Will WikiLeaks unravel the American 'secret government'?

[Peter Lemkin]

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

What Might Be Lurking in WikiLeaks' "Thermonuclear Device"?

It appears increasingly likely that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will be extradited to Sweden and turned over to the United States for criminal charges of a dubious nature.

That brings heightened urgency to this question: What is contained in the "thermonuclear device" of government files that WikiLeaks has vowed to release if harm comes to the organization or its leader?

Little is known about the files that WikiLeaks possesses but has not released, so we can only make an educated guess. But a source tells Legal Schnauzer that the files could include information about Bush-era crimes, including political prosecutions, stolen elections, U.S. attorney firings, and more.

One hint came when Assange said in a recent interview that he has "insurance files" on Rupert Murdoch and his global media company, News Corporation. But we've seen signs that WikiLeaks' "big bomb" goes way beyond anything involving Rupert Murdoch.

The strongest insight we've seen came in a recent Time magazine profile of Assange in its Person of the Year issue. WikiLeaks, it turns out, obtained sensitive information by piggybacking on the work of Chinese hackers. Time explains:

The worst--or best, in the view of advocates for radical transparency--could be yet to come. John Young, a New York City architect who left the WikiLeaks steering committee after clashing with Assange, says the group members are storing "a lot more information underground than they are publishing on the surface." Some of it comes from a hacker-on-hacker sting in 2006, when data jockeys at WikiLeaks detected what they believed to be a large-scale intelligence operation to steal data from computers around the world. The intruders were using TOR, an anonymous browsing technology invented by the U.S. Navy, to tunnel into their targets and extract information. The WikiLeaks team piggybacked on the operation, recording the data stream in real time as the intruders stole it.

In an encrypted e-mail dated Jan. 7, 2007, decrypted and made available to TIME by its recipient, one of the participants boasted, "Hackers monitor chinese and other intel as they burrow into their targets, when they pull, so do we. Inxhaustible supply of material?... 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."

The theft scandalized some WikiLeaks insiders, and Assange has held back from publishing most of its fruits. But shortly before his arrest in London, he issued a veiled threat that "comes straight out of cypherpunk fiction," according to Christopher Soghoian, a well-known security researcher.

Last July, it turns out, as controversy erupted over its release of the Afghanistan war logs, WikiLeaks had posted, without explanation, a 1.4-gigabyte encrypted file called "insurance.aes256." Some 100,000 people around the world have downloaded it. On Dec. 3, Assange said in an online chat with readers of the Guardian newspaper that the file contains the entire diplomatic archive, most of which has yet to be released, and additional "significant material from the U.S. and other countries." He added, "If something happens to us, the key parts will be released automatically."

From a domestic standpoint, the most intriguing information might be the reference to "political parties" and "trade groups." Could that mean the Republican Party during the George W. Bush years? Could that be one reason GOP guru Karl Rove seems particularly determined to see that Assange is "hunted down"? Could "trade groups" include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has been a powerful force in the GOP's electoral strategies.

Our source finds it particularly interesting that the WikiLeaks files were obtained on the backs of Chinese hackers. This brings to mind SMARTech, the Chattanooga-based company whose servers hosted 2004 presidential-election results for Ohio, plus Bush-administration e-mails that went outside of official White House channels.

According to several published reports, SMARTech CEO Jeff Averbeck has ties to Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and possibly has routed information through servers at those federal facilities. Says our source:

If I was working in Chinese intelligence, I think Oak Ridge Labs would be an inviting target for hacking. If SMARTech has used those lines, the Chinese might have obtained all kinds of information about stolen U.S. elections. I would want the NASA and TVA servers, as well, and who knows what the Chinese might have found there? With information about stolen elections and more, the Chinese could blackmail the U.S. government for about a century. I suspect Assange has stuff we haven't even thought of.

The next court date in Assange's extradition battle is February 7. Meanwhile, we can ponder these questions: Is it possible that WikiLeaks will force the U.S. government into rediscovering its conscience? Wouldn't it be ironic if we wind up having to thank Chinese hackers for helping to get our democracy back on track, to essentially save us from the criminality of the Bush years?
Posted by legalschnauzer at 6:02 AM

Labels: Julian Assange, Karl Rove, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Rupert Murdoch, SMARTech, Tennessee Valley Authority, WikiLeaks
http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2011/...leaks.html

While somewhat speculative and not as well pinnned-down as I might like, I hope his speculations are true - in part, in whole or even underestimating what might be held-back as a hedge against disaster for Assange and Wikileaks. I know other members of Wikileaks have also hinted that 'in the case of some [undefined by them] 'emergency' they each have a partial 'key' to the releasing of massive amounts of encrypted and hidden data - the EXACT nature of which they didn't know the details of, and the GENERAL nature of which they declined to comment on. The hackers piggybacking on hackers is very interesting and very possible, to my knowledge. Many of their known insiders are Chinese and hackers.....so who knows.....this may turn out to be the Wikileak decade, like it or not.....and some will like it and others definitely will NOT.

[Peter Lemkin]

WikiLeaks: Julian Assange claims to have Rupert Murdoch 'insurance files'

Founder claims WikiLeaks has more than 500 US diplomatic cables on one broadcasting organisation

Josh Halliday
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 12 January 2011 17.40 GMT

Julian Assange said the 'insurance files' will be released 'if something happens to me or to WikiLeaks'. Photograph: Toby Melville/Reuters

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, claimed today he was in possession of "insurance" files on Rupert Murdoch and his global media company, News Corporation.


Assange also claimed that WikiLeaks holds more than 500 confidential US diplomatic cables on one broadcasting organisation.


Speaking to journalist John Pilger for an interview to be published tomorrow in the latest edition of the New Statesman, Assange said: "There are 504 US embassy cables on one broadcasting organisation and there are cables on Murdoch and News Corp."


Assange refers to these specific cables as "insurance files" that will be released "if something happens to me or to WikiLeaks".


The Guardian has published stories based on more than 700 of the cables and has access to all 250,000.


He said yesterday that the whistleblowers' site would "shortly" continue publishing cables stories which would "speak more of the same truth to power".


WikiLeaks began publishing the leaked cables through international media partners including the Guardian, part of the group that publishes MediaGuardian.co.uk, in late November.


Their release slowed over Christmas as the partner media organisations, which supplied redacted versions of the documents to WikiLeaks, scaled back their cable operations.


The 39-year-old Australian is currently fighting extradition from the UK to Sweden on accusations of rape and sexual assault. Pilger, who counts Assange as a personal friend, last month offered to stand £20,000 in surety to secure the whistleblower's bail.


Attempts by the US to take legal action against Assange should worry the mainstream media, he said.


"I think what's emerging in the mainstream media is the awareness that if I can be indicted, other journalists can, too," he added.


"Even the New York Times is worried. This used not to be the case. If a whistleblower was prosecuted, publishers and reporters were protected by the first amendment, which journalists took for granted. That's being lost."


Despite pressure from the US on private companies to severe ties with WikiLeaks, Assange insisted that China is the real "technological enemy" of the site.


China has deployed "aggressive and sophisticated" interception technology to stop details of the diplomatic dispatches reaching its citizens, he said, adding that there were now "all sorts of ways" Chinese users could access the controversial material.

[David Guyatt]

My suspicion is that Murdoch has long been a CIA asset. My additional suspicion is that Murdoch was funded from his earliest days to become a major media player on behalf of the CIA in order to control and manipulate political processes in various nations.

The problem I have is we are sort of promised:

A) a vast treasure trove of state department cables that will "change the world" as we know it.

B) the contents of a senior insiders hard drive of BoA that, I suspect, may be truly explosive and,

c) a file that will may well destroy Murdoch and News Corporation.

And the problem is that this is all great foreplay but without any promise of fulfillment.

Are we going to be treated like mushrooms as we usually are - kept in the dark and fed bullshit?

[Jeffrey Orling]

Hard to know, but this seems like a bit of poker going on. Assange is not likely to show his aces right from the get go. But on the other hand we don't know how much is bluff.

Clearly the other side is worried so he much have "something" damaging. But since there is so little accountability for criminality on the other side it's hard to see what actually would take these SOBs down. Torture didn't, warrantless wiretapping didn't, full body scans (violation of the 4th amendment) didn't, two illegal wars didn't and the list goes on and on. Assange needs some real hot smoking guns which can't be made to go away and ignored. Let's hope they're there.

If he's spread the goods around taking him out will do no good and embolden his colleagues and outrage the public many of whom will not take kindly to such forms of "justice" all in the name of.... national security.

It's more likely that a "programmed" lone nut will take him out if they can, but that won't stop the releases. A trial would not go well for the state... of it was a fair one.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Bradley Manning is in his sixth month of severe isolation. He still has severe restrictions on his social contact, freedom to exercise, and ability to sleep - far beyond those of other prisoners in the same brig.
You're one of more than 30,000 people who signed our letter to the commanding officer asking for humane treatment for Bradley. This weekend, we're delivering your letter to the Quantico Marine brig.
Can you please ask your family and friends to sign our letter urging for Bradley Manning to be treated humanely? This is your last chance!
If you're on Facebook, click here to share our petition for Bradley Manning on your wall.
If you're on Twitter, click here to tweet about our petition.
You can forward the email message below and ask your friends to sign, or just send them this link:
http://action.firedoglake.com/BradleyManningMessage
The LA Times described the conditions in which Pfc. Bradley Manning is imprisoned while he waits for a trial as "inhumane" and "indefensible." And a former Marine Captain at the Quantico marine brig where Manning is detained said he "seriously doubts that the conditions of [Manning's] confinement are … necessary, customary, or in accordance with law, US or international.
No matter what you think of Bradley Manning's alleged crimes, the conditions in which he is held are far beyond accepted practices, and possibly beyond what the law allows.
With your help, we'll send a strong message that Bradley Manning should be treated with basic rights and dignity.
Thanks for all you do.
Jane Hamsher Firedoglake.com

[Peter Lemkin]

2011-01-20: Cablegate: Ireland and U.S. Predator Drones
Submitted by x7o on Thu, 01/20/2011 - 17:47
http://wlcentral.org/node/999

State department cable reveals possible use of Irish IT infrastructure to pilot unmanned drones in Afghanistan. A recent article in Phoenix Magazine (behind paywall) conjectures that undersea fibre-optic cables channeled through sites in Ireland, revealed in Wikileaks release of 09STATE15113, are in fact part of the U.S. military infrastructure for piloting Predator Drones in Afghanistan from a military base in Nevada. If true, this could be illegal under Irish constitutional commitments to neutrality.


The 09STATE15113 cable was widely discussed in the media, after a former British Defence and Foreign Secretary and chairman of the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee suggested that its publication by Wikileaks might pose a significant threat to U.S. and British national security. These claims were addressed by WL Central, here. The cable itself is an inventory released by the State Department documenting U.S. infrastructural and strategic assets listed under the Department of Homeland Security's National Infrastructure Protection Programme (NIPP).

The cable, signed by Hillary Clinton, proclaims that "[t]he overarching goal of the NIPP is to build a safer, more secure, and more resilient America by enhancing protection of the nation's [Critical Infrastructure]/[Key Resources] to prevent, deter, neutralize or mitigate the effects of deliberate efforts by terrorists to destroy, incapacitate or exploit them; and to strengthen national preparedness, timely response, and rapid recovery in the event of an attack, natural disaster or other emergency." A scan of the inventory of critical infrastructure, however, reveals that the entire world is peppered with sites designated critical to American security. For instance, the three Irish sites listed include a building in an industrial estate on Dublin's north side, owned by Hibernia Atlantic. Hibernia Atlantic was unavailable for comment to the press after the release of the cable:

09STATE15113:

Ireland: Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing, Dublin
Ireland Genzyme Ireland Ltd. (filling), Waterford,
Ireland: Thymoglobulin,

The Phoenix article draws attention to the Hibernia site, pointing out that it ought to be a curiosity to Irish Military Intelligence why it is designated in this way by the American government.

Phoenix:

HOPEFULLY, Irish Military Intelligence (G2) has worked out by now why an anonymous building in a Coolock industrual estate is of such importance to the US that it features in the top secret National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) - published worldwide by Wikileaks. The NIPP lists include the Hibernia Atlantic Cable Network Operations Centre (NOC) at Clonshaugh, Dublin 17.

The Phoenix author goes on to suggest that the U.S. government has paid for the use of the transatlantic undersea fibre-optic cable, in order to facilitate its deployment of unmanned Predator drones in Central Asia.

The General Atomics MQ-1 "Predator" drone is an unmanned forward reconnaissance aircraft, which has been adapted for combat operations, and fitted with Hellfire missiles. It is one of an array of unmanned aircraft used by the United States military. A second, more secret Predator programme is run by the C.I.A. in covert targeted strikes. They have to date been deployed in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Yemen.

The use of Predator drones has been criticized even internally within the U.S. military, on account of their role in a number of events with high civilian deaths. A United Nations report raised concerns over whether the use of Predator drones violates international law.

The Predator has nonetheless been the focus of many PR spots on news networks, and has been celebrated in military technology documentaries as a staple of the 21st century American war effort. These often depict Predator drones in Central Asia being flown by satellite link from offices in a military base in Nevada. The Phoenix author makes the argument that the latency on satellite connections is too high for the Predator programme, and that the US military must instead use fibre-optic links to pilot the aircraft.

Phoenix:

In all these reports emphasis was placed on the use of earth satellites to control the killer drones... This secret media spin - that Predators are controlled in their Afghan area of operations through earth satellite links - is a fib aimed at securing the earth-based high speed links like Hibernian Atlantic from attack by jihadists.

Satellite links have one big draw back: they are far out in space (22,000 miles for some) and the speed with which they can transfer data is considerably slower than land-based and under-ocean fibre optic cables. Data takes 500 milliseconds to travel by satellite. But with Hibernian Atlantic's Dublin connection it takes 60 milliseconds to cross the ocean. The effect is called latency: the Coolock connection has low latency, a Nevada-Afghan satellite link has high latency.

An earth based system, of course, is more vulnerable to physical attack. A Holy Warrior who arrived at Sutton (where the Hibernian Atlantic cable comes ashore and from whences its east-bound companion heads to Southport and thence the Middle East) could do untold damage to the Predator campaign in Afghanistan, with little more than a spade and a hatchet. It is this, rather than considerations about Irish neutrality, which is the reason for the Dublin 17 centre being on that top secret list of vital facilities. But now the cat is out of the bag. No wonder the Yanks are so cross with Julian Assange. And no wonder the responsible Irish media has failed to follow up with investigation and publication of yet another example of Irish involvement in Uncle Sam's military exploits.

The possibility that Hibernia Atlantic is a conduit for Predator drone strikes raises a very new slant on a traditional Irish legal problem: what constitutes a breach of Irish constitutional commitments to neutrality. The Irish constitution, ratified during Ireland's neutrality in the Second World War, contains unusually strong restrictions on the participation in international conflicts, and various ancillary statutes build on this provision.

This issue has been the subject of significant legal activism over the history of the state, in recent years most visibly demonstrated in Horgan v. An Taoiseach, a High Court case in which an ex-soldier took a case against the Prime Minister of Ireland. The grounds for this case were that the allowance of the transmission of supplies and troops through Shannon airport, and the use of Irish airspace in U.S. flights to the Middle East and Central Asia as part of the "War on Terror" violated Irish neutrality, and were therefore unconstitutional. Some background for this case is given on WL Central here.

The idea that information infrastructure going through Irish territory, and using an Irish company, might be directly instrumental in the remote conduct of a war in Asia has analogies with the use of Irish airspace, and raises new questions over whether Irish neutrality is being breached.

However, the argument in Phoenix Magazine is hardly conclusive, and appears to assume that all assets listed in the NIPP list in 09STATE15113 are military assets, as opposed to assets important to American interests by more indirect means. 09STATE15113 does not appear to justify this assumption, and leaves open the possibility that a high capacity transatlantic fibre-optic cable might be important to U.S. strategic interests purely because its destruction would have a deleterious effect on certain U.S. industries, and thereby, on the national economy:

09STATE15113:

¶3. (U//FOUO) In addition to a list of critical domestic CI/KR, the NIPP requires compilation and annual update of a comprehensive inventory of CI/KR that are located outside U.S. borders and whose loss could critically impact the public health, economic security, and/or national and homeland security of the United States. DHS in collaboration with State developed the Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative (CFDI)to identify these critical U.S. foreign dependencies -- foreign CI/KR that may affect systems within the U.S. directly or indirectly. State is coordinating with DHS to develop the 2009 inventory, and the action request in Para. 13 represents the initial step in this process.

¶4. (U//FOUO) The NIPP does not define CI/KR. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD 7) references definitions in two separate statutes. In the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195(e)) "critical infrastructure" is defined as systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States the incapacitation or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters. In the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(9)) "key resources" are defined as publicly or privately controlled resources essential to the minimal operations of the economy and government.

¶5. (U//FOUO) The NIPP identifies 18 CI/KR sectors: agriculture and food; defense industrial base; energy; healthcare and public health; national monuments and icons; banking and finance; drinking water and water treatment systems; chemical; commercial facilities; dams; emergency services; commercial nuclear reactors, materials, and waste; information technology; communications; postal and shipping; transportation and systems; government facilities; and critical manufacturing. Obviously some of these sectors are more likely to have international components than other sectors.
...
Building upon the initial survey completed in 2008, Department requests each post reassess and update information about infrastructure and resources in each host country whose loss could immediately affect the public health, economic security, and/or national and homeland security of the United States.

It remains to be seen whether the possibilities raised by the Phoenix magazine have any correspondence with the facts. 899 diplomatic cables from the Dublin embassy have yet to be released by Wikileaks. Of the eleven that have been released at the time of this post, three have cast new and possibly incriminating light on the Shannon airport case, as has been explored by WL Central here. The prospect that they may cast light on the designation of Irish sites in the NIPP can not be ruled out.

[Peter Lemkin]

From DAVID C. MACMICHAEL

General James F. Amos
Commandant of the Marine Corps
3000 Marine Corps Pentagon
Washington DC 20350-3000

Dear General Amos:

As a former regular Marine Corps captain, a Korean War combat veteran, now retired on Veterans Administration disability due to wounds suffered during that conflict, I write you to protest and express concern about the confinement in the Quantico Marine Corps Base brig of US Army Pfc. Bradley Manning.

Manning, if the information I have is correct, is charged with having violated provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by providing to unauthorized persons, among them specifically one Julian Assange and his organization Wikileaks, classified information relating to US military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and State Department communications. This seems straightforward enough and sufficient to have Manning court-martialed and if found guilty sentenced in accordance with the UCMJ.

What concerns me here, and I hasten to admit that I respect Manning's motives, is the manner in which the legal action against him is being conducted. I wonder, in the first place, why an Army enlisted man is being held in a Marine Corps installation. Second, I question the length of confinement prior to conduct of court-martial. The sixth amendment to the US Constitution, guaranteeing to the accused in all criminal prosecutions the right to a speedy and public trial, extends to those being prosecuted in the military justice system. Third, I seriously doubt that the conditions of his confinementsolitary confinement, sleep interruption, denial of all but minimal physical exercise, etc.are necessary, customary, or in accordance with law, US or international.

Indeed, I have to wonder why the Marine Corps has put itself, or allowed itself to be put, in this invidious and ambiguous situation. I can appreciate that the decision to place Manning in a Marine Corps facility may not have been one over which you had control. However, the conditions of his confinement in the Quantico brig are very clearly under your purview, and, if I may say so, these bring little credit either to you or your subordinates at the Marine Corps Base who impose these conditions.

It would be inappropriate, I think, to use this letter, in which I urge you to use your authority to make the conditions of Pfc. Manning's confinement less extreme, to review my Marine Corps career except to note that my last duty prior to resigning my captain's commission in 1959 was commanding the headquarters company at Quantico. More relevantly, during the 1980s, following a stint as a senior estimates officer in the CIA, I played a very public role as a "whistleblower " in the Iran-contra affair. At that time, I wondered why Lt.Col. Oliver North, who very clearly violated the UCMJand, in my opinion, disgraced our servicewas not court-martialed.

When I asked the Navy's Judge-Advocate General's office why neither North nor Admiral Poindexter were charged under the UCMJ, the JAG informed me that when officers were assigned to duties in the White House, NSC, or similar offices they were somehow not legally in the armed forces. To my question why, if that were the case, they continued to draw their military pay and benefits, increase their seniority, be promoted while so serving, and, spectacularly in North's case, appear in uniform while testifying regarding violations of US law before Congress, I could get no answer beyond, "That's our policy."

This is not to equate North's case with Manning. It is only to suggest that equal treatment under the law is one of those American principles that the Marine Corps exists to protect. This is something you might consider.

Sincerely,

David C. MacMichael

[Source]

[Peter Lemkin]

2011-01-20 Cablegate, Ireland, and extraordinary rendition
Submitted by x7o on Thu, 01/20/2011 - 12:29
http://wlcentral.org/node/996

Cablegate reinforces suspicions of Irish government complicity in US rendition: US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks are gradually adding to a picture wherein the government of Ireland ignored public opposition to suspected US rendition flights through its territory, and looked for ways to co-operate with alleged US abuses while avoiding liability and political fallout.

What is the context?

The Shannon airport has a history of use as a military stopover point for foreign militaries. Post-9/11, the US military had been allowed to use Shannon as a conduit for "War on Terror" flights involving munitions, supplies, and the transport of vehicles and troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. This move was unpopular since the status of the Iraq war under international law was controversial, and the Shannon stopover was perceived by the Irish anti-war community as a violation of the principle of Irish neutrality.

A High Court challenge by an Irish ex-soldier in Horgan v. An Taoiseach on the grounds that the Shannon stopover was unconstitutional, pursuant to an Irish constitutional commitment (Art. 28.1) to neutrality, was rejected by Kearns J. on the basis that it was not for the judiciary to determine the degree to which the Shannon stopover constituted "participation" in the Iraq war.

The stopover was the subject of numerous activist campaigns and High Court cases. During the Iraq war, opposition to the Shannon stopover was at times as high as 58 per cent.

On December 6, 2005, BBC's Newsnight covered the possibility that Shannon was being used for CIA extraordinary rendition flights, whereby individuals were abducted from their home countries without legal or judicial oversight and flown to US-controlled sites within which their interrogation and extralegal incarceration could be facilitated more effectively. It was speculated that the US was outsourcing the tortuous interrogation of its detainees to client states that were not signatories to human-rights treaties.

What has Cablegate been revealing?

The role of the Irish government in the US use of Shannon is broadly outlined in three diplomatic cables from the Dublin embassy, released by WikiLeaks.

2010-11-30: A Confidential cable, 06DUBLIN1020 provides a brief on the Shannon situation to the State Department, and openly discusses the support of the Irish government for military stopovers in Shannon, interpreting new limitations on the use of Shannon by the US military more as an appeasement of public opinion in the face of a general election than as genuine concern for the abuse of Shannon airport.

06DUBLIN1020:

For segments of the Irish public, however, the visibility of U.S. troops at Shannon has made the airport a symbol of Irish complicity in perceived U.S. wrongdoing in the Gulf/Middle East...In late 2005/early 2006, EU-wide debate on extraordinary renditions similarly galvanized this lobby, and the Irish public generally, to question U.S. military access to the airport... The Irish Government consistently has acted to ensure continued U.S. military transits at Shannon in the face of public criticism... Notwithstanding its general support for U.S. interests, the Irish Government has more recently begun to place limits on certain forms of U.S. transits at Shannon... The Irish public's overwhelming opposition to Israeli military actions in Lebanon has exacerbated the governing Fianna Fail party's sensitivity to public criticism ahead of Ireland's May 2007 general elections. The major opposition party, Fine Gael, supports continued U.S. military use of Shannon, but the Labour Party and the Green Party, Fine Gael's opposition partners, favor a review, if not reversal, of Irish policy on U.S. transits. Against this political backdrop, U.S. missteps at Shannon could easily become campaign grist, a Fianna Fail concern that mid-level DFA officials have cited in informal discussions with Post... We suspect that the Government aims with tese new constraints to dampen public criticism ahead of the 2007 general elections[.]

2010-11-30: A Confidential cable, 07DUBLIN916 reports a meeting with (then) Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern, and relates approvingly his "tamping down" of public reaction to a report by the Irish Human Rights Commission on Extraordinary Rendition. The report had demanded that the Irish government inspect flights to ensure Extraordinary Rendition was not occurring, a demand that Ahern had unequivocally rejected - a move that drew the censure of the European Parliament. 07DUBLIN916 reveals that Ahern had assured the public that rendition was not occurring, but apparently reasonably certain that several renditions had in fact occurred. Ahern requested of the Ambassador a token inspection agreement, so as to provide political cover, lest the renditions become public knowledge.

07DUBLIN916:

Ambassador Foley thanked Ahern for his staunch rejection of the Irish Human Rights Commission's (IHRC) demand that the Irish Government inspect aircraft landing in Ireland that are alleged to have been involved in so-called extraordinary rendition flights (Ref B)...Ahern noted that he had "put his neck on the chopping block" and would pay a severe political price if it ever turned out that rendition flights had entered Ireland or if one was discovered in the future. He stated that he "could use a little more information" about the flights, musing that it might not be a bad idea to allow the random inspection of a few planes to proceed, which would provide cover if a rendition flight ever surfaced. He seemed quite convinced that at least three flights involving renditions had refueled at Shannon Airport before or after conducting renditions elsewhere... While Ahern's public stance on extraordinary renditions is rock-solid, his musings during the meeting seemed less assured. This was the only issue during the meeting that agitated him; he spent considerable time dwelling on it. Ahern seemed to be fishing for renewed assurances from the ambassador that no rendition flights have transited Ireland, or would transit in the future.

2011-01-13: A Secret and partially redacted cable, 04DUBLIN1739, reinforces the impression given in 07DUBLIN916 that throughout the Iraq War the Government of Ireland adopted a public stance of certainty that no rendition flights were occurring through Shannon, but privately suspected that they were occurring. It reveals that the primary worry of Irish government officials pertaining to rendition flights was not the prevention of internationally prohibited offenses against human beings, but the avoidance of political and legal liability. The Irish official, whose name was redacted, is primarily concerned that allowing rendition flights might constitute a criminal violation of Ireland's international treaty obligations, under treaties such as the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Human and Degrading Punishment, which besides forbidding torture, forbids also the neglect to intervene, and the refoulement of individuals to states where they might be subject to torture. The official scrupulously avoids asking whether rendition flights are occurring, since with that knowledge deniability would no longer be plausible. The ambassador diplomatically neglects to confirm, in return.

04DUBLIN1739:

DCM met with XXXXXXXXXXXX issues surrounding U.S. use of Shannon airport. XXXXXXXXXXXX noted that while there always has been an element of Irish society that objects to the U.S. military's use of Shannon, the government feels increasingly under pressure. On a weekly basis, members of parliament question the ministers...The political problem is that the government's defense of Shannon rests heavily on friendship with the U.S. and the Irish government saying it relies on the "good faith" of the USG... He cautioned that if it were ever to be discovered that the U.S. was not good on its word or had transported prisoners through Shannon in the context of the war on terrorism, there would be enormous political pressure on the government. As for the legal issue, he said that were a plane to include Shannon in an itinerary that also included transporting prisoners, GOI lawyers might be forced to conclude that the GOI itself was in violation of torture conventions...The DCM told XXXXXXXXXXXX that the USG would be in no position to respond to the detailed questions asked about particular planes, such as the Gulfstream jet, but stood by its commitment to abide by Irish law, consult with the Irish and avoid actions that would bring embarrassment to the Irish government... XXXXXXXXXXXX confirmed that there is no/no change pending to Irish policy allowing U.S. use of Shannon, but reiterated that some ministers feel they are going out on a limb defending U.S. use of Shannon and that the GOI is counting on the fact that the word of the USG is good and that the U.S. has not and will not transfer prisoners through Shannon or engage in any other activity that would place the government in legal or political difficulty. He said that the government consistently says the same thing and that this must not be shown later "to have holes in it." He also said it is critical that no "blue water" be found between statements that Irish and U.S. officials make.

The revelations in Cablegate appear to have vindicated the fears of the Irish anti-war community, and have galvanized parliamentary support for strengthening the judiciary's competency in the prevention of abuses. Irish Labour spokesperson for Foreign Affairs, Michael D Higgins, has urged renewed support for his 2008 Private Members Bill, the Air Navigation and Transport (Prevention of Extraordinary Rendition) Bill, which would render explicit Irish obligations under international law. Coverage of Higgins' statement can be consulted here.

2011-01-20 Cablegate: Statement on rendition by Irish Labour spokesperson for Foreign Affairs
Submitted by x7o on Thu, 01/20/2011 - 13:16


Irish Labour politician calls out Irish government on rendition: A senior member of the Irish Labour party and spokesperson for Foreign Affairs, Michael D Higgins, has criticized the Fianna Fáil government for apparent collusion with the US government on suspected rendition flights from Shannon airport in County Clare, indicated in US diplomatic cables from the Dublin Embassy.

In a statement made on January 17, Higgins referred to 04DUBLIN1739 and 07DUBLIN916 in support of his claim that the Irish government had knowingly conspired against popular and legal opinion in the use of Shannon airport by the U.S. military, while secretly harbouring a strong suspicion that it was being used for extraordinary rendition flights.

Labour.ie

The latest US cable revealed by Wikileaks shows how even in 2004 the Government's legal advice was that allowing the use of Shannon Airport to aircraft en-route to, or returning from, a rendition mission, made Ireland complicit in torture.

Yet the Dáil and Irish citizens were continually assured by Ministers that permitting the use of Irish territory as a staging post was not a breach of Ireland's committments under the international convention against torture. The Government ignored its own legal advice and maintained the same line until June 2006 when the Council of Europe and the Irish Human Rights Commission stated that such aircraft were conducting illegal activity.

The disclosure of this cable comes after earlier revelations that former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern, was 'quite convinced' in 2007 that Shannon Aiport had been used on at least three occasions by aircraft involved in rendition flights. Clearly there was then, as there is now, a strong need to change the law in this country to ensure that even when there is a Government without the mettle to stand up for Ireland's commitments to human rights, Irish airports are not used in rendition circuits and that any such aircraft are subject to proper inspection by the Irish authorities.

Higgins made reference to a private member's bill he had introduced in 2008, the intention of which was to render explicit in Irish law Ireland's obligations under international human-rights treaties:

Labour.ie
that persons are not transported by aircraft out of the State in state custody otherwise than in accordance with the laws of the State and the international agreements to which it is a party,
that aircraft suspected of being used for the transport of persons in state custody to a place where they may be exposed to the risk of a breach of human rights are not permitted to enter the airspace of the State or, if such aircraft are within the airspace of the State, that all practicable measures are taken to prevent the commission of a breach of human rights within the territory of the State.

Higgins urged that legislative measures be taken to strengthen Irish legal protections against extraordinary rendition.

Labour.ie

I would now urge the government either accept this Bill or to produce similar legislation of their own. Around the time my Bill was published, the Green Party announced that a government committee had been established to look at the whole area of extraordinary rendition, but nothing has been heard of this since.
Extraordinary rendition is the term used to describe the extrajudicial transfer of a person from one state to another and gives rise to particular concerns in the context of alleged transfers of suspected terrorists to countries known to torture prisoners or to employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture. It is contrary to international law and Ireland has an obligation to ensure that we do not facilitate this practice in any way.

In response to public and opposition pressure in the wake of the recent IMF deal, the Irish government is expected to announce a general election within the next month. Because of a sea change in Irish politics in the wake of Ireland's banking crisis, the coming election is widely regarded as being open beyond precedent in Irish history. It remains to be seen whether the revelations in Cablegate achieve legislative influence in the limited time before the Dáil is dissolved, or whether (government party) Fianna Fáil complicity in US rendition becomes an election campaign issue.

[David Guyatt]

The idea that information infrastructure going through Irish territory, and using an Irish company, might be directly instrumental in the remote conduct of a war in Asia has analogies with the use of Irish airspace, and raises new questions over whether Irish neutrality is being breached.

I seriously think that the Irish government have an agreed protocol with the US about this. Some years ago I was told that during the Irish "troubles", there was a secret accommodation between Eire and the UK that allowed UK defence forces to pursue individual members of the IRA across the border providing certain criteria were adhered to. I suspect, but don't know, that silent assassination may have been at the heart of it.

[Peter Lemkin]

2011-01-21 Julian Assange receives Russian visa
Submitted by exiledsurfer on Fri, 01/21/2011 - 12:57

According to Russia Times, Julian Assange has been granted a Russian visa and plans to visit the country soon. With his next court hearing scheduled for February 7, Assange may be able to visit Russia in three weeks, but only if the Swedish extradition request is turned down by Britain.

No details of the agenda and schedule have been disclosed. However, by that time a Russia-based pro-WikiLeaks NGO currently being established is likely to get its official registration.

The Russian News Service quoted by Russia Times quotes Israel Shamir as its source for the article. Shamir is a highly controversial figure who was associated with Wikileaks in distributing the US State cables.