole.org/, btw? 4) I have emailed Julian my own idea, which has significant overlap with yours. The disadvantage of mine (http://www.rumormill.org/) is that it requires monitors. The good news is the reputation feature (which will choke forgery) and far lower threshold of leak (ie, a rumor, not just a document). I was originally thinking that WL could be the archive and RM could be the discussion. In any case, I claim NO OWNERSHIP of my idea, so I am happy to merge interets. I am alone, with few resources, so even getting RM loaded would be great. I am happy to be "in the open" (many details via links below) and talk to folks, but I have less knowledge than any of you. Julian -- I'll be back in Davis on Wed. We can skype/PGP after I

get back. There is a huge demand for a WL-type thing WITHIN the US these days due to (sad) abrogations of whistleblowers rights. I have contacted POGO, et al in the past, but never gotten far. They are likely to be interested but not to offer (material/real) help. EFF is likely to be an exception... Just a few initial thoughts. David -Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.  It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.    -William Pitt (1759-1806) David Zetland (david[a t]primal.ucdavis.edu; 530-848-9208) PhD Candidate, Agricultural and Resource Economics, UC Davis http://www.kysq.org ~~  http://www.rumor-mill.org/

Cc: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 19:03:09 -0600 To: "David Zetland" <dzetland[a t]gmail.com> Subject: [WL] Re: Suggestions for reputation-building... [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

On 8 Jan 2007, at 18:13, David Zetland wrote: > 1) $5million is a bad idea. $1 million or less. This project will get > respect if it's shoestring -- not dotcom -- in financial dimensions. I agree. I think this is just an internal feel of what we could use  for a full deployment, not what we need and not something to be quoted around the place. > 2) You MUST get a working site. The reporters will lose interest if > there is nothing to see -- ie, hot air/vaporware. wl.org doesn't seem > to have anything up... Absolutely. Can you help? The unexpected press coverage has  completely diverted people from that task. That's a reality we can't easily change. We have more  volunteers now, but this doesn't scale and in the short term reduces productivity as  someone has to brief them. We could put up a few more dramatic leaks. One option is to take the thing unsecured (faster) and see what happens to it as we build the full version. Having it go down briefly might  be useful to us. > 3) The wiki format is attractive for ease of use and group editing. I > have not seen a working version, but there are (potential) significant > problems with edit-wars, spamming, agents-provocateurs. The idea of an > online archive, OTOH, is EXCELLENT. (How is it different than > http://www.thememoryhole.org/, btw? It is the edit-wars etc that keep people motivated and form community! Truth is the only constant in these wars,

which are otherwise random, so people will converge to it. If the wars can be toned down (through exhaustion or otherwise) as something develops then peturbations from it become smaller and smaller. In this way we can see it as an annealing process. Where opinions diverge too much for this process, new pages are created. We must also understand the zeitgeist. The reason we're getting such publicity, despite having almost nothing up is that we're resonating off wikipedia's and wiki infludence more generally. AFAIK, this was  deliberate strategy. > 4) I have emailed Julian my own idea, which has significant overlap > with yours. The disadvantage of mine (http://www.rumormill.org/) is > that it requires monitors. The good news is the reputation feature > (which will choke forgery) and far lower threshold of leak (ie, a > rumor, not just a document). I was originally thinking that WL could > be the archive and RM could be the discussion. In any case, I claim NO > OWNERSHIP of my idea, so I am happy to merge interets. I am alone, > with few resources, so even getting RM loaded would be great. We can easily have an automated linking between these two. We could also lower the threshold to accept "rumor" leaks into the wiki process, however, I suspect, that at least early on, that  would pollute us. Having to have a document erects a necessary entry barrier. > due to (sad) abrogations of whistleblowers rights. I have contacted > POGO, et al in the past, but never gotten far. They are likely

to be > interested but not to offer (material/real) help. EFF is likely to be > an exception... Prescient. We have a pogo staff member (in a personal capacity only) and eff has just offered assistance. What we want them to do is an  interesting question. Will they take donations for us?

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 21:31:45 -0800 To: wmreditor[a t]waynemadsenreport.com From: John Young <jya[a t]pipeline.com> Cc: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net,Julien Assange <me[a t] iq.org> Subject: [WL] Wikileaks Suspects You [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Hi Wayne, A Wikileaks message today, below, for your collection of whine. Regards, John ---------From: Julian Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:40:14 +0000 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] cryptome disclosure Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---------=_1168263685-5925-9095"

[This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

No idea what JYA was saying! It's clear to me however, that he was not trying people's  identities with his xxxxx'ing, but rather trying the  sexiness of the document. Perhaps he feels WL is the  central status mechanism in his life? I think he controversy. to protect to increase a threat to just likes the 

He may have done us a great favor. There's a lot of movement in that  document. It's a little anarchist, but I think it generally reads  well and sounds like people doing something they care about. Btw, I suggest we be careful with Wayne Madsen too. He seems to be  another case of someone who was fantastic a few years ago, but  recently has started to see conspiracies everywhere. Both cases  possibly age related. I am not spending any more thought on it. Next week is going to be  busy. The weeks earlier stories will be already done and that'll set  the agenda for the rest of the week, not jya's attention seeker. I'm willing to handle calls for .au, although my background may make  S a better bet.

From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:03:59 -0600 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] manning the phones [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] I've set up some coms. who's happy to be in the daisy chain  forwarding chain from the washington number? please send me skype /  other details. It's getting a call every 20 minutes.

Cc: wmreditor[a t]waynemadsenreport.com, funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:07:48 -0600 To: John Young <jya[a t]pipeline.com> Subject: [WL] Re: Wikileaks Suspects You [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] John, can you xxxx  the reference to "IQ.ORG" in that document near  "my daughters photo". On 8 Jan 2007, at 23:31, John Young wrote: > S a better bet.

Cc: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:08:50 -0600 To: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Subject: [WL] Re: manning the phones [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] By "other" I mean phone On 8 Jan 2007, at 21:03, Julien Assange wrote: > I've set up some coms. who's happy to be in the daisy chain  > forwarding chain from the washington number? please send me skype /  > other details. It's getting a call every 20 minutes. > From: Julien Assange <me[a t]iq.org> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 00:03:50 -0600 To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net Subject: [WL] draft replacement front page [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] Journalist friend drafted this ("more positive") front page. I think  it's good, although needs some of the strength of the original in the first

sentence. WikiLeaks is a vehicle for the unfettered communication of things  that ought to be in the public domain. It is an uncensored, untraceable open channel for the largescale  dissemination of information that should be made public. We aim to develop and  support a mechanism that will allow the average person to release documents or  other information that is in the public interest without fear of censorship or recrimination.  Because some public interest information may be  personally risky for a whistleblower to release, WikiLeaks also aims to make  submissions to the site untraceable. You don't need advanced technical skills to use WikiLeaks. We have  based our interface on the user-friendly WikiPedia because it is so well known  and easy to use. We believe that the open dissemination of information is vital for a  healthy democracy. That is why WikiLeaks provides free, anonymous publication of information that ought to published in the public interest,  regardless of the source. The idea for the creation of WikiLeaks came from the desire to  support open government, particularly in Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle  East.  We

believe that transparency in government activities leads to reduced  corruption, better government and stronger democracies. Many governments in these  geographic areas would benefit from increased scrutiny from the world community,  as well as their own people. We believe this scrutiny requires information.  Often that information is costly - in terms of human life and human rights. We hope WikiLeaks will protect whistleblowers with the public interest at  heart so it will not be so costly in future. In its landmark ruling on the Pentagon Papers, the US Supreme Court  ruled that "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government." We agree. The ruling stated  that "paramount among the responsibilities of a  free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the  people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and  foreign shot and shell." We believe that it is not only the people keep their government honest, but also the people of are  watching that government. That is why the time has come global  avenue for disseminating documents the public should WikiLeaks. of one country that other countries who for an anonymous see. Welcome to

Cc: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 01:46:48 -0600 To: Ben Laurie <ben[a t]links.org> Subject: Re: [WL] media contact volunteers [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.] > > Yes, but not so sure about having my phone number posted. How about an > email address I can alias? ukrep[a t]WL, say. How about a 3 month skype in diversion? Only cost 10 euros + forwarding costs (minimal). That would anon your number, but get the sort of  real-timeism we're looking for. > Being the geek I am, I like to talk about the (potential/ vague) > technical architecture, too. Is this to be avoided? I personally think > its a good idea, especially for more technical publications (e.g. New > Scientist). Think this is ok. We still have some tricks in the bag. Since we're  trying to move to a position of open development and anonymous deployment (for efficiency) we're going to have to do something like this  eventually.

> BTW, I was rather enjoying the fact that I didn't really know who else > was on this list, given the mission, but gradually that's being  > eroded. > It's not too late to fix, though (I must blog about this: people keep > claiming you can't refund privacy. It's not true) - we could  > restart the > list with some unknown subset of the current subscribers plus some new > people all using anonymous email addresses. OTOH, I'm guessing the  > path > from me to any of you is pretty damn short, so perhaps not worth the > effort :-) We're ok. We just need to keep the path to .cn and similar sources  high. Also a little anon now gives room for movement later (we're not sure why we might need it, but some necessary actions maybe difficult without it)

To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net From: Wikileaks <wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 03:24:39 -0600 Subject: [WL] Fwd: Your Going On Newsreal [This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-ik-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'. This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Sean Kennedy <Newsreal[a t]Rantradio.com> Date: 9. Januar 2007 03:19:14 GMT-06:00 To: wikileaks[a t]wikileaks.org Subject: Your Going On Newsreal Hey!!   Good idea crew!   I’m going to yell about you on my radio show Newreal on 2007-01-16     Sean Kennedy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Kennedy

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->