Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.

Difference between revisions of "WikiLeaks"

From Anarchopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Will be removing the 'leaks' section to allow this article to be fully expanded and making a 'leaks' article, but this is safer to leave a record)
 
(cats)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
''See also [[United States diplomatic cables leak]] and [[WikiLeaks leaks]]''
+
''See also [[United States diplomatic cables WikiLeak]], [[WikiLeaks leaks]] and [[WikiLeaks: List of mirror sites]] and [[Category:WikiLeaks|List of WikiLeaks articles]]''
 
<!-- {{Infobox Website
 
<!-- {{Infobox Website
 
| favicon =
 
| favicon =
Line 21: Line 21:
 
| slogan = We [[open government]]s.
 
| slogan = We [[open government]]s.
 
| current status = Active (Undergoing [[Denial-of-service attack|DoS attacks]] and [[Internet service provider|ISP rejection]])<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/world/europe/04domain.html?_r=1&hp</ref>  
 
| current status = Active (Undergoing [[Denial-of-service attack|DoS attacks]] and [[Internet service provider|ISP rejection]])<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/world/europe/04domain.html?_r=1&hp</ref>  
−
| alexa = 4,629 ({{As of|2010|27|alt=November 2010}})<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikileaks.org# |title=wikileaks.org – Traffic Details from Alexa |publisher=[[Alexa Internet]], Inc |accessdate=27 November 2010 }}</ref>
+
| alexa = 4,629 (As of 27 November 2010)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikileaks.org# |title=wikileaks.org – Traffic Details from Alexa |publisher=[[Alexa Internet]], Inc |accessdate=27 November 2010 }}</ref>
 
}}
 
}}
 
-->
 
-->
  
−
'''WikiLeaks''' is an international [[non-profit]] [[new media|media organization]] that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous [[Journalism sourcing|news sources]] and [[news leak|leaks]]. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.<ref name=aboutwikileaks/> Within a year of its launch, the site claimed a database that had grown to more than 1.2&nbsp;million documents.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Wikileaks_has_1.2_million_documents.3F |title=Wikileaks has 1.2&nbsp;million documents? |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Wikileaks_has_1.2_million_documents.3F <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 16 February 2008}}</ref>
+
'''WikiLeaks''' is an international [[non-profit]] [[new media|media organization]] that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous [[Journalism sourcing|news sources]] and [[news leak|leaks]]. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.<ref name=aboutwikileaks>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About |title=Wikileaks:About |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=|accessdate=3 June 2009 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080314204422/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About|archivedate=14 March 2008}}</ref> Within a year of its launch, the site claimed a database that had grown to more than 1.2&nbsp;million documents.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Wikileaks_has_1.2_million_documents.3F |title=Wikileaks has 1.2&nbsp;million documents? |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Wikileaks_has_1.2_million_documents.3F <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 16 February 2008}}</ref>
  
−
The organization has described itself as having been founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the [[United States]], [[Taiwan]], [[Europe]], [[Australia]], and [[South Africa]].<ref name=aboutwikileaks/> Newspaper articles and ''[[The New Yorker]]'' magazine{{page number|issue=7 June 2010}} describe [[Julian Assange]], an Australian Internet activist, as its director.<ref name=McGreal>McGreal, Chris. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack Wikileaks reveals video showing U.S. air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians], ''The Guardian'', 5 April 2010.</ref>
+
The organization has described itself as having been founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the [[United States]], [[Taiwan]], [[Europe]], [[Australia]], and [[South Africa]].<ref name=aboutwikileaks/> Newspaper articles and ''[[The New Yorker]]'' magazine describe [[Julian Assange]], an Australian Internet activist, as its director.<ref name=McGreal>McGreal, Chris. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack Wikileaks reveals video showing U.S. air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians], ''The Guardian'', 5 April 2010.</ref>
  
−
WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including the 2008 [[Economist (magazine)|''Economist'' magazine]] New Media Award.<ref>[http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2008/04/winners-of-index-on-censorship-freedom-of-expression-award-announced/ Winners of Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Award Announced]{{dead link|date=October 2010}} 22 April 2008</ref> In June 2009, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange won [[Amnesty International]]'s UK Media Award (in the category "New Media") for the 2008 publication of "Kenya: The Cry of Blood&nbsp;– Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances",<ref>[http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Kenya:_The_Cry_of_Blood_-_Report_on_Extra-Judicial_Killings_and_Disappearances,_Sep_2008 Kenya: The Cry of Blood&nbsp;– Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances, Sep 2008]{{dead link|date=October 2010}} WikiLeaks.</ref> a report by the [[Kenya National Commission on Human Rights]] about police killings in Kenya.<ref>[http://amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18227 Amnesty announces Media Awards 2009 winners] Amnesty.org.uk, 2 June 2009</ref> In May 2010, the ''[[New York Daily News]]'' listed WikiLeaks first in a ranking of "websites that could totally change the news".<ref name=5sites>{{cite news |url=http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_5_pioneering_web_sites_that_could_totally_change_the_news.html |title=5 pioneering Web sites that could totally change the news |last=Reso |first=Paulina |date=20 May 2010 |work=[[Daily News (New York)|Daily News]] |accessdate=8 June 2010}}</ref>
+
WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including the 2008 ''Economist'' magazine New Media Award.<ref>[http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2008/04/winners-of-index-on-censorship-freedom-of-expression-award-announced/ Winners of Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Award Announced]''dead link reported'' 22 April 2008</ref> In June 2009, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange won [[Amnesty International]]'s UK Media Award (in the category "New Media") for the 2008 publication of "Kenya: The Cry of Blood&nbsp;– Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances",<ref>[http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Kenya:_The_Cry_of_Blood_-_Report_on_Extra-Judicial_Killings_and_Disappearances,_Sep_2008 Kenya: The Cry of Blood&nbsp;– Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances, Sep 2008]''dead link reported'' WikiLeaks.</ref> a report by the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights about police killings in Kenya.<ref>[http://amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18227 Amnesty announces Media Awards 2009 winners] Amnesty.org.uk, 2 June 2009</ref> In May 2010, the ''New York Daily News'' listed WikiLeaks first in a ranking of "websites that could totally change the news".<ref name=5sites>{{cite web |url=http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_5_pioneering_web_sites_that_could_totally_change_the_news.html |title=5 pioneering Web sites that could totally change the news |last=Reso |first=Paulina |date=20 May 2010 |work=Daily News |accessdate=8 June 2010}}</ref>
  
−
In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from [[12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike|a 2007 incident]] in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by U.S. forces, on a website called [[Collateral murder|Collateral Murder]]. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released [[Afghan War Diary]], a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|War in Afghanistan]] not previously available for public review.<ref name="AssociatedPressNews">{{cite news | title=AP Interview: WikiLeaks to publish new documents | website=[[www.ap.org]] | date=8 August 2010 | url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WIKILEAKS_NEW_FILES?SITE=NVLAS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT | accessdate=8 August 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> In October, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the [[Iraq War Logs]] in coordination with major commercial media organisations. In November, Wikileaks began releasing [[United States diplomatic cables leak|U.S. State department diplomatic cables]].
+
In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from [[12th July Baghdad airstrike|a 2007 incident in Baghdad]] in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by U.S. forces, on a website called [[Wikipedia:Collateral murder|Collateral Murder]]. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released [[Afghan War Diary]], a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the [[Wikipedia:War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|War in Afghanistan]] not previously available for public review.<ref name="AssociatedPressNews">{{cite web | title=AP Interview: WikiLeaks to publish new documents | website=[[www.ap.org]] | date=8 August 2010 | url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WIKILEAKS_NEW_FILES?SITE=NVLAS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT | accessdate=8 August 2010}} ''dead link reported''</ref> In October, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the [[Iraq War Logs]] in coordination with major commercial media organisations. In November, Wikileaks began releasing [[United States diplomatic cables leak|U.S. State department diplomatic cables]].
  
 
WikiLeaks was launched as a user-editable "[[Wiki|wiki]]" site and still uses [[MediaWiki]] as the [[content management system]], but has progressively moved towards a more traditional publication model, and no longer accepts either user comments or edits.
 
WikiLeaks was launched as a user-editable "[[Wiki|wiki]]" site and still uses [[MediaWiki]] as the [[content management system]], but has progressively moved towards a more traditional publication model, and no longer accepts either user comments or edits.
  
 
==History==
 
==History==
−
The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.<ref> "Reportedly spurred by the leak of the Pentagon papers, Assange unveiled WikiLeaks in December 2006" {{cite web | title=WikiLeaks' War on Secrecy: Truth's Consequences | url=http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034276-3,00.html | accessdate=4 December 2010}}</ref><ref>"In December, 2006, WikiLeaks posted its first document" {{cite web | title=No Secrets | url=http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=8 | accessdate= 1 December 2010}}</ref> The site claims to have been "founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa".<ref name=aboutwikileaks>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About |title=Wikileaks:About |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=3 June 2009 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080314204422/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About|archivedate=14 March 2008}}</ref> The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.<ref name=NewScientist1>{{cite news |author=Paul Marks |title=How to leak a secret and not get caught |url=http://www.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19325865.500-how-to-leak-a-secret-and-not-get-caught.html |work=New Scientist |date=13 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref> It has been represented in public since January 2007 by [[Julian Assange]] and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks' advisory board.<ref name="afp07">{{cite news |author=Agence France Press |work=The Age |title=Chinese cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers |url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/Technology/Chinese-cyberdissidents-launch-WikiLeaks-a-site-forwhistleblowers/2007/01/11/1168105082315.html |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=17 June 2010 | location=Melbourne}}</ref> News reports in ''[[The Australian]]'' have called Assange the "founder of WikiLeaks".<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/rudd-government-blacklist-hacker-monitors-police/story-e6frg8yx-1225718288350 |title=Rudd Government blacklist hacker monitors police |work=The Australian author=Richard Guilliatt |date=30 May 2009 |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref> According to Wired magazine, a volunteer said that Assange described himself in a private conversation as "the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html|title=WikiLeaks Founder on the Run, Trailed by Notoriety}}</ref> {{As of|2009|6}}, the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers<ref name=aboutwikileaks/> and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, [[Phillip Adams]], [[Wang Dan]], C. J. Hinke, [[Ben Laurie]], Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, [[Xiao Qiang]], [[Chico Whitaker]] and [[Wang Youcai]].<ref>{{cite web |title=WikiLeaks:Advisory Board |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:Advisory_Board |publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=16 June 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> Despite appearing on the list, when contacted by ''[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]]'' magazine in 2010, Khamsitsang said that while he received an e-mail from WikiLeaks, he had never agreed to be an advisor.<ref name=motherjones2>{{cite web|url=http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=2 |title=Inside WikiLeaks’ Leak Factory |publisher=Mother Jones |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
+
The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.<ref> "Reportedly spurred by the leak of the Pentagon papers, Assange unveiled WikiLeaks in December 2006" {{cite web | title=WikiLeaks' War on Secrecy: Truth's Consequences | url=http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034276-3,00.html | accessdate=4 December 2010}}</ref><ref>"In December, 2006, WikiLeaks posted its first document" {{cite web | title=No Secrets | url=http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=8 | accessdate= 1 December 2010}}</ref> The site claims to have been "founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa".<ref name=aboutwikileaks>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About |title=Wikileaks:About |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=3 June 2009 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080314204422/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About|archivedate=14 March 2008}}</ref> The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.<ref name=NewScientist1>{{cite web |author=Paul Marks |title=How to leak a secret and not get caught |url=http://www.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19325865.500-how-to-leak-a-secret-and-not-get-caught.html |work=New Scientist |date=13 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref> It has been represented in public since January 2007 by [[Julian Assange]] and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks' advisory board.<ref name="afp07">{{cite web |author=Agence France Press |work=The Age |title=Chinese cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers |url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/Technology/Chinese-cyberdissidents-launch-WikiLeaks-a-site-forwhistleblowers/2007/01/11/1168105082315.html |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=17 June 2010 | location=Melbourne}}</ref> News reports in ''[[The Australian]]'' have called Assange the "founder of WikiLeaks".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/rudd-government-blacklist-hacker-monitors-police/story-e6frg8yx-1225718288350 |title=Rudd Government blacklist hacker monitors police |work=The Australian author=Richard Guilliatt |date=30 May 2009 |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref> According to Wired magazine, a volunteer said that Assange described himself in a private conversation as "the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html|title=WikiLeaks Founder on the Run, Trailed by Notoriety}}</ref> As of June 2009, the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers<ref name=aboutwikileaks/> and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, [[Phillip Adams]], [[Wang Dan]], C. J. Hinke, [[Ben Laurie]], Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, [[Xiao Qiang]], [[Chico Whitaker]] and [[Wang Youcai]].<ref>{{cite web |title=WikiLeaks:Advisory Board |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:Advisory_Board |publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=16 June 2010}} ''dead link reported''</ref> Despite appearing on the list, when contacted by ''[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]]'' magazine in 2010, Khamsitsang said that while he received an e-mail from WikiLeaks, he had never agreed to be an advisor.<ref name=motherjones2>{{cite web|url=http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=2 |title=Inside WikiLeaks’ Leak Factory |publisher=Mother Jones |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
  
−
WikiLeaks states that its "primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations."<ref name=aboutwikileaks/><ref>{{cite news |author=|title=Cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers |url=http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=60857 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20070221224039/http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=60857 |work=South China Morning Post |archivedate=12 February 2007 |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref>
+
WikiLeaks states that its "primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations."<ref name=aboutwikileaks/><ref>{{cite web|author=|title=Cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers |url=http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=60857 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20070221224039/http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=60857 |work=South China Morning Post |archivedate=12 February 2007 |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref>
  
 
In January 2007, the website stated that it had over 1.2&nbsp;million leaked documents that it was preparing to publish.<ref name=NowPublic1>{{cite web |author=Kearny |title=Wikileaks and Untraceable Document Disclosure |url=http://www.nowpublic.com/wikileaks_and_untraceable_document_disclosure |work=Now Public News |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070927224330/http://www.nowpublic.com/wikileaks_and_untraceable_document_disclosure <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 27 September 2007}}, ''Wikileaks''.</ref> An article in ''[[The New Yorker]]'' said
 
In January 2007, the website stated that it had over 1.2&nbsp;million leaked documents that it was preparing to publish.<ref name=NowPublic1>{{cite web |author=Kearny |title=Wikileaks and Untraceable Document Disclosure |url=http://www.nowpublic.com/wikileaks_and_untraceable_document_disclosure |work=Now Public News |date=11 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070927224330/http://www.nowpublic.com/wikileaks_and_untraceable_document_disclosure <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 27 September 2007}}, ''Wikileaks''.</ref> An article in ''[[The New Yorker]]'' said
−
<blockquote>One of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the [[Tor (anonymity network)|Tor network]]. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments’ information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site’s foundation, and Assange was able to say, "[w]e have received over one million documents from thirteen countries."<ref name="Khatchdourian">{{cite news|url=http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?printable=true|title=WikiLeaks and Julian Paul Assange|work=The New Yorker |accessdate=8 June 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tranche#Noun |title=Wiktionary definition of tranche |publisher=En.wiktionary.org |date=13 October 2010 |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref></blockquote> Assange responded to the suggestion that eavesdropping on Chinese hackers played a crucial part in the early days of WikiLeaks by saying "the imputation is incorrect. The facts concern a 2006 investigation into Chinese espionage one of our contacts were involved in. Somewhere between none and handful of those documents were ever released on WikiLeaks. Non-government targets of the Chinese espionage, such as Tibetan associations were informed (by us)".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/02/wikileaks_tor_snooping_denial/|title=Wikileaks denies Tor hacker eavesdropping gave site its starte|work=[[The Register]]|accessdate=10 July 2010}}</ref> The group has subsequently released a number of other significant documents which have become front-page news items, ranging from documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan war]] to corruption in Kenya.<ref>{{cite news |author=|title=Wikileaks Releases Secret Report on Military Equipment |url=http://www.nysun.com/article/62236 |work=The New York Sun |date=9 September 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref>
+
<blockquote>One of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the [[Tor (anonymity network)|Tor network]]. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments’ information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site’s foundation, and Assange was able to say, "[w]e have received over one million documents from thirteen countries."<ref name="Khatchdourian">{{cite web|url=http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?printable=true|title=WikiLeaks and Julian Paul Assange|work=The New Yorker |accessdate=8 June 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tranche#Noun |title=Wiktionary definition of tranche |publisher=En.wiktionary.org |date=13 October 2010 |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref></blockquote> Assange responded to the suggestion that eavesdropping on Chinese hackers played a crucial part in the early days of WikiLeaks by saying "the imputation is incorrect. The facts concern a 2006 investigation into Chinese espionage one of our contacts were involved in. Somewhere between none and handful of those documents were ever released on WikiLeaks. Non-government targets of the Chinese espionage, such as Tibetan associations were informed (by us)".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/02/wikileaks_tor_snooping_denial/|title=Wikileaks denies Tor hacker eavesdropping gave site its starte|work=[[The Register]]|accessdate=10 July 2010}}</ref> The group has subsequently released a number of other significant documents which have become front-page news items, ranging from documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the [[Wikipedia:War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan war]] to corruption in Kenya.<ref>{{cite web |author=|title=Wikileaks Releases Secret Report on Military Equipment |url=http://www.nysun.com/article/62236 |work=The New York Sun |date=9 September 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref>
  
−
The organization's stated goal is to ensure that [[whistleblower]]s and journalists are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents, as happened to Chinese journalist [[Shi Tao]], who was sentenced to 10 years in 2005 after publicising an email from Chinese officials about the anniversary of the [[Tiananmen Square massacre]].<ref name=Scenta-coUK1>{{cite news |author=|title=Leak secrets trouble free |url=http://www.scenta.co.uk/scenta/news.cfm?cit_id=1432293&FAArea1=widgets.content_view_1 |work=Scenta |date=15 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20071127164824/http://www.scenta.co.uk/scenta/news.cfm?cit_id=1432293&FAArea1=widgets.content_view_1 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 27 November 2007}}</ref>
+
The organization's stated goal is to ensure that [[whistleblower]]s and journalists are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents, as happened to Chinese journalist [[Shi Tao]], who was sentenced to 10 years in 2005 after publicising an email from Chinese officials about the anniversary of the [[Tiananmen Square massacre]].<ref name=Scenta-coUK1>{{cite web |author=|title=Leak secrets trouble free |url=http://www.scenta.co.uk/scenta/news.cfm?cit_id=1432293&FAArea1=widgets.content_view_1 |work=Scenta |date=15 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20071127164824/http://www.scenta.co.uk/scenta/news.cfm?cit_id=1432293&FAArea1=widgets.content_view_1 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 27 November 2007}}</ref>
  
−
The project has drawn comparisons to [[Daniel Ellsberg]]'s leaking of the [[Pentagon Papers]] in 1971.<ref name=LinuxworldWikileaks1>[[Scott Bradner]] [http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1264532314;fp;2;fpid;1 "WikiLeaks: a site for exposure"], [[LinuxWorld.com|Linuxworld]], 18 January 2007. Retrieved 18 January 2007.</ref> In the United States, the leaking of some documents may be legally protected. The [[U.S. Supreme Court]] has ruled that the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]] guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of [[political discourse]].<ref name=LinuxworldWikileaks1/> Author and journalist [[Whitley Strieber]] has spoken about the benefits of the WikiLeaks project, noting that "Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East."<ref>{{cite news |author=Staff Reports |title=Whistleblower Website Coming |url=http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=31640 |work=Free-Market News Network |date=18 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
The project has drawn comparisons to [[Wikipedia:Daniel Ellsberg|Daniel Ellsberg]]'s leaking of the [[Wikipedia:Pentagon Papers|Pentagon Papers]] in 1971.<ref name=LinuxworldWikileaks1>[[Scott Bradner]] [http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1264532314;fp;2;fpid;1 "WikiLeaks: a site for exposure"], [[LinuxWorld.com|Linuxworld]], 18 January 2007. Retrieved 18 January 2007.</ref> In the United States, the leaking of some documents may be legally protected. The [[U.S. Supreme Court]] has ruled that the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]] guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of [[political discourse]].<ref name=LinuxworldWikileaks1/> Author and journalist [[Whitley Strieber]] has spoken about the benefits of the WikiLeaks project, noting that "Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East."<ref>{{cite web |author=Staff Reports |title=Whistleblower Website Coming |url=http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=31640 |work=Free-Market News Network |date=18 January 2007 |accessdate=28 February 2008}} ''dead link reported''</ref>
  
−
On 24 December 2009, WikiLeaks announced that it was experiencing a shortage of funds<ref>{{cite web |url=http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/6995068005 |title=twitter.com/wikiLeaks at 1.24&nbsp;am 24&nbsp;Dec 2009 |publisher=Twitter |date=24 December 2009 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref> and suspended all access to its website except for a form to submit new material.<ref name="Wikileaks is overloaded">{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/ |title=Wikileaks is overloaded |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 31 December 2009}} "To concentrate on raising the funds necessary to keep us alive into 2010, we have reluctantly suspended all other operations, but will be back soon."[http://wikileaks.org/ wikileaks.org]</ref> Material that was previously published was no longer available, although some could still be accessed on unofficial mirrors.<ref name="Wikileaks Mirror">{{cite web |url=http://mirror.wikileaks.info/ |title=Wikileaks Mirror |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 13 February 2010}}</ref><ref name="Another Wikileaks Mirror">{{cite web |url=http://mirror.infoboj.eu/ |title=Another Wikileaks Mirror |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 13 February 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks stated on its website that it would resume full operation once the operational costs were covered.<ref name=autogenerated3>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/ |title=WikiLeaks is overloaded |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 17 February 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Butselaar |first=Emily |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/29/wikileaks-shut-down |title=Dig deep for WikiLeaks |work=The Guardian |location=UK |date=29 January 2010 |accessdate = 30 January 2010 |location=London}}</ref> WikiLeaks saw this as a kind of strike "to ensure that everyone who is involved stops normal work and actually spends time raising revenue".<ref name="leakonomy">Interview with Julian Assange, spokesperson of Wikileaks: [http://stefanmey.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/leak-o-nomy-the-economy-of-wikileaks/ ''Leak-o-nomy: The Economy of Wikileaks''].</ref>
+
On 24 December 2009, WikiLeaks announced that it was experiencing a shortage of funds<ref>{{cite web |url=http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/6995068005 |title=twitter.com/wikiLeaks at 1.24&nbsp;am 24&nbsp;Dec 2009 |publisher=Twitter |date=24 December 2009 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref> and suspended all access to its website except for a form to submit new material.<ref name="Wikileaks is overloaded">{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/ |title=Wikileaks is overloaded |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 31 December 2009}} "To concentrate on raising the funds necessary to keep us alive into 2010, we have reluctantly suspended all other operations, but will be back soon."[http://wikileaks.org/ wikileaks.org]</ref> Material that was previously published was no longer available, although some could still be accessed on unofficial mirrors.<ref name="Wikileaks Mirror">{{cite web |url=http://mirror.wikileaks.info/ |title=Wikileaks Mirror |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 13 February 2010}}</ref><ref name="Another Wikileaks Mirror">{{cite web |url=http://mirror.infoboj.eu/ |title=Another Wikileaks Mirror |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 13 February 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks stated on its website that it would resume full operation once the operational costs were covered.<ref name=autogenerated3>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/ |title=WikiLeaks is overloaded |work=WikiLeaks |accessdate = 17 February 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last= Butselaar |first=Emily |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/29/wikileaks-shut-down |title=Dig deep for WikiLeaks |work=The Guardian |location=UK |date=29 January 2010 |accessdate = 30 January 2010 |location=London}}</ref> WikiLeaks saw this as a kind of strike "to ensure that everyone who is involved stops normal work and actually spends time raising revenue".<ref name="leakonomy">Interview with Julian Assange, spokesperson of Wikileaks: [http://stefanmey.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/leak-o-nomy-the-economy-of-wikileaks/ ''Leak-o-nomy: The Economy of Wikileaks''].</ref>
 
While it was initially hoped that funds could be secured by 6 January 2010,<ref>{{cite web |author=WikiLeaks |url=http://twitter.com/wikiLeaks |title=at 7:42&nbsp;am 5&nbsp;Jan 2010 |publisher=Twitter |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref> it was only on 3 February 2010 that WikiLeaks announced that its minimum fundraising goal had been achieved.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8613426708 |title=www.twitter.com/wikileaks at 3&nbsp;February&nbsp;5.51&nbsp;pm |publisher=Twitter |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
 
While it was initially hoped that funds could be secured by 6 January 2010,<ref>{{cite web |author=WikiLeaks |url=http://twitter.com/wikiLeaks |title=at 7:42&nbsp;am 5&nbsp;Jan 2010 |publisher=Twitter |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref> it was only on 3 February 2010 that WikiLeaks announced that its minimum fundraising goal had been achieved.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8613426708 |title=www.twitter.com/wikileaks at 3&nbsp;February&nbsp;5.51&nbsp;pm |publisher=Twitter |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
  
Line 54: Line 54:
 
On 18 May 2010, WikiLeaks announced that its website and archive were back up.<ref>[https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/14270362566].</ref>
 
On 18 May 2010, WikiLeaks announced that its website and archive were back up.<ref>[https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/14270362566].</ref>
  
−
As of June 2010, WikiLeaks was a finalist for a grant of more than half a million dollars from the [[John S. and James L. Knight Foundation]],<ref name=Khatchadourian>[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all No Secrets], by Raffi Khatchadourian, New Yorker, 7 June 2010.</ref> but did not make the cut.<ref name=Knight>{{cite news|last=Cohen |first=Noam |url=http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/knight-foundation-hands-out-grants-to-12-groups-but-not-wikileaks/ |title=Knight Foundation Hands Out Grants to 12 Groups, but Not WikiLeaks - Media Decoder Blog - NYTimes.com |publisher=Mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com |date=17 June 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks commented, "WikiLeaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure”. WikiLeaks said that the Knight foundation announced the award to "'12 Grantees who will impact future of news'&nbsp;– but not WikiLeaks" and questioned whether Knight foundation was "really looking for impact".<ref name=Knight/> A spokesman of the Knight Foundation disputed parts of WikiLeaks' statement, saying "WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board."<ref name=yahoo>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100617/ts_ynews/ynews_ts2677_3 WikiLeaks questions why it was rejected for Knight grant] Yahoo! News, 17 June 2010</ref> However, he declined to say whether WikiLeaks was the project rated highest by the Knight advisory panel, which consists of non-staffers, among them journalist [[Jennifer 8. Lee]], who has done PR work for WikiLeaks with the press and on social networking sites.<ref name=yahoo/>
+
As of June 2010, WikiLeaks was a finalist for a grant of more than half a million dollars from the [[John S. and James L. Knight Foundation]],<ref name=Khatchadourian>[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all No Secrets], by Raffi Khatchadourian, New Yorker, 7 June 2010.</ref> but did not make the cut.<ref name=Knight>{{cite web|last=Cohen |first=Noam |url=http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/knight-foundation-hands-out-grants-to-12-groups-but-not-wikileaks/ |title=Knight Foundation Hands Out Grants to 12 Groups, but Not WikiLeaks - Media Decoder Blog - NYTimes.com |publisher=Mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com |date=17 June 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks commented, "WikiLeaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure”. WikiLeaks said that the Knight foundation announced the award to "'12 Grantees who will impact future of news'&nbsp;– but not WikiLeaks" and questioned whether Knight foundation was "really looking for impact".<ref name=Knight/> A spokesman of the Knight Foundation disputed parts of WikiLeaks' statement, saying "WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board."<ref name=yahoo>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100617/ts_ynews/ynews_ts2677_3 WikiLeaks questions why it was rejected for Knight grant] Yahoo! News, 17 June 2010</ref> However, he declined to say whether WikiLeaks was the project rated highest by the Knight advisory panel, which consists of non-staffers, among them journalist [[Jennifer 8. Lee]], who has done PR work for WikiLeaks with the press and on social networking sites.<ref name=yahoo/>
  
 
On 17 July [[Jacob Appelbaum]] spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks at the 2010 [[Hackers on Planet Earth]] conference in New York City, replacing Assange because of the presence of federal agents at the conference.<ref name=repair/><ref>{{cite web|last=McCullagh |first=Declan |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20010861-83.html |title=Feds look for WikiLeaks founder at NYC hacker event &#124; Security – CNET News |publisher=News.cnet.com |date=16 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> He announced that the WikiLeaks submission system was again up and running, after it had been temporarily suspended.<ref name=repair>{{cite web|author=<!--start post navigation--> Previous post Next post |url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks_repair/ |title=Wikileaks Reopens for Leakers &#124; Threat Level |publisher=Wired.com |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref><ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1ebTGiyaQQ2HSCOpqsD8GD7x_7IBqkeYZ4jfEJ_rYeFQ Jacob Appelbaum WikiLeaks Next HOPE Keynote Transcript – 07/17/10<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Assange was a surprise speaker at a TED conference on 19 July 2010 in Oxford, and confirmed that WikiLeaks was now accepting submissions again.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.ted.com/2010/07/surprise_speake.php |title=Surprise speaker at TEDGlobal: Julian Assange in Session 12 |publisher=Blog.ted.com |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.geekosystem.com/wikileaks-julian-assange-ted/ |title=Julian Assange – TED Talk – WikiLeaks |publisher=Geekosystem |date=19 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref>
 
On 17 July [[Jacob Appelbaum]] spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks at the 2010 [[Hackers on Planet Earth]] conference in New York City, replacing Assange because of the presence of federal agents at the conference.<ref name=repair/><ref>{{cite web|last=McCullagh |first=Declan |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20010861-83.html |title=Feds look for WikiLeaks founder at NYC hacker event &#124; Security – CNET News |publisher=News.cnet.com |date=16 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> He announced that the WikiLeaks submission system was again up and running, after it had been temporarily suspended.<ref name=repair>{{cite web|author=<!--start post navigation--> Previous post Next post |url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks_repair/ |title=Wikileaks Reopens for Leakers &#124; Threat Level |publisher=Wired.com |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref><ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1ebTGiyaQQ2HSCOpqsD8GD7x_7IBqkeYZ4jfEJ_rYeFQ Jacob Appelbaum WikiLeaks Next HOPE Keynote Transcript – 07/17/10<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Assange was a surprise speaker at a TED conference on 19 July 2010 in Oxford, and confirmed that WikiLeaks was now accepting submissions again.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.ted.com/2010/07/surprise_speake.php |title=Surprise speaker at TEDGlobal: Julian Assange in Session 12 |publisher=Blog.ted.com |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.geekosystem.com/wikileaks-julian-assange-ted/ |title=Julian Assange – TED Talk – WikiLeaks |publisher=Geekosystem |date=19 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref>
Line 60: Line 60:
 
Upon returning to the U.S. from the Netherlands, on 29 July, Appelbaum was detained for three hours at the airport by U.S. agents, according to anonymous sources.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/> The sources told ''[[Cnet]]'' that Appelbaum's bag was searched, receipts from his bag were photocopied, his laptop was inspected, although in what manner was unclear.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/> Appelbaum reportedly refused to answer questions without a lawyer present, and was not allowed to make a phone call. His three mobile phones were reportedly taken and not returned.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport>{{cite web|last=Mills |first=Elinor |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20012253-245.html |title=Researcher detained at U.S. border, questioned about WikiLeaks &#124; InSecurity Complex – CNET News |publisher=News.cnet.com |date=28 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> On 31 July, he spoke at a [[DEF CON|Defcon]] conference and mentioned his phone being "seized". After speaking, he was approached by two [[FBI]] agents and questioned.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/>
 
Upon returning to the U.S. from the Netherlands, on 29 July, Appelbaum was detained for three hours at the airport by U.S. agents, according to anonymous sources.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/> The sources told ''[[Cnet]]'' that Appelbaum's bag was searched, receipts from his bag were photocopied, his laptop was inspected, although in what manner was unclear.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/> Appelbaum reportedly refused to answer questions without a lawyer present, and was not allowed to make a phone call. His three mobile phones were reportedly taken and not returned.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport>{{cite web|last=Mills |first=Elinor |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20012253-245.html |title=Researcher detained at U.S. border, questioned about WikiLeaks &#124; InSecurity Complex – CNET News |publisher=News.cnet.com |date=28 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> On 31 July, he spoke at a [[DEF CON|Defcon]] conference and mentioned his phone being "seized". After speaking, he was approached by two [[FBI]] agents and questioned.<ref name=AppelbaumAirport/>
  
−
==Administration==
 
−
According to a January 2010 interview, the WikiLeaks team then consisted of five people working full-time and about 800 people who worked occasionally, none of whom were compensated.<ref name="leakonomy"/> WikiLeaks has no official headquarters. The expenses per year are about €200,000, mainly for servers and [[bureaucracy]], but would reach €600,000 if work currently done by volunteers were paid for.<ref name="leakonomy"/> WikiLeaks does not pay for lawyers, as hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal support have been donated by media organisations such as the [[Associated Press]], ''[[The Los Angeles Times]]'', and the [[National Newspaper Publishers Association]].<ref name="leakonomy"/> Its only revenue stream is donations, but WikiLeaks is planning to add an auction model to sell early access to documents.<ref name="leakonomy"/> According to the [[Wau Holland]] Foundation, WikiLeaks receives no money for personnel costs, only for hardware, travelling and bandwidth.<ref name=techeye>{{cite web|url=http://www.techeye.net/internet/wau-holland-foundation-sheds-light-on-wikileaks-donations#ixzz0td0dXhBx |title=Wau Holland Foundation sheds light on WikiLeaks donations – Hardware, ISP, travelling costs |publisher=TechEye |date=13 July 2010 |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref> An article in TechEYE.net wrote {{quote|As a charity accountable under German law, donations for WikiLeaks can be made to the foundation. Funds are held in escrow and are given to WikiLeaks after the whistleblower website files an application containing a statement with proof of payment. The foundation does not pay any sort of salary nor give any renumeration {{sic}} to WikiLeaks' personnel, corroborating the statement of the site's German representative Daniel Schmitt (real name Daniel Domscheit-Berg)<ref>{{cite web|author=Theunis Bates Contributor |url=http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/wiklleaks-woes-grow-as-spokesman-quits-site/19651296?test=latestnews |title=WikiLeaks' Woes Grow as Spokesman Quits Site |publisher=Aolnews.com |date= |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref> on national television that all personnel works voluntarily, even its speakers.<ref name=techeye/>}}
 
−
 
−
===Site management issues===
 
−
There has been public disagreement between [[Julian Assange]] and Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who was suspended by Assange and on 28 September announced he would leave the company.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isHwFGCcbgxypyBe_STcUdqToASwD9IIGLF00?docId=D9IIGLF00 |title=WikiLeaks chief lashes out at media during debate |publisher=Google |date=30 September 2010 |accessdate=22 October 2010}}{{dead link|date=November 2010}}</ref><ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/09/28/businessinsider-wikileaks-spokesman-quits.DTL "WikiLeaks Spokesman Quits, Blasts Founder Julian Assange As Paranoid Control Freak, Admits To Using Fake Name", by Henry Blodget], 28 September 2010, [[San Francisco Chronicle]]</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/wikileaks-woes-grow-as-spokesman-quits-site/19651296 |title=WikiLeaks' Woes Grow as Spokesman Quits Site |publisher=Aolnews.com |date= |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref> In October 2010, it was reported that [[Moneybookers]], which collected donations for WikiLeaks, had ended its relationship with the site. Moneybookers stated that its decision had been made "to comply with money laundering or other investigations conducted by government authorities, agencies or commissions."<ref name="moneybookers">{{cite news |title= WikiLeaks donation site shutdown by operator|author=Benson, Pam |publisher=CNN |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/10/15/wikileaks.donation.site/?hpt=T2|date=16 October 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
===Hosting===
 
−
WikiLeaks describes itself as “an uncensorable system for untraceable mass document leaking”. WikiLeaks is hosted by [[PRQ]], a Sweden-based company providing “highly secure, no-questions-asked hosting services.” PRQ is said to have “almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own [[server log|logs]].” The servers are spread around the world with the central server located in Sweden.<ref name="DN1">{{cite news |title={{Sv icon}} Jagad och hatad – men han vägrar vika sig |author=Fredén, Jonas |newspaper=[[Dagens Nyheter]] |url=http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/jagad-och-hatad-men-han-vagrar-vika-sig-1.1153725|date=14 August 2010}}</ref> Julian Assange has said that the servers are located in Sweden (and the other countries) "specifically because those nations offer legal protection to the disclosures made on the site". He talks about the [[Constitution of Sweden|Swedish constitution]], which gives the information providers total legal protection.<ref name="DN1" /> It is forbidden according to Swedish law for any administrative authority to make inquiries about the sources of any type of newspaper.<ref>{{cite news |title={{Sv icon}} Därför blir Julian Assange kolumnist i Aftonbladet |author=Helin, Jan |newspaper=[[Aftonbladet]]|date=14 August 2010 |url=http://blogg.aftonbladet.se/janhelin/2010/08/darfor-blir-julian-assange-kolumnist-i-aftonbladet |accessdate=15 August 2010}}</ref> These laws, and the hosting by PRQ, make it difficult to take WikiLeaks offline. Furthermore, "Wikileaks maintains its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade [[encryption]] to protect sources and other confidential information." Such arrangements have been called "[[bulletproof hosting]]."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/21/wikileaks_bulletproof_hosting/ |title=Wikileaks judge gets Pirate Bay treatment | first = Dan | last = Goodin |publisher=The Register |date=21 February 2008 |accessdate=13 March 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/25/what-is-wikileaks/?iref=storysearch |title=What is Wikileaks? |publisher=CNN |date=25 July 2010 |accessdate=6 August 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
On 17 August 2010, it was announced that the Swedish [[Pirate Party (Sweden)|Pirate Party]] will be hosting and managing many of WikiLeaks' new servers. The party donates servers and bandwidth to WikiLeaks without charge. Technicians of the party will make sure that the servers are maintained and working.<ref>{{cite web|author=TT |url=http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/piratpartiet-skoter-wikileak-servrar-1.1155285 |title=Piratpartiet sköter Wikileak-servrar |language={{sv icon}} |publisher=DN.se |date=17 August 2010 |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Swedish Pirate Party to host WikiLeaks servers|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/08/18/sweden.wikileaks/#fbid=zfd5Igi2Lea&wom=false|accessdate=21 August 2010|publisher=CNN|date=18 August 2010}}</ref>
 
−
Some servers are hosted in the converted former NATO nuclear bunker [[CyberBunker]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=8AD4A8A7D99D4BA2899337993BED519D |title=WikiLeaks moves servers to underground data center in nuclear bunker |publisher=Datacenter Dynamics |date=3 September 2010 |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
After the site became the target of a [[denial-of-service]] attack from a hacker on its old servers, WikiLeaks moved its site to [[Amazon.com|Amazon]]'s servers.<ref name="amazon">{{cite web|last= Gross|first=Doug|title=WikiLeaks cut off from Amazon servers|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/01/wikileaks.amazon/index.html?eref=edition|publisher=CNN|accessdate=2 December 2010}}</ref> Later, however, the website was "ousted"<ref name="amazon" /> from the Amazon servers, without a public statement from the company. WikiLeaks then decided to install itself on the servers of OVH in [[France]].<ref>{{fr}} http://www.lepoint.fr/high-tech-internet/expulse-d-amazon-wikileaks-s-installe-en-france-02-12-2010-1270137_47.php</ref>
 
−
 
−
WikiLeaks is based on several software packages, including [[MediaWiki]], [[Freenet]], [[Tor (anonymity network)|Tor]], and [[Pretty Good Privacy|PGP]].<ref>{{cite web |author=|title= Is WikiLeaks accessible across the globe or do oppressive regimes in certain countries block the site? |url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Is_Wikileaks_accessible_across_the_globe_or_do_oppressive_regimes_in_certain_countries_block_the_site.3F |work=WikiLeaks |year=2008 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Is_Wikileaks_accessible_across_the_globe_or_do_oppressive_regimes_in_certain_countries_block_the_site.3F <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 16 February 2008}}</ref> WikiLeaks strongly encouraged postings via [[Tor (anonymity network)|Tor]] because of the strong privacy needs of its users.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/wpes09-bridge-attack.pdf |title=On the risks of serving whenever you surf |publisher=freehaven.net |format=PDF |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
On 4 November 2010, Julian Assange told Swiss public television [[Télévision Suisse Romande|TSR]] that he is seriously considering seeking political asylum in neutral Switzerland and setting up a WikiLeaks foundation in the country to move the operation there.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.tsr.ch/info/suisse/2657308-julian-assange-compte-demander-l-asile-en-suisse.html|title=Julian Assange compte demander l'asile en Suisse|publisher=TSR|date=4 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6A369920101104|title=WikiLeaks founder says may seek Swiss asylum|publisher=Reuters|date=4 November 2010}}</ref> According to Assange, Switzerland and Iceland are the only countries where WikiLeaks would feel safe to operate.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.orf.at/stories/2023751/|title=WikiLeaks-Gründer erwägt Umzug in die Schweiz|publisher=ORF|date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks Founder to Release Thousands of Documents on Lebanon |first= |last= |newspaper=[[Al-Manar]] |date=5 November 2010 |url=http://www.almanar.com.lb/newssite/NewsDetails.aspx?id=161016&language=en |accessdate=28 November 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
===Name and policies===
 
−
Despite using the name "WikiLeaks", the website is not [[wiki]]-based {{As of|2010|12|lc=on}}. Also, despite some popular confusion<ref>{{cite news|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-09-06/In_the_news|title=Difficult relationship between WikiLeaks and Wikipedia|coauthors=Wackywace, HaeB, and Tony1|date=6 September 2010|work={{srlink|Wikipedia:Signpost/About|The Signpost}}|publisher=[[Wikipedia]]|accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> due to both having the term "[[wiki]]" in their names, WikiLeaks and [[Wikipedia]] have no affiliation with each other<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiLeaks_is_not_part_of_Wikipedia|title=Wikipedia:WikiLeaks is not part of Wikipedia|work=[[Wikipedia]]|publisher=[[Wikimedia Foundation]]|accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wiki-giants-on-a-collision-course-over-shared-name-2065561.html|title=Wiki giants on a collision course over shared name|last1=Rawlinson|first1=Kevin |first2=Tom |last2=Peck|date=30 August 2010|work=The Independent |location=UK|accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> ("[[wiki]]" is not a [[brand name]]).
 
−
 
−
The "about" page originally read: "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."<ref>{{cite web |author=|title=What is WikiLeaks? How does WikiLeaks operate? |url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_WikiLeaks.3F_How_does_WikiLeaks_operate.3F |work=WikiLeaks |year=2008 |accessdate=28 February 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_WikiLeaks.3F_How_does_WikiLeaks_operate.3F <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 16 February 2008}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
However, WikiLeaks established an editorial policy that accepted only documents that were "of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical interest" (and excluded "material that is already publicly available").<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:Submissions |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080419013425/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:Submissions |archivedate=19 April 2008 |title=WikiLeaks' submissions page |publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref> This coincided with early criticism that having no editorial policy would drive out good material with spam and promote "automated or indiscriminate publication of confidential records."<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikileaks and untracable document disclosure |url=http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/01/wikileaks_and_untraceable_docu.html |work=Secrecy News |publisher=Federation of American Scientists |date=3 January 2007 |accessdate=21 August 2008}}</ref> It is no longer possible for anybody to post to it or edit it, as the original FAQ promised. Instead, submissions are regulated by an internal review process and some are published, while documents not fitting the editorial criteria are rejected by anonymous WikiLeaks reviewers. By 2008, the revised FAQ stated that "Anybody can post comments to it. [...] Users can publicly discuss documents and analyze their credibility and veracity."<ref>{{cite web |author=|title=What is Wikileaks? How does Wikileaks operate? |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_Wikileaks.3F_How_does_Wikileaks_operate.3F |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080504122032/http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_Wikileaks.3F_How_does_Wikileaks_operate.3F |archivedate=4 May 2008 |work=WikiLeaks |year=2008}} Archived by the [[Internet Archive]] on 4 May 2008 from the [http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_Wikileaks.3F_How_does_Wikileaks_operate.3F original]{{dead link|date=October 2010}}</ref> After the 2010 relaunch, posting new comments to leaks was no longer possible.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/wikileaks-assange-returns |title=WikiLeaks Gets A Facelift |publisher=Mother Jones |author=Dave Gilson |date=19 May 2010 |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
===Verification of submissions===
 
−
WikiLeaks states that it has never released a misattributed document. Documents are assessed before release. In response to concerns about the possibility of misleading or fraudulent leaks, WikiLeaks has stated that misleading leaks "are already well-placed in the mainstream media. WikiLeaks is of no additional assistance."<ref name=FederalTimes1>Daniel Friedman [http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2460843 "Web site aims to post government secrets"]{{dead link|date=October 2010}}, [[Federal Times]], 4 January 2007.</ref> The FAQ states that: "The simplest and most effective countermeasure is a worldwide community of informed users and editors who can scrutinize and discuss leaked documents."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/faq-en |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20070701115958/http://wikileaks.org/faq-en |archivedate=1 July 2007 |title=Frequently Asked Questions |publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
According to statements by Assange in 2010, submitted documents are vetted by a group of five reviewers, with expertise in different fields such as language or programming, who also investigate the background of the leaker if his or her identity is known.<ref name=motherjones3>{{cite web|url=http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=3 |title=Inside WikiLeaks’ Leak Factory |publisher=Mother Jones |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref> In that group, Assange has the final decision about the assessment of a document.<ref name=motherjones3/>
 
−
 
−
=== Insurance file ===
 
−
On 29 July 2010 WikiLeaks added a 1.4 GB "Insurance File" to the Afghan War Diary page. The file is [[Advanced Encryption Standard|AES]] encrypted and has been speculated to serve as [[insurance]] in case the WikiLeaks website or its spokesman Julian Assange are incapacitated, upon which the [[passphrase]] could be published ([[Dead man's switch|q.v.]]).<ref name="wired_insurance">{{cite web|last=Zetter|first=Kim|title=WikiLeaks Posts Mysterious 'Insurance' File|url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks-insurance-file/|publisher=Wired.com|accessdate=31 July 2010}}</ref><ref name="telegraph_dns_insuranceaes">{{cite news | first=Victoria | last=Ward | pages= | language =| title=WikiLeaks website disconnected as US company withdraws support | date=2010-12-03 | publisher=[[The Telegraph]] | url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8178457/WikiLeaks-website-disconnected-as-US-company-withdraws-support.html |accessdate=2010-12-03 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5uhylLWl9 |archivedate=2010-12-03 |deadurl=no }}</ref> Following the first few days' release of the [[United States diplomatic cables leak|United States diplomatic cables]] starting 28 November 2010, the US television broadcaster [[CBS]] predicted that "If anything happens to Assange or the website, a key will go out to unlock the files. There would then be no way to stop the information from spreading like wildfire because so many people already have copies."<ref name="cbsnews_diplomaticbomb">{{cite news | first=Elizabeth | last=Palmer | pages= | language =| title=WikiLeaks Backup Plan Could Drop Diplomatic Bomb | date=2010-12-02 | publisher=[[CBS]] | url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/02/eveningnews/main7111845.shtml |accessdate=2010-12-03 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5uhyqi1SX |archivedate=2010-12-03 |deadurl=no }}</ref> CBS correspondent Declan McCullagh stated, "What most folks are speculating is that the insurance file contains unreleased information that would be especially embarrassing to the U.S. government if it were released."<ref name="cbsnews_diplomaticbomb" />
 
  
 
==Investigations, censorship, and alleged harassment==
 
==Investigations, censorship, and alleged harassment==
−
{{Expand section|date=December 2010}}
+
''See also [[Electronic attacks on WikiLeaks]]''
  
 
===Police raid on German WikiLeaks domain holder's home===
 
===Police raid on German WikiLeaks domain holder's home===
−
The home of Theodor Reppe, registrant of the German WikiLeaks domain name, wikileaks.de, was raided on 24 March 2009 after WikiLeaks released the [[Australian Communications and Media Authority]] (ACMA) [[Australian Communications and Media Authority#ACMA blacklist leaked|censorship blacklist]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Hausdurchsuchung bei Inhaber der Domain wikileaks.de |language=English, translated from German |trans_title=Search of owner of the domain wikileaks.de |accessdate=21 September 2009 |url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Hausdurchsuchung-bei-Inhaber-der-Domain-wikileaks-de-Update--/meldung/135147 |archiveurl=http://www.translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Hausdurchsuchung-bei-Inhaber-der-Domain-wikileaks-de-Update--/meldung/135147&sl=auto&tl=en&history_state0=auto|archivedate=21 September 2009}}</ref> The site was not affected.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-wikileaks-raided-by-german.html |title=Wikileaks raided by German police |publisher=Networkworld.com |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref><ref>[http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Police_raid_home_of_Wikileaks.de_domain_owner_over_censorship_lists Police raid home of Wikileaks.de domain owner over censorship lists]{{dead link|date=October 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Tech%2Band%2BScience/Story/STIStory_354564.html |title=Police raid Wikileaks owner |publisher=Straitstimes.com |date=25 March 2009 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
+
The home of Theodor Reppe, registrant of the German WikiLeaks domain name, wikileaks.de, was raided on 24 March 2009 after WikiLeaks released the [[Australian Communications and Media Authority]] (ACMA) [[Australian Communications and Media Authority#ACMA blacklist leaked|censorship blacklist]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Hausdurchsuchung bei Inhaber der Domain wikileaks.de |language=English, translated from German |trans_title=Search of owner of the domain wikileaks.de |accessdate=21 September 2009 |url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Hausdurchsuchung-bei-Inhaber-der-Domain-wikileaks-de-Update--/meldung/135147 |archiveurl=http://www.translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Hausdurchsuchung-bei-Inhaber-der-Domain-wikileaks-de-Update--/meldung/135147&sl=auto&tl=en&history_state0=auto|archivedate=21 September 2009}}</ref> The site was not affected.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-wikileaks-raided-by-german.html |title=Wikileaks raided by German police |publisher=Networkworld.com |date= |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref><ref>[http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Police_raid_home_of_Wikileaks.de_domain_owner_over_censorship_lists Police raid home of Wikileaks.de domain owner over censorship lists]''dead link reported''</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Tech%2Band%2BScience/Story/STIStory_354564.html |title=Police raid Wikileaks owner |publisher=Straitstimes.com |date=25 March 2009 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
  
 
===Chinese censorship===
 
===Chinese censorship===
Line 103: Line 71:
  
 
===Potential future Australian censorship===
 
===Potential future Australian censorship===
−
On 16 March 2009, the [[Australian Communications and Media Authority]] added WikiLeaks to their proposed blacklist of sites that will be blocked for all Australians if the mandatory internet filtering censorship scheme is implemented as planned.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/home/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11000-a-day/2009/03/17/1237054787635.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1&page=-1/ |title=Banned hyperlinks could cost you $11,000 a day |work=The Age |location=Australia|date=16 March 2009 |accessdate=16 March 2009 | location=Melbourne | first=Asher | last=Moses}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Australia_secretly_censors_Wikileaks_press_release_and_Danish_Internet_censorship_list,_16_Mar_2009/ |title=Australia secretly censors Wikileaks press release and Danish Internet censorship list, 16&nbsp;Mar 2009 | publisher=WikiLeaks|date=16 March 2009 |accessdate=16 March 2009}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> The blacklisting was removed 30 November 2010.<ref>{{cite web|last=Taylor |first=Josh |url=http://www.zdnet.com.au/wikileaks-removed-from-acma-blacklist-339307604.htm |title=Wikileaks removed from ACMA blacklist – Communications – News |publisher=Zdnet.com.au |date=17 March 2009 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
+
On 16 March 2009, the [[Australian Communications and Media Authority]] added WikiLeaks to their proposed blacklist of sites that will be blocked for all Australians if the mandatory internet filtering censorship scheme is implemented as planned.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/home/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11000-a-day/2009/03/17/1237054787635.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1&page=-1/ |title=Banned hyperlinks could cost you $11,000 a day |work=The Age |location=Australia|date=16 March 2009 |accessdate=16 March 2009 | location=Melbourne | first=Asher | last=Moses}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Australia_secretly_censors_Wikileaks_press_release_and_Danish_Internet_censorship_list,_16_Mar_2009/ |title=Australia secretly censors Wikileaks press release and Danish Internet censorship list, 16&nbsp;Mar 2009 | publisher=WikiLeaks|date=16 March 2009 |accessdate=16 March 2009}}''dead link reported''</ref> The blacklisting was removed 30 November 2010.<ref>{{cite web|last=Taylor |first=Josh |url=http://www.zdnet.com.au/wikileaks-removed-from-acma-blacklist-339307604.htm |title=Wikileaks removed from ACMA blacklist – Communications – News |publisher=Zdnet.com.au |date=17 March 2009 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
  
 
===Thai censorship===
 
===Thai censorship===
−
The Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) is currently censoring the website WikiLeaks in Thailand<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/391577-thailand-blocks-access-to-wikileaks-website/ |title=Thailand blocks access to WikiLeaks website | publisher=Thai Visa|date=18 August 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=Bangkok}}</ref> and more than 40,000 other webpages<ref>{{cite news|url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703824304575435170175485654.html?mod=googlenews_wsj |title=Thai Groups Denounce Website Censorship |work=The Wall Street Journal date=17 August 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=USA | first=Patrick | last=Barta}}</ref> because of the emergency decree in Thailand imposed as a result of political instabilities (Emergency decree declared beginning of April 2010<ref>{{cite news|http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/asia/07thailand.html |title=Citing Instability, Thailand Extends Emergency Decree |work=New York Times |date=6 July 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=USA}}</ref>). When trying to access the WikiLeaks website, internet users are redirected to [http://58.97.5.29/www.capothai.org/ this webpage].
+
The Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) is currently censoring the website WikiLeaks in Thailand<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/391577-thailand-blocks-access-to-wikileaks-website/ |title=Thailand blocks access to WikiLeaks website | publisher=Thai Visa|date=18 August 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=Bangkok}}</ref> and more than 40,000 other webpages<ref>{{cite web|url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703824304575435170175485654.html?mod=googlenews_wsj |title=Thai Groups Denounce Website Censorship |work=The Wall Street Journal date=17 August 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=USA | first=Patrick | last=Barta}}</ref> because of the emergency decree in Thailand imposed as a result of political instabilities (Emergency decree declared beginning of April 2010<ref>{{cite web|http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/asia/07thailand.html |title=Citing Instability, Thailand Extends Emergency Decree |work=New York Times |date=6 July 2010 |accessdate=25 August 2010 | location=USA}}</ref>). When trying to access the WikiLeaks website, internet users are redirected to [http://58.97.5.29/www.capothai.org/ this webpage].
  
 
===Alleged harassment and surveillance===
 
===Alleged harassment and surveillance===
 
According to ''[[The Times]]'', WikiLeaks and its members have complained about continuing harassment and surveillance by law enforcement and intelligence organizations, including extended detention, seizure of computers, veiled threats, “covert following and hidden photography.”<ref name=campbell/>
 
According to ''[[The Times]]'', WikiLeaks and its members have complained about continuing harassment and surveillance by law enforcement and intelligence organizations, including extended detention, seizure of computers, veiled threats, “covert following and hidden photography.”<ref name=campbell/>
  
−
After the release of the [[12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike|2007 airstrikes video]] and as they prepared to release film of the [[Granai airstrike]], Julian Assange has said that his group of volunteers came under intense surveillance. In an interview and Twitter posts he said that a restaurant in [[Reykjavik]] where his group of volunteers met came under surveillance in March; there was "covert following and hidden photography" by police and foreign intelligence services; that an apparent British intelligence agent made thinly veiled threats in a Luxembourg car park; and that one of the volunteers was detained by police for 21 hours. Another volunteer posted that computers were seized, saying "If anything happens to us, you know why ... and you know who is responsible."<ref name=campbell>{{cite news|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7094234.ece|title=Whistleblowers on US ‘massacre’ fear CIA stalkers|date=11 April 2010|work=The Sunday Times |location=UK |author=Matthew Campbell | location=London}}</ref> According to the [[Columbia Journalism Review]], "the Icelandic press took a look at Assange’s charges of being surveilled in Iceland [...] and, at best, have found nothing to substantiate them."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/thin_ice.php |title=Thin Ice |publisher=CJR |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref>
+
After the release of the [[12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike|2007 airstrikes video]] and as they prepared to release film of the [[Granai airstrike]], Julian Assange has said that his group of volunteers came under intense surveillance. In an interview and Twitter posts he said that a restaurant in [[Reykjavik]] where his group of volunteers met came under surveillance in March; there was "covert following and hidden photography" by police and foreign intelligence services; that an apparent British intelligence agent made thinly veiled threats in a Luxembourg car park; and that one of the volunteers was detained by police for 21 hours. Another volunteer posted that computers were seized, saying "If anything happens to us, you know why ... and you know who is responsible."<ref name=campbell>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7094234.ece|title=Whistleblowers on US ‘massacre’ fear CIA stalkers|date=11 April 2010|work=The Sunday Times |location=UK |author=Matthew Campbell | location=London}}</ref> According to the [[Columbia Journalism Review]], "the Icelandic press took a look at Assange’s charges of being surveilled in Iceland [...] and, at best, have found nothing to substantiate them."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/thin_ice.php |title=Thin Ice |publisher=CJR |date= |accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref>
  
−
WikiLeaks has claimed that Facebook deleted their fan page, which had 30,000 fans.<ref name="WikiLeaks-Twitter-Announcement-Facebook">{{cite web | url = http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/12558544922 | title = Twitter / WikiLeaks: Facebook deletes WikiLeaks fanclub with 30k fans |publisher=Twitter | date = 20 April 2010 | accessdate = 22 April 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=WikiLeaks claims Facebook deleted its page, 30000 fans |url=http://www.news.com.au/technology/wikileaks-claims-facebook-deleted-its-page-30000-fans/story-e6frfro0-1225856489723 |publisher=News.com.au |date=21 April 2010 |accessdate=23 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Wikileaks Claims Facebook Deleted Their Fan Page Because They "Promote Illegal Acts" |url=http://gawker.com/5520933/wikileaks-claims-facebook-deleted-their-fan-page-because-they-promote-illegal-acts |publisher=Gawker |date=20 April 2010 |accessdate=21 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Wikileaks Fan Page Pulled Down for Being "Inauthentic," Says Facebook |url=http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/wikileaks-fan-page-pulled-down-being-inauthentic-says-facebook |publisher=techPresident |date=21 April 2010 |accessdate=22 April 2010}}</ref>
+
WikiLeaks has claimed that Facebook deleted their fan page, which had 30,000 fans.<ref name="WikiLeaks-Twitter-Announcement-Facebook">{{cite web | url = http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/12558544922 | title = Twitter / WikiLeaks: Facebook deletes WikiLeaks fanclub with 30k fans |publisher=Twitter | date = 20 April 2010 | accessdate = 22 April 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks claims Facebook deleted its page, 30000 fans |url=http://www.news.com.au/technology/wikileaks-claims-facebook-deleted-its-page-30000-fans/story-e6frfro0-1225856489723 |publisher=News.com.au |date=21 April 2010 |accessdate=23 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Wikileaks Claims Facebook Deleted Their Fan Page Because They "Promote Illegal Acts" |url=http://gawker.com/5520933/wikileaks-claims-facebook-deleted-their-fan-page-because-they-promote-illegal-acts |publisher=Gawker |date=20 April 2010 |accessdate=21 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Wikileaks Fan Page Pulled Down for Being "Inauthentic," Says Facebook |url=http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/wikileaks-fan-page-pulled-down-being-inauthentic-says-facebook |publisher=techPresident |date=21 April 2010 |accessdate=22 April 2010}}</ref>
  
 
===United States===
 
===United States===
Line 119: Line 87:
  
 
===Iceland===
 
===Iceland===
−
In August 2009, [[Kaupthing]], a large bank, succeeded in obtaining a court order gagging Iceland’s national broadcaster, [[RUV]], from broadcasting a risk analysis report showing the bank's substantial exposure to debt default risk. This information had been leaked by a whistleblower to WikiLeaks and remained available on the WikiLeaks site; faced with an injunction minutes before broadcast the channel ran with a screen grab of the WikiLeaks site instead of the scheduled piece on the bank. Citizens of Iceland felt outraged that RUV was prevented from broadcasting news of relevance.<ref>AP News, 2009, "Iceland Court Lifts Gag Order After Public Outrage," http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Iceland+court+lifts+gag+order+after+public+outrage-a01611956752</ref> Therefore, WikiLeaks has been credited with inspiring the [[Icelandic Modern Media Initiative]], a bill meant to reclaim Iceland's 2007 ''[[Reporters sans frontières]]'' ranking as first in the world for free speech. It aims to enact a range of protections for sources, journalists, and publishers.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8510927.stm|title=
+
In August 2009, [[Kaupthing]], a large bank, succeeded in obtaining a court order gagging Iceland’s national broadcaster, [[RUV]], from broadcasting a risk analysis report showing the bank's substantial exposure to debt default risk. This information had been leaked by a whistleblower to WikiLeaks and remained available on the WikiLeaks site; faced with an injunction minutes before broadcast the channel ran with a screen grab of the WikiLeaks site instead of the scheduled piece on the bank. Citizens of Iceland felt outraged that RUV was prevented from broadcasting news of relevance.<ref>AP News, 2009, "Iceland Court Lifts Gag Order After Public Outrage," http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Iceland+court+lifts+gag+order+after+public+outrage-a01611956752</ref> Therefore, WikiLeaks has been credited with inspiring the [[Icelandic Modern Media Initiative]], a bill meant to reclaim Iceland's 2007 ''[[Reporters sans frontières]]'' ranking as first in the world for free speech. It aims to enact a range of protections for sources, journalists, and publishers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8510927.stm|title=
 
Iceland's journalism freedom dream prompted by Wikileaks|publisher=BBC|date=13 February 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://immi.is/?l=en|title=Icelandic Modern Media Initiative|publisher=immi.is}}</ref> [[Birgitta Jónsdóttir]], a former volunteer for WikiLeaks and member the Icelandic parliament, is the chief sponsor of the proposal.
 
Iceland's journalism freedom dream prompted by Wikileaks|publisher=BBC|date=13 February 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://immi.is/?l=en|title=Icelandic Modern Media Initiative|publisher=immi.is}}</ref> [[Birgitta Jónsdóttir]], a former volunteer for WikiLeaks and member the Icelandic parliament, is the chief sponsor of the proposal.
−
{{Clear}}
 
  
−
==Reception==
 
−
===Support===
 
−
In July 2010 [[Veterans for Peace]] president Mike Ferner editorialized on the group's website "neither Wikileaks nor the soldier or soldiers who divulged the documents should be prosecuted for revealing this information. We should give them a medal."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Wikileaks_will_spark_resistance.vp.html |title=Wikileaks revelations will spark massive resistance to Afghanistan War |publisher=Veterans For Peace |date=27 July 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
Documentary filmmaker [[John Pilger]] wrote an August 2010 editorial in the Australian publication ''[[Green Left Weekly|Green Left]]'' titled "Wikileaks Must Be Defended." In it, Pilger said WikiLeaks represented the interests of "public accountability" and a new form of journalism at odds with "the dominant section ... devoted merely to taking down what cynical and malign power tells it."<ref>{{cite web|author=|url=http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45225 |title=John Pilger: Wikileaks must be defended &#124; Green Left Weekly |publisher=Greenleft.org.au |date=29 August 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
[[Daniel Ellsberg]] has been a frequent defender of WikiLeaks. Following the November 2010 release of U.S. [[diplomatic cables]], Ellsberg rejected criticism that the site was endangering the lives of U.S. military personnel and intelligence assets stating "not one single soldier or informant has been in danger from any of the WikiLeaks releases. That risk has been largely overblown."<ref>{{cite web|author=Get your FREE! Nation User Name |url=http://www.thenation.com/blog/156709/greg-mitchell-and-daniel-ellsberg-wikileaks-document-dump |title=Greg Mitchell and Daniel Ellsberg on the WikiLeaks Document Dump |publisher=The Nation |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> Ellsberg went on to note that government claims to the contrary were "a script that they roll out every time there's a leak of any sort."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11879951 |title=BBC News – WikiLeaks: view of man behind Pentagon Papers leak |publisher=BBC News |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
====Awards received====
 
−
In 2008 [[Index on Censorship]] presented WikiLeaks with their inaugural Economist New Media Award.
 
−
 
−
In 2009 Amnesty International awarded WikiLeaks their Media Award for exposing "extra judicial killings and disappearances" in Kenya.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jun/03/amnesty-international-media-awards |title=Amnesty International Media Awards 2009: full list of winners &#124; Media &#124; guardian.co.uk |work=Guardian |location=UK |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
====Praise by governments====
 
−
In late November 2010 a representative of the [[government of Ecuador]] made what was, apparently, an unsolicited public offer to Julian Assange to establish residency in Ecuador. Deputy Foreign Minister Kinto Lucas stated "we are going to invite him to come to Ecuador so he can freely present the information he possesses and all the documentation, not just on the Internet, but in various public forums."<ref>[http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=197327 Ecuador offers asylum to WikiLeaks founder] [[Jerusalem Post]] 11/30/2010</ref> Lucas went on to state his praise for WikiLeaks and Assange calling them "[people] who are constantly investigating and trying to get light out of the dark corners of [state] information."<ref>[http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/11/2010113033515743921.html Ecuador offers refuge to Assange] 30 Nov 2010 [[Al Jazeera]]</ref> The following day, however, president [[Rafael Correa]] distanced his administration from the offer stating that Lucas had been speaking for himself and not on the government's behalf. Correa then criticized Assange for "breaking the laws of the United States and leaking this type of information."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://us.mobile.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE6AT66820101201 |title=Ecuador backs off offer to WikiLeaks' Assange |publisher=Us.mobile.reuters.com |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
[[Hugo Chávez]], president of Venezuela, stated his support for WikiLeaks following the release of U.S. [[diplomatic cables]] in November 2010 that showed the United States had tried to rally support from regional governments to isolate Venezuela. “I have to congratulate the people of WikiLeaks for their bravery and courage,” Chávez commented in televised remarks.<ref>{{cite web|last=Cancel |first=Daniel |url=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-30/chavez-praises-wikileaks-for-bravery-while-calling-on-clinton-to-resign.html |title=Chavez Praises Wikileaks for `Bravery' While Calling on Clinton to Resign |publisher=Bloomberg |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
===Criticism===
 
−
WikiLeaks has attracted criticism from a variety of sources.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/WikiLeaks-Website-Behind-US-Cable-Leaks-Goes-From-Humble-Start-To-Enemy-Of-Governments-Worldwide/Article/201011415837564?lpos=World_News_First_Home_Page_Feature_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15837564_WikiLeaks%3A_Website_Behind_US_Cable_Leaks_Goes_From_Humble_Start_To_Enemy_Of_Governments_Worldwide|title=WikiLeaks Revelations Get Global Prominence|date=28 November 2010|author=Richard Williams|publisher=Sky News Online}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
In 2007 John Young, operator of [[cryptome]], left his position on the WikiLeaks Board of Directors accusing the group of being a "CIA conduit." Young subsequently retreated from his assertion but has continued to be critical of the site.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2009/10/start/exposed-wikileaks-secrets |title=Exposed: Wikileaks' secrets (Wired UK) |publisher=Wired.co.uk |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> In a 2010 interview with [[CNET.com]] Young accused the group of a lack of transparency regarding their fundraising and financial management. He went on to state his belief that WikiLeaks could not guarantee whistleblowers the anonymity or confidentiality they claimed and that he "would not trust them with information if it had any value, or if it put me at risk or anyone that I cared about at risk."<ref>{{cite web|last=McCullagh |first=Declan |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html |title=Wikileaks' estranged co-founder becomes a critic (Q&A) &#124; Privacy Inc. – CNET News |publisher=News.cnet.com |date=20 July 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
Citing the leaking of the sorority rituals of [[Alpha Sigma Tau]], [[Steven Aftergood]] has opined that WikiLeaks "does not respect the rule of law nor does it honor the rights of individuals." Aftergood went on to state that WikiLeaks engages in unrestrained disclosure of non-governmental secrets without compelling public policy reasons and that many anti-corruption activists were opposed to the site's activities.<ref>{{cite web|author=28 June 2010 |url=http://www.firstamendmentcoalition.org/2010/06/secrecy-news-criticizes-wikileaks/ |title=Secrecy News criticizes WikiLeaks |publisher=First Amendment Coalition |date=28 June 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
In 2010, [[Amnesty International]] joined several other human rights groups criticizing WikiLeaks for not adequately redacting the names of Afghan civilians working as U.S. military informants from files they had released. Julian Assange responded by offering Amnesty International staff the opportunity to assist in the document vetting process. When Amnesty International appeared to express reservations in accepting the offer, Assange dismissed the group as "people who prefer to do nothing but cover their asses." Other groups that joined Amnesty International in criticizing WikiLeaks subsequently noted that, despite their displeasure over the issue of civilian name redaction, they generally appreciated WikiLeaks work.<ref>{{cite web|last=Whalen |first=Jeanne |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703428604575419580947722558.html |title=Human Rights Groups Press WikiLeaks Over Data - WSJ.com |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=9 August 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
In an August 2010 open letter, the non-governmental organization [[Reporters Without Borders]] praised WikiLeaks' past usefulness in exposing "serious violations of human rights and civil liberties" but criticized the group over a perceived absence of editorial control, stating "indiscriminately publishing 92,000 classified reports reflects a real problem of methodology and, therefore, of credibility. Journalistic work involves the selection of information. The argument with which you defend yourself, namely that WikiLeaks is not made up of journalists, is not convincing."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open-letter-to-wikileaks-founder-12-08-2010,38130.html |title=Reporters Sans Frontières – Open letter to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange: ‘‘A bad precedent for the Internet's future'' |publisher=En.rsf.org |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> The group subsequently clarified their statement as a criticism of WikiLeaks release procedure and not the organization itself, stating "we reaffirm our support for Wikileaks, its work and its founding principles."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.rsf.org/united-states-criticism-of-wikileaks-is-not-a-17-08-2010,38169.html |title=Reporters Sans Frontières – "Criticism of Wikileaks is not a call for censorship or support for the war" |publisher=En.rsf.org |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
On 30 November 2010, former Canadian government adviser [[Tom Flanagan (political scientist)|Tom Flanagan]], while appearing on the [[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation|CBC]] television program "Power & Politics", called for Julian Assange to be killed. "I think Assange should be assassinated," Flanagan stated, before noting to host Evan Solomon, "I'm feeling pretty manly today." Flanagan subsequently retracted his call for the death of Assange while reiterating his opposition to WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/12/01/flanagan-wikileaks-assange.html |title=CBC News – Politics – Flanagan regrets WikiLeaks assassination remark |publisher=Cbc.ca |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
====Criticism by governments====
 
−
Many of the governments and organizations whose files have been leaked by WikiLeaks have been critical of the organization. Following the [[#Diplomatic cables release|November 2010 release]] of United States [[diplomatic cables]], [[U.S. Secretary of State]] Hillary Clinton denounced the group saying, "this disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy interests, it is an attack on the international community."<ref>{{cite web|author=|url=http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/obama_administration_in_damage_control_JBSDPnEISQvcyu0ZfHx7XL#ixzz16kRfnGL0 |title=Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls WikiLeaks documents 'an attack on the international community' |work=New York Post |date= |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref> [[Peter T. King|Peter King]], chairman of the Homeland Security Committee of the [[United States House of Representatives]] has stated his support for listing Wikileaks as a "foreign terrorist organization" explaining that "WikiLeaks presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States."<ref>{{cite news |title=Congressman wants WikiLeaks listed as terrorist group |author=Declan McCullagh |newspaper=CNet |date=28 November 2010 |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20023941-38.html#ixzz16keYyAPb |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
[[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]], president of Iran, joined in criticism of WikiLeaks following the November 2010 release of United States diplomatic cables. Ahmadinejad claimed that the release of cables purporting to show concern with Iran by Arab states was a planned leak by the United States to discredit his government, though he did not indicate whether he believed WikiLeaks was in collusion with the United States or was simply an unwitting facilitator.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-claims-psychological-warfare-ahmadinejad |title=WikiLeaks claims are 'psychological warfare' says Ahmadinejad &#124; World news |work=The Guardian |location=UK |date=23 November 2010 |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
 
−
 
−
[[Philip J. Crowley]], the current United States [[Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs]], has stated that the US State Department does not regard WikiLeaks as a legitimate media organization.[http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2010/12/152291.htm]
 
  
 
==Leaks==
 
==Leaks==
−
''See main article [[WikiLeaks leaks]]''
+
* [[WikiLeaks leaks before 2009]]
 +
* [[WikiLeaks leaks (2009)]]
 +
* [[WikiLeaks leaks (2010)]]
 +
* [[United States diplomatic cables WikiLeak]] (Cablegate)
 +
Full list of leaks articles
 +
**[[WikiLeaks leaks]]
  
−
===Pre-2009===
 
−
====Apparent Somali assassination order====
 
−
WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh [[Hassan Dahir Aweys]].<ref name=Khatchdourian/> ''[[The New Yorker]]'' has reported that {{blockquote|[Julian] Assange and the others were uncertain of its authenticity, but they thought that readers, using Wikipedia-like features of the site, would help analyze it. They published the decision with a lengthy commentary, which asked, “Is it a bold manifesto by a flamboyant Islamic militant with links to Bin Laden? Or is it a clever smear by US intelligence, designed to discredit the Union, fracture Somali alliances and manipulate China?” ... The document’s authenticity was never determined, and news about WikiLeaks quickly superseded the leak itself.<ref name="Khatchdourian"/>}}
 
  
−
====Daniel arap Moi family corruption====
+
==See also==
−
On 31 August 2007, ''[[The Guardian]]'' (Britain) featured on its front page a story about corruption by the family of the former Kenyan leader [[Daniel arap Moi]]. The newspaper stated that the source of the information was WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news | author=| title=The looting of Kenya | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/kenya/story/0,,2159757,00.html | work=The Guardian | date=31 August 2007| accessdate=28 February 2008 | location=London | first=Xan | last=Rice}}</ref>
+
  
−
====Bank Julius Baer lawsuit====
+
* [[Wikipedia:Chilling Effects (group)|Chilling Effects (group)]]
−
{{main|Bank Julius Baer vs. Wikileaks lawsuit}}
+
* [[Wikipedia:Cryptome|Cryptome]]
−
In February 2008, the wikileaks.org [[domain name]] was taken offline after the Swiss Bank [[Julius Baer]] sued WikiLeaks and the wikileaks.org [[domain registrar]], Dynadot, in [[Government of California#The Superior Courts of California|a court in]] California, United States, and obtained a [[permanent injunction]] ordering the shutdown.<ref name=injunction>{{cite press release | author=| title=Wikileaks.org under injunction | url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080306005837/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archivedate=6 March 2008 | publisher=WikiLeaks | date=18 February 2008 | accessdate=28 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/california/candce/3:2008cv00824/200125/ |title=Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd. et al. v. Wikileaks et al |publisher=News.justia.com |date= |accessdate=13 March 2009}}</ref> WikiLeaks had hosted allegations of illegal activities at the bank's [[Cayman Island]] branch.<ref name=injunction/> WikiLeaks' U.S. Registrar, Dynadot, complied with the order by removing its DNS entries. However, the website remained accessible via its numeric IP address, and online activists immediately mirrored WikiLeaks at dozens of alternative websites worldwide.<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite web|url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1039527/judge-rethinks-wikileaks |title=Judge reverses Wikileaks injunction |publisher=The Inquirer |date=2 March 2008 |accessdate=23 September 2009}}</ref>
+
* [[Wikipedia:Digital rights|Digital rights]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Freedom of information|Freedom of information]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Freedom of the press|Freedom of the press]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Information security|Information security]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:irrepressible.info|irrepressible.info]]
 +
* [[Wikipedia:Streisand effect|Streisand effect]]
  
−
The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] and the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] filed a motion protesting the censorship of WikiLeaks. The [[Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press]] assembled a coalition of media and press that filed an [[amicus curiae]] brief on WikiLeaks' behalf. The coalition included major U.S. newspaper publishers and press organisations, such as the [[American Society of Newspaper Editors]], [[The Associated Press]], the [[Citizen Media Law Project]], [[The E.W. Scripps Company]], the [[Gannett Company]], [[The Hearst Corporation]], the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', the [[National Newspaper Publishers Association]], the [[Newspaper Association of America]] and [[The Society of Professional Journalists]]. The coalition requested to be heard as a friend of the court to call attention to relevant points of law that it believed the court had overlooked (on the grounds that WikiLeaks had not appeared in court to defend itself, and that no First Amendment issues had yet been raised before the court). Amongst other things, the coalition argued that:<ref name=autogenerated1 /><blockquote>"WikiLeaks provides a forum for dissidents and whistleblowers across the globe to post documents, but the Dynadot injunction imposes a prior restraint that drastically curtails access to Wikileaks from the Internet based on a limited number of postings challenged by Plaintiffs. The Dynadot injunction therefore violates the bedrock principle that an injunction cannot enjoin all communication by a publisher or other speaker."<ref name=autogenerated1 /></blockquote>
+
== Citations ==
−
 
+
<references/>
−
The same judge, Judge Jeffrey White, who issued the injunction vacated it on 29 February 2008, citing [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] concerns and questions about [[legal jurisdiction]].<ref>{{cite news | author=Philipp Gollner | work=Reuters| url=http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2927431720080229 | title=Judge reverses ruling in Julius Baer leak case | date=29 February 2008 | accessdate=1 March 2008}}</ref> WikiLeaks was thus able to bring its site [[online]] again. The bank dropped the case on 5 March 2008.<ref>{{cite web
+
−
|url=http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206902154
+
−
|title=Swiss Bank Abandons Lawsuit Against WikiLeaks: The wiki had posted financial documents it said proved tax evasion by Bank Julius Baer's clients
+
−
|first=Thomas
+
−
|last=Claburn
+
−
|publisher=InformationWeek
+
−
|date=6 March 2008}}</ref> The judge also denied the bank's request for an order prohibiting the website's publication.<ref name=autogenerated1 />
+
−
 
+
−
The Executive Director of the [[Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press]], Lucy Dalglish, commented: <blockquote>
+
−
"It's not very often a federal judge does a 180 degree turn in a case and dissolves an order. But we're very pleased the judge recognized the constitutional implications in this prior restraint."<ref name=autogenerated1 />
+
−
</blockquote>
+
−
 
+
−
====Guantánamo Bay procedures====
+
−
A copy of ''Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta''–the protocol of the [[United States Army|U.S. Army]] at the [[Guantánamo Bay detention camp]]–dated March 2003 was released on the WikiLeaks website on 7 November 2007.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo "Sensitive Guantánamo Bay Manual Leaked Through Wiki Site"], [[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] 14 November 2007</ref> The document, named "gitmo-sop.pdf", is also mirrored at ''[[The Guardian]].''<ref>[http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2007/11/15/gitmosop.pdf specific address] at ''The Guardian.''</ref> Its release revealed some of the restrictions placed over detainees at the camp, including the designation of some prisoners as off-limits to the [[International Committee of the Red Cross]], something that the U.S. military had in the past repeatedly denied.<ref name='Reuters 15 November 2007'>{{cite news | first= | last= | coauthors= | title=Guantanamo operating manual posted on Internet | date=15 November 2007 | publisher=| url =http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1424207020071114?pageNumber=1 | work=Reuters | pages = | accessdate = 15 November 2007 | language = }}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
On 3 December 2007, WikiLeaks released a copy of the 2004 edition of the manual,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Camp_Delta_Standard_Operating_Procedure_%282004%29|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080403235835/http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Camp_Delta_Standard_Operating_Procedure_(2004)|archivedate=3 April 2008 |title=Camp Delta Operating Procedure (2004) |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=13 March 2009}}</ref> together with a detailed analysis of the changes.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Changes_in_Guantanamo_Bay_SOP_manual_(2003-2004)|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080404110524/http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Changes_in_Guantanamo_Bay_SOP_manual_(2003-2004)|archivedate=4 April 2008 |title=Changes in Guantanamo SOP manual (2003–2004) |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=13 March 2009}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Scientology====
+
−
On 7 April 2008, WikiLeaks reported receiving a letter (dated 27 March) from the [[Religious Technology Centre]] claiming ownership of several recently leaked documents pertaining to [[Operating Thetan|OT Levels]] within the [[Church of Scientology]]. These same documents were at the center of [[Scientology vs the Internet#The Xenu revelation|a 1994 scandal]]. The email stated:{{cquote|The Advanced Technology materials are unpublished, copyrighted works. Please be advised that your customer's action in this regard violates United States copyright law. Accordingly, we ask for your help in removing these works immediately from your service.
+
−
– [[Moxon and Kobrin]]<ref>{{cite web
+
−
|url=http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology_collected_Operating_Thetan_documents
+
−
|title=Church of Scientology collected Operating Thetan Documents, including full text of legal letter.
+
−
|date=4 June 2008}}{{dead link|date=October 2010}}</ref>}}
+
−
 
+
−
The letter continued on to request the release of the logs of the uploader, which would remove their anonymity. WikiLeaks responded with a statement released on [[Wikinews]] stating: "in response to the attempted suppression, WikiLeaks will release several thousand additional pages of Scientology material next week",<ref>{{cite web
+
−
|url=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology_warns_Wikileaks_over_documents
+
−
|title=Church of Scientology warns WikiLeaks over documents
+
−
|date=4 July 2008}}</ref> and did so.
+
−
 
+
−
====Sarah Palin's Yahoo email account contents====
+
−
{{Main|Sarah Palin email hack}}
+
−
In September 2008, during the [[United States presidential election, 2008|2008 United States presidential election campaigns]], the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to [[Sarah Palin]] (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee [[John McCain]]) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of [[Anonymous (group)|Anonymous]].<ref>See the article "Anonymous (Group)"</ref> It has been alleged by Wired that contents of the mailbox indicate that she used the private Yahoo account to send work-related messages, in violation of public record laws.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/group-posts-e-m.html|publisher=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|title=Group Posts E-Mail Hacked From Palin Account&nbsp;– Update}}</ref> The hacking of the account was widely reported in mainstream news outlets.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703304.html?hpid=topnews|title=Hackers Access Palin's Personal E-Mail, Post Some Online|last=Shear|first=Michael D.|coauthors=Karl Vick|date=18 September 2008|work=The Washington Post |accessdate=18 September 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/palins-e-mail-hacked/|title=FBI, Secret Service Investigate Hacking of Palin’s E-mail|date=18 September 2008|publisher=Fox News|accessdate=18 September 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/sarahpalin/2980391/Sarah-Palins-email-account-broken-into-by-hackers.html|title=Sarah Palin's email account broken into by hackers |last=Swaine|first=Jon|date=18 September 2008|work=The Daily Telegraph |accessdate=18 September 2008 | location=London}}</ref> Although WikiLeaks was able to conceal the hacker's identity, the source of the Palin emails was eventually publicly identified as [[David Kernell]], a 20-year-old economics student at the University of Tennessee and the son of Democratic Tennessee State Representative [[Mike Kernell]] from Memphis,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://knoxville.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/2008/kxhacking100808.htm |title=Federal Bureau of Investigation&nbsp;– Knoxville Division&nbsp;– Press Releases&nbsp;– Department of Justice |publisher=Knoxville.fbi.gov |date= |accessdate=16 November 2009}}</ref> whose email address (as listed on various social networking sites) was linked to the hacker's identity on Anonymous.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/21/160222 | title=Palin Email Hacker Found | work=Slashdot | accessdate=21 September 2008}}</ref> Kernell attempted to conceal his identity by using the anonymous proxy service [http://www.ctunnel.com/ ctunnel.com], but, because of the illegal nature of the access, ctunnel website administrator Gabriel Ramuglia assisted the FBI in tracking down the source of the hack.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/18/palin_email_investigation/ | title=Memo to US Secret Service: Net proxy may pinpoint Palin email hackers | work=TheRegister | accessdate=21 September 2008}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====BNP membership list====
+
−
After briefly appearing on a blog, the membership list of the far-right [[British National Party]] was posted to WikiLeaks on 18 November 2008. The name, address, age and occupation of many of the 13,500 members were given, including several police officers, two solicitors, four ministers of religion, at least one doctor, and a number of primary and secondary school teachers. In Britain, police officers are banned from joining or promoting the BNP, and at least one officer was dismissed for being a member.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7956824.stm|title ='BNP membership' officer sacked |publisher=BBC | accessdate=23 March 2009 | date=21 March 2009}}</ref> The BNP was known for going to considerable lengths to conceal the identities of members. On 19 November, BNP leader [[Nick Griffin]] stated that he knew the identity of the person who initially leaked the list on 17 November, describing him as a "hardliner" senior employee who left the party in 2007.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/nov/19/bnp-list | title=BNP membership list posted online by former 'hardliner' |work=The Guardian |location=UK | accessdate=19 November 2008 | location=London | first=Ian | last=Cobain | date=19 November 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20081118214827111 | title=BNP Membership List Exposed | publisher=Infoshop News | accessdate=19 November 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1087101/Police-officer-faces-investigation-outed-BNP-supporter-membership-leak.html | title=Police officer faces investigation after being 'outed' as BNP supporter in membership leak | publisher=DailyMail | accessdate=19 November 2008 | location=London | first1=Michael | last1=Lea | first2=Nicola | last2=Boden | date=19 November 2008}}</ref> On 20 October 2009, a list of BNP members from April 2009 was leaked. This list contained 11,811 members.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/20/bnp-membership-list-wikileaks |title=BNP membership list leaked |work=Guardian |location=UK | accessdate=20 October 2009 |location=London |first=Robert |last=Booth |date=20 October 2009}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
===2009===
+
−
In January 2009, over 600 internal United Nations reports (60 of them marked "strictly confidential") were leaked.<ref>{{cite web|last=Radio |first=Britannia |url=http://britanniaradio.blogspot.com/2009/01/wikileaks-releases-un-bombshell_15.html |title=Britannia Radio |publisher=Britanniaradio.blogspot.com |date=15 January 2009 |accessdate=13 March 2009}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
On 7 February 2009, WikiLeaks released 6,780 [[Congressional Research Service]] reports.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Change_you_can_download:_a_billion_in_secret_Congressional_reports |title=Change you can download: a billion in secret Congressional reports |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=13 March 2009}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
In March 2009, WikiLeaks published a list of contributors to the [[Norm Coleman]] senatorial campaign<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/The_Big_Bad_Database_of_Senator_Norm_Coleman |title=The Big Bad Database of Senator Norm Coleman |publisher=|date=11 March 2009 |accessdate=17 June 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> and a set of documents belonging to [[Barclays Bank]] that had been ordered removed from the website of ''[[The Guardian]]''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/The_Guardian:_Censored_Barclays_tax_avoidance_leaked_memos%2C_16_Mar_2009 |title=Barclays Bank gags Guardian over leaked memos detailing offshore tax scam |publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=17 June 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Climategate emails====
+
−
{{Main|Climatic Research Unit email controversy}}
+
−
 
+
−
In November 2009, controversial documents, including e-mail correspondence between climate scientists, were released (allegedly after being illegally obtained) from the [[University of East Anglia]]'s (UEA) [[Climatic Research Unit]] (CRU).<ref>{{cite book|author=[[Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change]]|url=http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7934/7934.pdf|title=Government Response to the House of Commons Science and Technology 8th Report of Session 2009–10: The disclosure of climate date from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia|publisher=[[The Stationery Office]]|isbn=9780101793421}}</ref> According to the university, the emails and documents were obtained through a server [[hacker (computer security)|hacking]]; one prominent host of the full 120&nbsp;MB archive was WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks.org aims to expose lies, topple governments |date= 29 November 2009 |work=New York Post |url=http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/wikileaks_org_aims_to_expose_lies_flsLqNMO3B0LEtxL5bNaKL}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/wikileaks-shuts-down-unable-to-plug-funding-gap-20100202-n9z4.html |title=Wikileaks shuts down, unable to plug funding gap (Sydney Morning Herald) |work=Sydney Morning Herald |date= 2 February 2010|accessdate=30 April 2010 | first=Asher | last=Moses}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Internet censorship lists====
+
−
WikiLeaks has published the lists of forbidden or illegal web addresses for several countries.
+
−
 
+
−
On 19 March 2009, WikiLeaks published what was alleged to be the [[Australian Communications and Media Authority]]'s blacklist of sites to be banned under [[Internet censorship in Australia|Australia's proposed laws on Internet censorship]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.efa.org.au/2009/03/19/leaked-government-blacklist-confirms-worst-fears/|title=Leaked Government blacklist confirms worst fears|author=Colin Jacobs|publisher=Electronic Frontiers Australia|accessdate=19 March 2009|date=19 March 2009}}</ref> Reactions to the publication of the list by the Australian media and politicians were varied. Particular note was made by journalistic outlets of the type of websites on the list; while the Internet censorship scheme submitted by the [[Australian Labor Party]] in 2008 was proposed with the stated intention of preventing access to [[child pornography]] and sites related to [[terrorism]],<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/19/australia-internet-censorship-markets-economy-wikileaks.html|title=Aussie Internet Blacklist Has Gray Areas|author=Vivian Wai-yin Kwok|accessdate=19 March 2009|date=19 March 2009|work=Forbes}}</ref> the list leaked on WikiLeaks contains a number of sites unrelated to sex crimes involving minors.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/03/19/1237054961100.html|title=Leaked Australian blacklist reveals banned sites|author=Asher Moses|accessdate=19 March 2009|date=19 March 2009|work=Sydney Morning Herald }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Wikileaks-spills-ACMA-blacklist/0,130061744,339295538,00.htm|title=Wikileaks spills ACMA blacklist|author=Liam Tung|publisher=ZD Net Australia|accessdate=19 March 2009|date=19 March 2009}}</ref> When questioned about the leak, [[Stephen Conroy]], the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy in Australia's [[Rudd Labor Government]], responded by claiming that the list was not the actual list, yet threatening to prosecute anyone involved in distributing it.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/19/2520929.htm?section=australia|title=Leaked blacklist irresponsible, inaccurate: Conroy|publisher=ABC News|author=Nic MacBean|accessdate=19 March 2009|date=19 March 2009|quote="I am aware of reports that a list of URLs has been placed on a website. This is not the ACMA blacklist."
+
−
 
+
−
He says that the published list purports to be current on 6 August 2008, and contains approximately 2,400 URLs, whereas the ACMA blacklist for the same date contained 1,061 URLs.
+
−
 
+
−
"There are some common URLs to those on the ACMA blacklist. However, ACMA advises that there are URLs on the published list that have never been the subject of a complaint or ACMA investigation, and have never been included on the ACMA blacklist," he said.
+
−
 
+
−
"ACMA is investigating this matter and is considering a range of possible actions it may take including referral to the Australian Federal Police. Any Australian involved in making this content publicly available would be at serious risk of criminal prosecution."}}</ref> On 20 March 2009, WikiLeaks published an updated list, dated 18 March 2009; it more closely matches the claimed size of the ACMA blacklist, and contains two pages which have been independently confirmed to be blacklisted by ACMA.
+
−
 
+
−
WikiLeaks also contains details of Internet censorship in Thailand, including lists of censored sites dating back to May 2006.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Internet_Censorship_in_Thailand |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080116070133/http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Internet_Censorship_in_Thailand |archivedate=16 January 2008 |title=Internet Censorship in Thailand |publisher=wikileaks.org |accessdate=17 June 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Bilderberg Group meeting reports====
+
−
Since May 2009, WikiLeaks has made available reports of several meetings of the [[Bilderberg Group]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Series/Bilderberg_reports |title=Bildeberg Group Documents |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=11 May 2009}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> It includes the group's history<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group_History%2C_1956 |title=Bilderberg Group History, 1956 |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=11 May 2009}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> and meeting reports from the years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1962, 1963 and 1980.
+
−
 
+
−
====2008 Peru oil scandal====
+
−
On 28 January 2009, WikiLeaks released 86 telephone intercept recordings of Peruvian politicians and businessmen involved in the [[2008 Peru oil scandal|"Petrogate" oil scandal]]. The release of the tapes led the front pages of five Peruvian newspapers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/86_interceptaciones_telefonicas_a_politicos_y_autoridades_peruanos,_m%C3%A1s_del_caso_Petrogate,_2008 |title=86 interceptaciones telefonicas a politicos y autoridades peruanos, más del caso Petrogate, 2008 |publisher=WikiLeaks |date= |accessdate=16 November 2009}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Nuclear accident in Iran====
+
−
On 16 July 2009, Iranian news agencies reported that the head of Iran's atomic energy organization [[Gholam Reza Aghazadeh]] had abruptly resigned for unknown reasons after twelve years in office.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8153775.stm |title=Iranian nuclear chief steps down |publisher=BBC News |date=16 July 2009 |accessdate=16 October 2010}}</ref> Shortly afterwards WikiLeaks released a report disclosing a "serious nuclear accident" at the Iranian [[Nuclear facilities in Iran#Natanz|Natanz nuclear facility]] in 2009.<ref>{{cite web|last= |first= |url=http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Serious_nuclear_accident_may_lay_behind_Iranian_nuke_chief%27s_mystery_resignation/ |title=Serious nuclear accident may lay behind Iranian nuke chief's mystery resignation |publisher=wikileaks |date=16 July 2009 |accessdate=16 October 2010}}</ref> The [[Federation of American Scientists]] (FAS) released statistics according to which the number of enriched centrifuges operational in Iran mysteriously declined from about 4,700 to about 3,900 beginning around the time the nuclear incident WikiLeaks mentioned would have occurred.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/tag/wikileaks/ |title=German Cyber-Security Expert: Stuxnet's Target, Natanz Reactor |publisher=www.richardsilverstein.com |date=23 September 2010 |accessdate=2 October 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Clayton |first=Mark |url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100924/ts_csm/328049_1 |title=Stuxnet worm mystery: What's the cyber weapon after? |publisher=Yahoo News |date=25 February 2009 |accessdate=28 September 2010}} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
According to media reports the accident may have been the direct result of a [[cyberattack]] at Iran's nuclear program, carried out with the [[Stuxnet]] computer worm.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/27/6_mysteries_about_stuxnet |title=6 mysteries about Stuxnet |publisher=Blog.foreignpolicy.com |date= |accessdate=28 September 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Paul Woodward |url=http://warincontext.org/2010/09/26/iran-confirms-stuxnet-found-at-bushehr-nuclear-power-plant/ |title=Iran confirms Stuxnet found at Bushehr nuclear power plant|publisher=Warincontext.org |date=22 February 1999 |accessdate=28 September 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Toxic dumping in Africa: The Minton report====
+
−
In September 2006, commodities giant [[Trafigura]] commissioned an internal report about a [[2006 Côte d'Ivoire toxic waste dump|toxic dumping incident in the Ivory Coast]],<ref name="wikileaks">{{cite news
+
−
|url=http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/10/a-gag-too-far/
+
−
|title=A gag too far
+
−
|work=Index On Censorship
+
−
|date=October 2009
+
−
|accessdate=14 October 2009
+
−
}}{{dead link|date=October 2010}}</ref> which (according to the United Nations) affected 108,000 people. The document, called the Minton Report, names various harmful chemicals "likely to be present" in the waste&nbsp;— [[sodium hydroxide]], [[cobalt phthalocyanine sulfonate]], [[coker naphtha]], [[thiol]]s, [[sodium alkanethiolate]], [[sodium hydrosulfide]], [[sodium sulfide]], [[dialkyl disulfide]]s, [[hydrogen sulfide]]&nbsp;— and notes that some of them "may cause harm at some distance". The report states that potential health effects include "burns to the skin, eyes and lungs, vomiting, diarrhea, loss of consciousness and death", and suggests that the high number of reported casualties is "consistent with there having been a significant release of hydrogen sulphide gas".
+
−
 
+
−
On 11 September 2009, Trafigura's lawyers, [[Carter-Ruck]], obtained a secret "[[super-injunction]]"<ref>{{cite |title=Minton report secret injunction gagging The Guardian on Trafigura |work=WikiLeaks |url=https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Minton_report_secret_injunction_gagging_The_Guardian_on_Trafigura,_11_Sep_2009 |accessdate=15 October 2009}}{{dead link|date=November 2010}}</ref> against ''[[The Guardian]]'', banning that newspaper from publishing the contents of the document. Trafigura also threatened a number of other media organizations with legal action if they published the report's contents, including the [[Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation]]<ref name="wikileaks"/> and ''The Chemical Engineer'' magazine.<ref name="duckett">{{cite news
+
−
|url=http://www.tcetoday.com/trafigura
+
−
|accessdate=2 December 2010
+
−
|title=Trafigura story breaks
+
−
|work=The Chemical Engineer
+
−
|first=Adam
+
−
|last=Duckett
+
−
|date=13 October 2009
+
−
}}</ref> On 14 September 2009, WikiLeaks posted the report.<ref>{{cite web
+
−
|url=http://wikileaks.org/leak/waterson-toxicwaste-ivorycoast-%C3%A92009.pdf
+
−
|title=RE: Caustic Tank Washings, Abidjan, Ivory Coast
+
−
|accessdate=16 October 2009
+
−
}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
On 12 October, Carter-Ruck warned ''The Guardian'' against mentioning the content of a parliamentary question that was due to be asked about the report. Instead, the paper published an article stating that they were unable to report on an unspecified question and claiming that the situation appeared to "call into question privileges guaranteeing [[freedom of speech|free speech]] established under the [[Bill of Rights 1689|1689 Bill of Rights]]".<ref>Leigh, David (12 October 2009). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament Guardian gagged from reporting parliament]. ''[[The Guardian]]''.</ref> The suppressed details rapidly circulated via the internet and Twitter<ref>Rusbridger, Alan (14 October 2009). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/oct/14/trafigura-fiasco-tears-up-textbook The Trafigura fiasco tears up the textbook]. ''[[The Guardian]]''.</ref><ref>Higham, Nick (13 October 2009). [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8304908.stm When is a secret not a secret?] [[BBC News]].</ref><ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009_October_12#the_mysterious_British_House_of_Commons The mysterious British House of Commons]. Wikipedia Reference Desk</ref> and, amid uproar, Carter-Ruck agreed the next day to the modification of the injunction before it was challenged in court, permitting ''The Guardian'' to reveal the existence of the question and the injunction.<ref>{{cite news
+
−
|title=Gag on Guardian reporting MP's Trafigura question lifted
+
−
|work=The Guardian
+
−
|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-gagged-parliamentary-question
+
−
|accessdate=14 October 2009
+
−
|date=13 October 2009
+
−
|first=David
+
−
|last=Leigh
+
−
| location=London
+
−
}}</ref> The injunction was lifted on 16 October.<ref>{{cite news
+
−
|work=The Daily Telegraph
+
−
|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6350262/Secret-Trafigura-report-said-likely-cause-of-illness-was-release-of-toxic-gas-from-dumped-waste.html
+
−
|title=Secret Trafigura report said ‘likely cause’ of illness was release of toxic gas from dumped waste
+
−
|first=Martin
+
−
|last=Beckford
+
−
|date=16 October 2009
+
−
|accessdate=16 October 2009
+
−
| location=London
+
−
}}
+
−
</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Kaupthing Bank====
+
−
WikiLeaks has made available an internal document<ref>{{cite web |title=Financial collapse: Confidential exposure analysis of 205 companies each owing above €45M to Icelandic bank Kaupthing, 26&nbsp;September 2008 |url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Financial_collapse:_Confidential_exposure_analysis_of_205_companies_each_owing_above_€45M_to_Icelandic_bank_Kaupthing%2C_26_Sep_2008 |date=29 July 2009 |work=|publisher=WikiLeaks |accessdate=22 September 2009}}</ref> from [[Kaupthing Bank]] from just prior to the collapse of Iceland's banking sector, which led to the [[2008–2009 Icelandic financial crisis]]. The document shows that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off. Kaupthing's lawyers have threatened WikiLeaks with legal action, citing banking privacy laws. The leak has caused an uproar in Iceland.<ref>{{cite web |title=Miklar hreyfingar rétt fyrir hrun |url=http://www.ruv.is/heim/frettir/frett/store64/item292385/ |date=31 July 2009 |publisher=[[RÚV]] |accessdate=22 September 2009}}</ref> Criminal charges relating to the multibillion euro loans to Exista and other major shareholders are being investigated. The bank is seeking to recover loans taken out by former bank employees before its collapse.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jRXbUVXZXzphjcFfhmcjSq_E262A |title=Failed Icelandic bank seeks 197&nbsp;million euros from former staff |publisher=AFP |date=17 May 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Joint Services Protocol 440====
+
−
[[Joint Services Protocol 440]] ("JSP 440") is the name of a British 2001 [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defense]] 2,400-page restricted document for security containing instructions for avoiding leaks in the information flow caused by [[hacker (computer security)|hackers]], journalists, and foreign [[spy|spies]].<ref>Tom Chivers. "[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6261756/MoD-how-to-stop-leaks-document-is-leaked.html MoD 'how to stop leaks' document is leaked]" ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' 5 October 2009. Retrieved 6 October 2009.</ref><ref>Kalle Holmberg. "[http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/brittisk-instruktion-mot-lackor-har-lackt-ut-1.968704 Brittisk instruktion mot läckor har läckt ut]" ''[[Dagens Nyheter]]'', 6 October 2009. Retrieved 6 October 2009.</ref> The protocol was posted on WikiLeaks on 3 October 2009.
+
−
 
+
−
====9/11 pager messages====
+
−
On 25 November 2009, WikiLeaks released 570,000 intercepts of pager messages sent on the day of the [[11 September attacks]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://911.wikileaks.org/ |title=Wikileaks 9/11 Pager Data Website |publisher=911.wikileaks.org |date= |accessdate=2010-12-02}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34149853/ns/us_news-security/ |title=570,000 pager messages from 9/11 released MSNBC 25&nbsp;November 2009 |publisher=MSNBC |date=25 November 2009 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Analysis-of-911-Pager-Data-Paints-Chilling-Picture-78219132.html|title=Analysis of 9/11 Pager Data Paints Chilling Picture|author=Jennifer Millman|publisher=NBC New York|date=1 December 2009 }}</ref> Bradley Manning (see below) commented that those were obvious [[NSA]] intercepts.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/07/wikileaks_arrest/|title=Wikileaks' US army 'leaker' arrested|author=Chris Williams|publisher=TheRegister|date=7 June 2010}}</ref> Among the released messages are communications between [[The Pentagon|Pentagon]] officials and [[New York City Police Department]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/wikileaks-pages/|title=Wikileaks Says It Has Half-a-Million 9/11 Pager Messages|author=Kevin Poulsen|publisher=Wired|date=25 November 2009}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
===2010===
+
−
====U.S. Intelligence report on WikiLeaks====
+
−
On 15 March 2010, WikiLeaks released a secret 32-page [[U.S. Department of Defense]] Counterintelligence Analysis Report from March 2008. The document described some prominent reports leaked on the website which related to U.S. security interests and described potential methods of marginalizing the organization. WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange said that some details in the Army report were inaccurate and its recommendations flawed,<ref name="USarmyintel">{{cite web
+
−
| url = http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20000469-38.html
+
−
| title = U.S. Army worried about Wikileaks in secret report
+
−
| last = Mccullagh
+
−
| first = Declan
+
−
| publisher=[[CNET Networks|CNET]] News, CBS Interactive
+
−
| date = 15 March 2010
+
−
| accessdate = 15 March 2010
+
−
}}</ref> and also that the concerns of the U.S. Army raised by the report were hypothetical.<ref name=nytimes>{{cite news|last=Strom |first=Stephanie |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/us/18wiki.html |title=Pentagon Sees a Threat From Online Muckrakers |publisher=nytimes |date=17 March 2010 |accessdate=30 April 2010}}</ref>
+
−
The report discussed deterring potential whistleblowers via termination of employment and criminal prosecution of any existing or former insiders, leakers or whistleblowers. Reasons for the report include notable leaks such as U.S. equipment expenditure, human rights violations in Guantanamo Bay and the [[First Battle of Fallujah|battle over the Iraqi town of Fallujah]].<ref>{{cite web
+
−
| url = http://wikileaks.org/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf
+
−
| title = U.S. Intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks
+
−
| format = PDF
+
−
}}{{dead link|date=October 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Baghdad airstrike video====
+
−
{{Main|12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike}}
+
−
 
+
−
On 5 April 2010, WikiLeaks released classified U.S. military footage from a series of attacks on 12 July 2007 in Baghdad by a U.S. helicopter that killed 12, including two [[Reuters]] news staff, [[Saeed Chmagh]] and [[Namir Noor-Eldeen]], on a website called "Collateral Murder". The footage consisted of a 39-minute unedited version and an 18-minute version which had been edited and annotated. Analysis of the video indicates that the pilots thought the men were carrying weapons (which were actually camera equipment). When asked if they were ''sure'' that the men were carrying weapons, they answered in the affirmative.<ref>{{cite news |title=Video Shows U.S. Killing of Reuters Employees |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html
+
−
|date=6 April 2009 |work=New York Times author=Elisabeth Bumiller; Brian Stelter |accessdate=7 April 2010 }}</ref>
+
−
The [[United States military|military]] conducted an "informal" investigation into the incident, but has yet to release the investigative materials (such as the sworn statements of the soldiers involved or the battle damage assessment) that were used, causing the report to be criticized as "sloppy."<ref>Khatchadourian, Raffi (9 April 2010) [http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2010/04/the-wikileaks-video-reading-the-report.html The WikiLeaks Video: Reading the Report], ''[[The New Yorker]]''</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
In the week following the release, "Wikileaks" was the search term with the most significant growth worldwide in the last seven days as measured by [[Google]] Insights.<ref name=Google>[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/current-google-insights-trends-wikileaks-posts-clasified-military-video-masters-1942629.html Current Google Insights trends: Wikileaks posts classified military video, Masters], ''[[The Independent]]'', (12 April 2010)</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
=====Arrest of Bradley Manning=====
+
−
{{Main|Bradley Manning}}
+
−
A 22-year-old [[US Army]] [[intelligence analyst]], [[Private First Class|PFC]] (formerly [[Specialist (rank)|SPC]]) [[Bradley Manning]], was arrested after alleged chat logs were turned in to the authorities by former hacker [[Adrian Lamo]], in whom he had confided. Manning reportedly told Lamo he had [[news leak|leaked]] the [[Collateral Murder video|"Collateral Murder" video]], in addition to a video of the [[Granai airstrike]] and around 260,000 [[diplomatic cable]]s, to WikiLeaks.<ref name=wired>{{cite news | url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/ | authorlink1=Kevin Poulsen | first1=Kevin | last1=Poulsen | authorlink2=Kim Zetter | first2=Kim | last2=Zetter | title=U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe | newspaper=Wired |date=6 June 2010 |accessdate=15 June 2010}}</ref><ref name=BBCManning>{{cite news | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10254072.stm | title=US intelligence analyst arrested over security leaks | date=7 June 2010 |publisher=BBC News | accessdate=15 June 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks said "allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified US embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect."<ref name=BBC>{{cite news | first=Jonathan | last=Fildes | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10255887.stm | title=Hacker explains why he reported 'Wikileaks source' | date=7 June 2010 |publisher=BBC News | accessdate=15 June 2010}}</ref> WikiLeaks have said that they are unable as yet to confirm whether or not Manning was actually the source of the video, stating "we never collect personal information on our sources", but that they have nonetheless "taken steps to arrange for his protection and legal defence."<ref name=BBCManning/><ref name=Fildes8>{{cite news | first=Jonathan | last=Fildes | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10265430.stm | title=Wikileaks site unfazed by arrest of U.S. army 'source' | date=8 June 2010 |publisher=BBC News | accessdate=15 June 2010}}</ref> On 21 June Julian Assange told ''[[The Guardian]]'' that WikiLeaks had hired three US criminal lawyers to defend Manning but that they had not been given access to him.<ref>{{cite news | first=Ian | last=Traynor | title=WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange breaks cover but will avoid America | newspaper=[[guardian.co.uk]] | date=21 June 2010 | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun/21/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-breaks-cover | accessdate=21 June 2010 | location=London}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
Manning reportedly wrote, "Everywhere there’s a U.S. post, there’s a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/ |author=Kevin Poulsen and Kim Zetter |title=U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe |publisher=Wired |date=6 June 2010}}</ref> According to the Washington Post, he also described the cables as "explaining how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/09/AR2010060906170.html |author=Ellen Nakashima |title=Messages from alleged leaker Bradley Manning portray him as despondent soldier |work=The Washington Post| date=10 June 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Afghan War Diary====
+
−
{{Main|Afghan War documents leak}}
+
−
On 25 July 2010,<ref>{{cite news |title=The Man Who Fell to Earth|author=John Birmingham |url=http://www.themonthly.com.au/monthly-essays-john-birmingham-man-who-fell-earth-julian-assange-s-wikileaks-2789 |publisher=The Monthly |date=1 October 2010 |accessdate=25 October 2010 |first=John | last=Birmingham}}</ref> WikiLeaks released to ''[[The Guardian]]'', ''[[The New York Times]]'', and ''[[Der Spiegel]]'' over [http://hotfile.com/dl/57733000/664f6b6/200402009diarywar.html.7z.html 92,000 documents] related to the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|war in Afghanistan]] between 2004 and the end of 2009. The documents detail individual incidents including [[friendly fire]] and civilian casualties.<ref name="guardian1">{{cite news | title=Afghanistan war logs: the unvarnished picture | newspaper=[[guardian.co.uk]] | date=25 July 2010 | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-guardian-editorial?intcmp=239 | accessdate=26 July 2010 | location=London}}</ref> The scale of leak was described by Julian Assange as comparable to that of the [[Pentagon Papers]] in the 1970s. The documents were released to the public on 25 July 2010. On 29 July 2010 WikiLeaks added a 1.4 GB "[[WikiLeaks#Insurance_file|insurance file]]" to the Afghan War Diary page, whose decryption details would be release if WikiLeaks or Assange were harmed.<ref name="wired_insurance" /><ref name="telegraph_dns_insuranceaes" /><ref name="cbsnews_diplomaticbomb" />
+
−
 
+
−
About 15,000 of the 92,000 documents have not yet been released on WikiLeaks, as the group is currently reviewing the documents to remove some of the sources of the information. Speaking to a group in London in August 2010, Assange said that the group will "absolutely" release the remaining documents. He stated that WikiLeaks has requested help from the Pentagon and human-rights groups to help redact the names, but has not received any assistance. He also stated that WikiLeaks is "not obligated to protect other people's sources...unless it is from unjust retribution."<ref>{{cite news|title=Pentagon Slams WikiLeaks' Plan to Post More War Logs |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704407804575425900461793766.html?mod=WSJ_article_LatestHeadlines#articleTabs%3Darticle|accessdate=13 August 2010|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=12 August 2010|author=Julian E. Barnes|author2=Jeanne Whalen}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
According to a report on the Daily Beast website, the Obama administration has asked Britain, Germany and Australia among others to consider bringing criminal charges against Assange for the Afghan war leaks and to help limit Assange's travels across international borders.<ref>{{cite web|last=Shenon|first=Philip|title=U.S. Urges Allies to Crack Down on WikiLeaks|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-10/a-western-crackdown-on-wikileaks/|publisher=The Daily Beast|accessdate=10 August 2010}}</ref> In the United States, a joint investigation by the Army and the Federal Bureau of Investigation may try to prosecute "Mr. Assange and others involved on grounds they encouraged the theft of government property".<ref>{{cite news |title=Prosecutors Eye WikiLeaks Charges |coauthors=ADAM ENTOUS, EVAN PEREZ |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704488404575441673460880204.html |=Politics and Policy/US |work=The Wall Street Journal date=20 August 2010<!-- 23:54:56 -->|accessdate=21 August 2010 | first1=Adam | last1=Entous | first2=Evan | last2=Perez}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
The Australia Defence Association (ADA) stated that WikiLeaks' [[Julian Assange]] "could have committed a serious criminal offence in helping an enemy of the [[Australian Defence Force]] (ADF)."<ref name=smh>{{cite news|url=http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/assange-may-have-committed-offence-ada-20100728-10vp8.html|title=Assange may have committed offence: ADA|work=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=28 July 2010}}</ref> Neil James, the executive director of ADA, states: "Put bluntly, Wikileaks is not authorised in international or Australian law, nor equipped morally or operationally, to judge whether open publication of such material risks the safety, security, morale and legitimate objectives of Australian and allied troops fighting in a UN-endorsed military operation."<ref name=smh/>
+
−
 
+
−
WikiLeaks' recent leaking of classified U.S. intelligence has been described by commentator of ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' as having "endangered the lives of Afghan informants" and "the dozens of Afghan civilians named in the document dump as U.S. military informants. Their lives, as well as those of their entire families, are now at terrible risk of Taliban reprisal."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703940904575395500694117006.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle|title=WikiLeaks 'Bastards'|work=The Wall Street Journal date=29 July 2010}}</ref> When interviewed, Assange stated that WikiLeaks has withheld some 15,000 documents that identify informants to avoid putting their lives at risk. Specifically, Voice of America reported in August 2010 that Assange, responding to such criticisms, stated that the 15,000 still held documents are being reviewed "line by line," and that the names of "innocent parties who are under reasonable threat" will be removed.<ref
+
−
name="voa2010Aug21">{{cite web|url=http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Embattled-Wikileaks-Founder-Facing-Rape-Charge-in-Sweden-101219394.html |title=Sweden Withdraws Arrest Warrant for Embattled WikiLeaks Founder |publisher=.voanews.com |date=21 August 2010 |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref> [[Greg Gutfeld]] of [[Fox News]] described the leaking as "WikiLeaks' Crusade Against the U.S. Military."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,597965,00.html|title=WikiLeaks' Crusade Against the U.S. Military|publisher=Fox News | date=28 July 2010}}</ref> [[John Pilger]] has reported that prior to the release of the Afghan War Diaries in July, WikiLeaks contacted the White House in writing, asking that it identify names that might draw reprisals, but received no response.<ref name="2010aug_pilger">{{cite web|url=http://www.zcommunications.org/why-wikileaks-must-be-protected-by-john-pilger |title=Why Wikileaks Must Be Protected |publisher=Zcommunications.org |date= |accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref><ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/19/world/19wiki.html WikiLeaks and Pentagon Disagree About Talks] 19 August 2010</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
According to the New York Times, Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders criticized WikiLeaks for what they saw as risking people’s lives by identifying Afghans acting as informers.<ref name="NYT20101028-Burns">{{cite news|last=Burns|first=John|title=WikiLeaks Founder on the Run, Trailed by Notoriety|work=The New York Times |date=23 October 2010|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html?_r=2|accessdate=28 October 2010}}</ref> A Taliban spokesman said that the Taliban had formed a nine-member "commission" to review the documents "to find about people who are spying."<ref name="NYT20101028-Burns" /> He said the Taliban had a "wanted" list of 1,800 Afghans and was comparing that with names WikiLeaks provided, stating "after the process is completed, our Taliban court will decide about such people."<ref name="NYT20101028-Burns" />
+
−
 
+
−
====Love Parade documents====
+
−
Sometime after the [[Love Parade stampede]] in [[Duisburg]], Germany on 24 July 2010, the local news blog ''Xtranews'' published internal documents of the city administration regarding Love Parade planning and actions by the authorities. The city government reacted by acquiring a court order on 16 August forcing ''Xtranews'' to remove the documents from its blog.<ref>Konrad Lischka: [http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,712408,00.html ''Einstweilige Verfügung – Duisburg verbietet Blogger-Veröffentlichung zur Love Parade''] at [[Spiegel Online]] on 18 August 2010 (German)</ref> Two days later, however, after the documents had surfaced on other websites as well, the government stated that it would not conduct any further legal actions against the publication of the documents.<ref>[http://www.wdr.de/themen/panorama/loveparade_2010/aktuell/100818.jhtml ''Loveparade-Dokumente offen im Internet''] at [[Westdeutscher Rundfunk|wdr.de]] (German. Retrieved 26 August 2010.</ref> On 20 August WikiLeaks released a publication titled ''Loveparade 2010 Duisburg planning documents, 2007–2010'', which comprised 43 internal documents regarding the Love Parade 2010.<ref>{{cite web|title=Loveparade 2010 Duisburg planning documents, 2007–2010|url=http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Loveparade_2010_Duisburg_planning_documents,_2007-2010|accessdate=21 August 2010}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref><ref>[http://www.news.com.au/technology/wikileaks-releases-documents-on-love-parade-tragedy/story-e6frfrnr-1225908260011 ''WikiLeaks releases documents on Love Parade tragedy''] at news.com.au on 21 August 2010</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Iraq War Logs====
+
−
{{Main|Iraq War documents leak}}
+
−
In October 2010, it was reported that WikiLeaks was planning to release up to 400,000 documents relating to the [[Iraq War]].<ref>{{cite news | title=WikiLeaks May Release 400,000 Iraq War Documents| first= | last= | publisher=[[CBS News]]| date=16 October 2010 | url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/16/national/main6964276.shtml | accessdate=16 October 2010}}</ref> Julian Assange initially denied the reports, stating: "WikiLeaks does not speak about upcoming releases dates, indeed, with very rare exceptions we do not communicate any specific information about upcoming releases, since that simply provides fodder for abusive organizations to get their spin machines ready."<ref>{{cite news | title=Where do all these claims about WikiLeaks doing something on Iraq today (Monday) come from? | first=Julian | last=Assange | publisher=WikiLeaks| date=18 October 2010 | url=http://www.twitlonger.com/show/6hqu1n| accessdate=18 October 2010}}</ref> ''[[The Guardian]]'' reported on 21 October 2010 that it had received almost 400,000 Iraq war documents from WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news | title=Iraq war logs: secret files show how US ignored torture |work=The Guardian |location=UK | date=22 October 2010 | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-war-logs-military-leaks | accessdate=22 October 2010}}</ref> On 22 October 2010, [[Al Jazeera]] was the first to release analyses of the leak, dubbed [[Iraq War Logs|The War Logs]]. WikiLeaks posted a [[Twitter|tweet]] that "Al Jazeera have broken our embargo by 30 minutes. We release everyone from their Iraq War Logs embargoes." This prompted other news organizations to release their articles based on the source material. The release of the documents coincided with a return of the main wikileaks.org website, which had been offering no content since 30 September 2010.
+
−
 
+
−
The BBC quoted the [[The Pentagon|Pentagon]] referring to the Iraq War Logs as "the largest leak of classified documents in its history." Media coverage of the leaked documents focused on claims that the U.S. government had ignored reports of [[torture]] by the Iraqi authorities during the period after the [[Iraq War|2003 war]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Huge Wikileaks release shows US 'ignored Iraq torture' |publisher=BBC News |date=23 October 2010 |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11611319 |accessdate=23 October 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
====Diplomatic cables release====
+
−
{{Main|United States diplomatic cables leak}}
+
−
{{Wikinewshas |news on this topic|
+
−
* [[n:Wikileaks to release thousands of secret documents; 'international embarrassment' likely|Wikileaks to release thousands of secret documents; 'international embarrassment' likely]], 27 November 2010
+
−
* [[n:Files will risk 'countless' lives, Obama administration warns Wikileaks|Files will risk 'countless' lives, Obama administration warns Wikileaks]], 28 November 2010
+
−
* [[n:Wikileaks website attacked; millions of files to be released tonight|Wikileaks website attacked; millions of files to be released tonight]], 28 November 2010
+
−
}}
+
−
On 22 November 2010 an announcement was made by the WikiLeaks twitter feed that the next release would be "7x the size of the Iraq War Logs."<ref>http://twitter.com/#!/wikileaks/status/6564225640042499</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.techeye.net/internet/wikileaks-promises-leak-seven-times-bigger-than-iraq|title=WikiLeaks promises leak "seven times bigger than Iraq"|author=Andrea Petrou}}</ref> U.S. authorities and the media have speculated that they may contain diplomatic cables.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n235797 |title=Telegraph: WikiLeaks to release three million secret U.S. documents – FOCUS Information Agency |publisher=Focus-fen.net |date= |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref> Prior to the expected leak, the government of the United Kingdom (UK) sent a [[DA-Notice]] to UK newspapers, which requests advance notice from the newspapers regarding the expected publication.<ref name="indexcensorship_DANotice">{{cite web| last =Butselaar| first =Emily| authorlink =| coauthors =| title =Wikileaks: UK issues DA-Notice as U.S. briefs allies on fresh leak| work=| publisher=[[Index on Censorship]]| date=26 November 2010| url =http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2010/11/us-uk-wikileaks-d-notice-leak/ |format =| doi =| accessdate=26 November 2010 |archiveurl= |archivedate= |deadurl=no }}{{dead link|date=November 2010}}</ref> According to [[Index on Censorship]], "there is no obligation on media to comply". "Newspaper editors would speak to [the] [[Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee]] prior to publication."<ref name="indexcensorship_DANotice" /> The Pakistani newspaper ''[[Dawn (newspaper)|Dawn]]'' stated that the U.S. newspapers ''[[The New York Times]]'' and ''[[The Washington Post]]'' were expected to publish parts of the diplomatic cables on Sunday 28 November, including 94 Pakistan-related documents.<ref name="dawn_cables_prediction">{{cite news | first= | last= | pages= | language =| title=WikiLeaks plans to release 94 papers about Pakistan | date=27 November 2010 | publisher=[[Dawn (newspaper)|Dawn]] | url=http://www.dawn.com/2010/11/27/wikileaks-plans-to-release-94-papers-about-pakistan-2.html |accessdate=27 November 2010 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5uXW29Chj |archivedate=26 November 2010 |deadurl=no }}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
On 26 November, via his lawyer Jennifer Robinson, Assange sent a letter to the [[United States Department of State|US Department of State]], asking for information regarding people who could be placed at "significant risk of harm" by the diplomatic cables release.<ref name="smh_DeptState_rejects">{{cite news | first= | last= | pages= | language =| title=US rejects talks with WikiLeaks | date=28 November 2010 |work=Sydney Morning Herald /[[Agence France Presse|AFP]] | url=http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/us-rejects-talks-with-wikileaks-20101128-18c57.html |accessdate=28 November 2010 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5uZqzdckM |archivedate=28 November 2010 |deadurl=no }}</ref><ref name="Koh_refuses_pdf">{{cite web| last=Koh| first=Harold Hongju| authorlink=Harold Hongju Koh| title=Dear Ms. Robinson and Mr. Assange|work=The Washington Post| date=27 November 2010| url=http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/Dept_of_State_Assange_letter.pdf |format=PDF| doi= |accessdate=28 November 2010 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5uZqSSqr6 |archivedate=28 November 2010 |deadurl=no }}</ref> [[Harold Hongju Koh|Harold Koh]], [[Legal Adviser of the Department of State]], refused the proposal, stating, "We will not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained U.S. Government classified materials."<ref name="Koh_refuses_pdf" />
+
−
 
+
−
On 28 November, WikiLeaks announced it was undergoing a massive [[DDoS|Distributed Denial-of-service attack]],<ref>{{Cite news |title= Wikileaks 'hacked ahead of secret US document release' |url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637 |publisher=BBC News |date=28 November 2010 |accessdate=28 November 2010}}</ref> but vowed to still leak the cables and documents via prominent media outlets including ''[[El País]]'', ''[[Le Monde]]'', ''[[Der Spiegel]]'', ''[[The Guardian]]'', and ''The New York Times''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8924979961798657 |title=Twitter / WikiLeaks: El Pais, Le Monde, Speigel |publisher=Twitter |date= |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref> The announcement was shortly thereafter followed by the online publication, by ''The Guardian'', of some of the purported diplomatic cables including one in which United States Secretary of State [[Hillary Clinton]] apparently orders diplomats to obtain credit card and frequent flier numbers of the French, British, Russian and Chinese delegations to the United Nations Security Council.<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert Booth and Julian Borger |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un |title=US diplomats spied on UN leadership|work=The Guardian |location=UK |date= |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref> Other revelations reportedly include that several Arab nations urged the U.S. to launch a first strike on Iran, that the Chinese government was directly involved in computer hacking, and that the U.S. is pressuring Pakistan to turn over nuclear material to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands. The cables also include unflattering appraisals of world leaders.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/11/28/2010-11-28_media_unveils_classified_documents_via_wikileaks_website_in_explosive_release_of.html| author=Helen Kennedy| title=WikiLeaks should be designated a 'foreign terrorist organization,' Rep. Pete King fumes|work=New York Daily News date=29 November 2010}}</ref> U.S. congressman [[Peter T. King]] called for WikiLeaks to be designated as a terrorist organization in response to the leak of the cables.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/WikiLeaks-Republican-Peter-King-Says-WikiLeaks-Should-Be-Designated-A-Terrorist-Organisation/Article/201011415837684?lpos=World_News_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15837684_WikiLeaks%3A_Republican_Peter_King_Says_WikiLeaks_Should_Be_Designated_A_Terrorist_Organisation|title=WikiLeaks 'Should Be A Terror Organisation' |first1=Rob |last1=Cole|date=29 November 2010 |publisher=[[Sky News]] |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
On 2 Dec 2010 [[EveryDNS]] dropped WikiLeaks from its entries, citing [[DDoS]] attacks that "threatened the stability of its infrastructure".<ref>RAPHAEL G. SATTER and MALIN RISING (3 Dec 2010) [http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/12/02/1882168/the-noose-tightens-around-wikileaks.html WikiLeaks dropped by domain name provider], an [[Associated Press]] story syndicated by [[The Charlotte Observer]]</ref>  The site's [http://wikileaks.info/ .info] DNS lookup remained operational (alternatives: [http://www.wikileaks.ch www.wikileaks.ch] [http://www.wikileaks.pl www.wikileaks.pl] [http://www.wikileaks.fi www.wikileaks.fi] [http://wikileaks.dataleech.com wikileaks.dataleech.com]), and listed IP address [http://213.251.145.96/ 213.251.145.96] for direct access respectively to the Wikileaks and Cablegate websites.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/security/2010/12/03/wikileaks-loses-domain-name-after-dos-attacks-40091046/|title=WikiLeaks loses domain name after DoS attacks|author=Darren Pauli|date=2010-12-02|publisher=ZDNet}}</ref> [[Amazon.com]] also severed its ties with WikiLeaks, to which it was providing infrastructure services, after an intervention of an aide of US Senator [[Joseph Lieberman]].<ref>RAVI SOMAIYA and ALAN COWELL (December 3, 2010), [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/world/europe/04domain.html WikiLeaks Struggles to Stay Online After Cyberattacks], The [[New York Times]]</ref><ref name=agedec4>Dylan Welch (December 4, 2010) [http://www.theage.com.au/world/attacks-shut-down-wikileaks-20101203-18jqt.html Attacks shut down WikiLeaks], [[The Age]]</ref><ref name=guadec02>Ewen MacAskill (2 December 2010) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-website-cables-servers-amazon WikiLeaks website pulled by Amazon after US political pressure], [[The Guardian]]</ref> Lieberman, who later praised Amazon's decision and called for other companies to follow suit,<ref name=guadec02/> also proposed new legislation targeting similar cases&mdash;[[Securing Human Intelligence and Enforcing Lawful Dissemination Act]],<ref name=agedec4/> also known as the the SHIELD Act.<ref>[[Kevin Poulsen]] (December 2, 2010) [http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/shield/ Lieberman Introduces Anti-WikiLeaks Legislation], [[Wired.com]]</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded to the leaks saying, "This disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy; it is an attack on the international community, the alliances and partnerships, the conventions and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity." Julian Assange is quoted as saying, "Of course, abusive, Titanic organizations, when exposed, grasp at all sorts of ridiculous straws to try and distract the public from the true nature of the abuse."<ref>{{cite news| url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/wikileaks/index.html| title=Clinton condemns leak as 'attack on international community'| publisher=CNN| date=29 November 2010}}</ref> [[John Perry Barlow]], co-founder of the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]], wrote a [[tweet]] saying: "The first serious infowar is now engaged. The field of battle is WikiLeaks. You are the troops."<ref>By RAPHAEL G. SATTER and PETER SVENSSON
+
−
(December 3, 2010) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120303214.html WikiLeaks fights to stay online amid attacks], an [[Associated Press]] report syndicated by The [[Washington Post]]</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
WikiLeaks and their media partners has started to voluntary censorship cables. Content of 10STATE17263 cable was removed from site for more 24 hours, then appeared back as 1 paragraph instead of original. 07STATE164120 cable was already removed for 12 hours, then appeared back with name of Russian opposition figure Vladirmir Ryzhkov in subject removed. On December 3 WikiLeaks has suspended to provide hourly updates with torrents.
+
−
 
+
−
===Announcements on upcoming leaks===
+
−
In May 2010, WikiLeaks said they had video footage of a massacre of civilians in Afghanistan by the U.S. military which they were preparing to release.<ref name=campbell/><ref>{{cite news | title=WikiLeaks works to expose government secrets, but Web site's sources are a mystery | first=Joby | last=Warrick |work=The Washington Post| date=19 May 2010 | url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/19/AR2010051905333.html | accessdate=21 May 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
In an interview with [[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Chris Anderson]] on 19 July 2010, Assange showed a document WikiLeaks had on an Albanian oil well blowout, and said they also had material from inside [[BP]],<ref>{{cite video|title=Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks|people=[[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Chris Anderson]]|publisher=[[TED (conference)|TED]]|time=11:28|quote=November last year ... well blowouts in Albania ... Have you had information from inside BP? Yeah, we have a lot ... |url=http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html|date=|ref=Assange2010ted|accessdate=2 August 2010}}</ref> and that they were "getting enormous quantity of whistle-blower disclosures of a very high caliber"<ref>[[#Assange2010ted|Assange TED interview. Event occurs at 13:55]]</ref> but added that they have not been able to verify and release the material because they do not have enough volunteer journalists.<ref>{{cite news|author=By Richard Galant, CNN |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/16/wikileaks.disclosures/ |title=WikiLeaks founder: Site getting tons of 'high caliber' disclosures - CNN.com |publisher=CNN |date=16 July 2010|accessdate=1 August 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
In October 2010, Assange told a leading Moscow newspaper that "The Kremlin had better brace itself for a coming wave of WikiLeaks disclosures about Russia."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329561/Wikileaks-Russian-corruption-expose-plan-linked-Alexander-Lebedev-bank-raid.html|title=Bank raid could have been warning against planned WikiLeaks Russian corruption expose says Alexander Lebedev |first1=Glen |last1=Owen |first2=Will |last2=Stewart |date=14 November 2010 |newspaper=[[Mail Online]] |accessdate=28 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2010/1026/WikiLeaks-ready-to-drop-a-bombshell-on-Russia.-But-will-Russians-get-to-read-about-it |title=WikiLeaks ready to drop a bombshell on Russia. But will Russians get to read about it? |publisher=CSMonitor.com |date=26 October 2010 |accessdate=29 November 2010}}</ref> Assange later clarified: "we have material on many businesses and governments, including in Russia. It’s not right to say there’s going to be a particular focus on Russia".<ref name=Forbes>{{cite news |title=An Interview With WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange |author=Andy Greenberg |newspaper=Forbes |date=29 November 2010 |url=http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/2/ |accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
In a 2009 ''[[Computer World]]'' interview, Assange claimed to be in possession of "5GB from Bank of America", and in 2010 told ''[[Forbes]]'' magazine that WikiLeaks was planning another "megaleak" for early in 2011, which this time would be from inside the private sector and involve "a big U.S. bank". Bank of America's stock price fell as a result of this announcement.<ref name=bankofamerica1>{{cite news | title=Bank of America rumored to be in WikiLeaks’ crosshairs | last=Rothacker |newspaper=[[The Boston Herald]]| first=Rick|url=http://news.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1299995 | accessdate=1 December 2010}}</ref><ref name=bankofamerica2>{{cite news|last=Mark|first=Memmott|title=Bank Of America Stock Steadies After WikiLeaks-Related Drop|url=http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/01/131727190/bank-of-america-stock-steadies-after-wikileaks-related-drop|accessdate=2 December 2010|newspaper=NPR|date=1 December 2010}}</ref><ref name=bankofamerica3>{{cite news|last=De La Merced|first=Michael|title=WikiLeaks’ Next Target: Bank of America?|url=http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/wikileaks-next-target-bank-of-america/|accessdate=2 December 2010|newspaper=New York Times|date=30 November 2010}}ref>{{cite news|author=By John Carney, CNBC |url=http://www.cnbc.com/id/40471184/ |title=Bank of America's Risky WikiLeaks Strategy |publisher=CNBC |date=2 December 2010|accessdate=d December 2010}}</ref>
+
−
 
+
−
==See also==
+
−
{{Portal box|Internet}}
+
−
{{div col|colwidth=15em}}
+
−
* [[Chilling Effects (group)]]
+
−
* [[Cryptome]]
+
−
* [[Digital rights]]
+
−
* [[Freedom of information]]
+
−
* [[Freedom of the press]]
+
−
* [[Information security]]
+
−
* [[irrepressible.info]]
+
−
* [[Streisand effect]]
+
−
{{div col end}}
+
−
 
+
−
==References==
+
−
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}
+
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
 
{{Wikiquote}}
 
{{Wikiquote}}
−
{{Commons category|Wikileaks}}
+
{{Wikileaks}}
 
* [http://www.wikileaks.fi Alternate domain]
 
* [http://www.wikileaks.fi Alternate domain]
 
* [http://wikileaks.info/ WikiLeaks Mirror page]
 
* [http://wikileaks.info/ WikiLeaks Mirror page]
Line 421: Line 132:
 
* [http://www.r-bloggers.com/animated-heatmap-of-wikileaks-report-intensity-in-afghanistan/ Animated Heatmap of WikiLeaks Report Intensity in Afghanistan]
 
* [http://www.r-bloggers.com/animated-heatmap-of-wikileaks-report-intensity-in-afghanistan/ Animated Heatmap of WikiLeaks Report Intensity in Afghanistan]
 
* [http://www.wlcentral.org/ WL Central]: An unofficial WikiLeaks information resource.
 
* [http://www.wlcentral.org/ WL Central]: An unofficial WikiLeaks information resource.
−
 
−
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2010}}
 
  
  
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wikileaks}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wikileaks}}
−
[[Category:WikiLeaks| ]]
+
[[Category:WikiLeaks| ]][[Category:Applications of cryptography]][[Category:Classified documents]][[Category:Espionage]][[Category:Information sensitivity]][[Category:International organizations]][[Category:Internet censorship]][[Category:Internet properties established in 2007]][[Category:Internet services shut down by a legal challenge]][[Category:MediaWiki websites]][[Category:National security]][[Category:Online archives]][[Category:Organizations based in Sweden]][[Category:Web 2.0]][[Category:Whistleblowing]][[Category:2007 establishments in Sweden]][[Category:Activism]][[Category:Information transparency]][[Category:Information security]][[Category:Information]][[Category:Websites]][[Category:CIA desk jockeys reading this and posing as 007 suck the Memory Hole]]
−
[[Category:Applications of cryptography]]
+
<!-- Note the below cats are mostly about the cyber attacks on WikiLeaks, although they also may cover perceptions about WikiLeaks in certain circles -->
−
[[Category:Classified documents]]
+
[[Category:Computer crimes]][[Category:Computer security exploits]][[Category:Computer viruses]][[Category:Cyberattacks]][[Category:Cybercrime]][[Category:Cyberterrorism]][[Category:Cyberwarfare]][[Category:Terrorism by method]]
−
[[Category:Espionage]]
+
−
[[Category:Information sensitivity]]
+
−
[[Category:International organizations]]
+
−
[[Category:Internet censorship]]
+
−
[[Category:Internet properties established in 2007]]
+
−
[[Category:Internet services shut down by a legal challenge]]
+
−
[[Category:MediaWiki websites]]
+
−
[[Category:National security]]
+
−
[[Category:Online archives]]
+
−
[[Category:Organizations based in Sweden]]
+
−
[[Category:Web 2.0]]
+
−
[[Category:Whistleblowing]]
+
−
[[Category:2007 establishments in Sweden]]
+
  
 
Worldwide Spelling Variations
 
Worldwide Spelling Variations
−
* ويكيليكس
+
* ويكيليكس* Vikiliks* ویکی‌لیکس]]* 위키리크스]]* ՎիքիԼիքս]]* विकिलीक्स]]* ויקיליקס]]* ვიკილიქსი]]* വിക്കിലീക്‌സ്]]* [[mr:विकीलीक्स]]* ويکيليکس]]* විකිලීක්ස්* Викиликс]]* விக்கிலீக்ஸ்]]* వీకీలీక్స్]]* วิกิลีกส์]]
−
* Vikiliks
+
−
* ویکی‌لیکس]]
+
−
* 위키리크스]]
+
−
* ÕŽÕ«Ö„Õ«Ô¼Õ«Ö„Õ½]]
+
−
* विकिलीक्स]]
+
−
* ויקיליקס]]
+
−
* ვიკილიქსი]]
+
−
* വിക്കിലീക്‌സ്]]
+
−
[[mr:विकीलीक्स]]
+
−
* ويکيليکس]]
+
−
* විකිලීක්ස්
+
−
* Викиликс]]
+
−
* விக்கிலீக்ஸ்]]
+
−
* వీకీలీక్స్]]
+
−
* วิกิลีกส์]]
+

Latest revision as of 07:16, 2 June 2012

See also United States diplomatic cables WikiLeak, WikiLeaks leaks and WikiLeaks: List of mirror sites and

WikiLeaks is an international non-profit media organization that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous news sources and leaks. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.[1] Within a year of its launch, the site claimed a database that had grown to more than 1.2 million documents.[2]

The organization has described itself as having been founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa.[1] Newspaper articles and The New Yorker magazine describe Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, as its director.[3]

WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including the 2008 Economist magazine New Media Award.[4] In June 2009, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange won Amnesty International's UK Media Award (in the category "New Media") for the 2008 publication of "Kenya: The Cry of Blood â€“ Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances",[5] a report by the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights about police killings in Kenya.[6] In May 2010, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks first in a ranking of "websites that could totally change the news".[7]

In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from a 2007 incident in Baghdad in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by U.S. forces, on a website called Collateral Murder. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary, a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan not previously available for public review.[8] In October, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organisations. In November, Wikileaks began releasing U.S. State department diplomatic cables.

WikiLeaks was launched as a user-editable "wiki" site and still uses MediaWiki as the content management system, but has progressively moved towards a more traditional publication model, and no longer accepts either user comments or edits.

History[edit]

The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.[9][10] The site claims to have been "founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa".[1] The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.[11] It has been represented in public since January 2007 by Julian Assange and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks' advisory board.[12] News reports in The Australian have called Assange the "founder of WikiLeaks".[13] According to Wired magazine, a volunteer said that Assange described himself in a private conversation as "the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest".[14] As of June 2009, the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers[1] and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, Phillip Adams, Wang Dan, C. J. Hinke, Ben Laurie, Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, Xiao Qiang, Chico Whitaker and Wang Youcai.[15] Despite appearing on the list, when contacted by Mother Jones magazine in 2010, Khamsitsang said that while he received an e-mail from WikiLeaks, he had never agreed to be an advisor.[16]

WikiLeaks states that its "primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations."[1][17]

In January 2007, the website stated that it had over 1.2 million leaked documents that it was preparing to publish.[18] An article in The New Yorker said

One of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the Tor network. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments’ information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site’s foundation, and Assange was able to say, "[w]e have received over one million documents from thirteen countries."[19][20]
Assange responded to the suggestion that eavesdropping on Chinese hackers played a crucial part in the early days of WikiLeaks by saying "the imputation is incorrect. The facts concern a 2006 investigation into Chinese espionage one of our contacts were involved in. Somewhere between none and handful of those documents were ever released on WikiLeaks. Non-government targets of the Chinese espionage, such as Tibetan associations were informed (by us)".[21] The group has subsequently released a number of other significant documents which have become front-page news items, ranging from documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the Afghanistan war to corruption in Kenya.[22]

The organization's stated goal is to ensure that whistleblowers and journalists are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents, as happened to Chinese journalist Shi Tao, who was sentenced to 10 years in 2005 after publicising an email from Chinese officials about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.[23]

The project has drawn comparisons to Daniel Ellsberg's leaking of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.[24] In the United States, the leaking of some documents may be legally protected. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of political discourse.[24] Author and journalist Whitley Strieber has spoken about the benefits of the WikiLeaks project, noting that "Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East."[25]

On 24 December 2009, WikiLeaks announced that it was experiencing a shortage of funds[26] and suspended all access to its website except for a form to submit new material.[27] Material that was previously published was no longer available, although some could still be accessed on unofficial mirrors.[28][29] WikiLeaks stated on its website that it would resume full operation once the operational costs were covered.[30][31] WikiLeaks saw this as a kind of strike "to ensure that everyone who is involved stops normal work and actually spends time raising revenue".[32] While it was initially hoped that funds could be secured by 6 January 2010,[33] it was only on 3 February 2010 that WikiLeaks announced that its minimum fundraising goal had been achieved.[34]

On 22 January 2010, PayPal suspended WikiLeaks' donation account and froze its assets. WikiLeaks said that this had happened before, and was done for "no obvious reason".[35] The account was restored on 25 January 2010.[36]

On 18 May 2010, WikiLeaks announced that its website and archive were back up.[37]

As of June 2010, WikiLeaks was a finalist for a grant of more than half a million dollars from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation,[38] but did not make the cut.[39] WikiLeaks commented, "WikiLeaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure”. WikiLeaks said that the Knight foundation announced the award to "'12 Grantees who will impact future of news' â€“ but not WikiLeaks" and questioned whether Knight foundation was "really looking for impact".[39] A spokesman of the Knight Foundation disputed parts of WikiLeaks' statement, saying "WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board."[40] However, he declined to say whether WikiLeaks was the project rated highest by the Knight advisory panel, which consists of non-staffers, among them journalist Jennifer 8. Lee, who has done PR work for WikiLeaks with the press and on social networking sites.[40]

On 17 July Jacob Appelbaum spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks at the 2010 Hackers on Planet Earth conference in New York City, replacing Assange because of the presence of federal agents at the conference.[41][42] He announced that the WikiLeaks submission system was again up and running, after it had been temporarily suspended.[41][43] Assange was a surprise speaker at a TED conference on 19 July 2010 in Oxford, and confirmed that WikiLeaks was now accepting submissions again.[44][45]

Upon returning to the U.S. from the Netherlands, on 29 July, Appelbaum was detained for three hours at the airport by U.S. agents, according to anonymous sources.[46] The sources told Cnet that Appelbaum's bag was searched, receipts from his bag were photocopied, his laptop was inspected, although in what manner was unclear.[46] Appelbaum reportedly refused to answer questions without a lawyer present, and was not allowed to make a phone call. His three mobile phones were reportedly taken and not returned.[46] On 31 July, he spoke at a Defcon conference and mentioned his phone being "seized". After speaking, he was approached by two FBI agents and questioned.[46]


Investigations, censorship, and alleged harassment[edit]

See also Electronic attacks on WikiLeaks

Police raid on German WikiLeaks domain holder's home[edit]

The home of Theodor Reppe, registrant of the German WikiLeaks domain name, wikileaks.de, was raided on 24 March 2009 after WikiLeaks released the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) censorship blacklist.[47] The site was not affected.[48][49][50]

Chinese censorship[edit]

The government of the People’s Republic of China uses its Golden Shield Project to attempt to censor every web site with "wikileaks" in the URL, including the primary .org site and the regional variations .cn and .uk. However, the site is still accessible from behind the Chinese firewall through one of the many alternative names used by the project, such as "secure.sunshinepress.org". The alternate sites change frequently, and WikiLeaks encourages users to search "wikileaks cover names" outside mainland China for the latest alternative names. Mainland search engines, including Baidu and Yahoo!, also censor references to "wikileaks".[51]

Potential future Australian censorship[edit]

On 16 March 2009, the Australian Communications and Media Authority added WikiLeaks to their proposed blacklist of sites that will be blocked for all Australians if the mandatory internet filtering censorship scheme is implemented as planned.[52][53] The blacklisting was removed 30 November 2010.[54]

Thai censorship[edit]

The Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) is currently censoring the website WikiLeaks in Thailand[55] and more than 40,000 other webpages[56] because of the emergency decree in Thailand imposed as a result of political instabilities (Emergency decree declared beginning of April 2010[57]). When trying to access the WikiLeaks website, internet users are redirected to this webpage.

Alleged harassment and surveillance[edit]

According to The Times, WikiLeaks and its members have complained about continuing harassment and surveillance by law enforcement and intelligence organizations, including extended detention, seizure of computers, veiled threats, “covert following and hidden photography.”[58]

After the release of the 2007 airstrikes video and as they prepared to release film of the Granai airstrike, Julian Assange has said that his group of volunteers came under intense surveillance. In an interview and Twitter posts he said that a restaurant in Reykjavik where his group of volunteers met came under surveillance in March; there was "covert following and hidden photography" by police and foreign intelligence services; that an apparent British intelligence agent made thinly veiled threats in a Luxembourg car park; and that one of the volunteers was detained by police for 21 hours. Another volunteer posted that computers were seized, saying "If anything happens to us, you know why ... and you know who is responsible."[58] According to the Columbia Journalism Review, "the Icelandic press took a look at Assange’s charges of being surveilled in Iceland [...] and, at best, have found nothing to substantiate them."[59]

WikiLeaks has claimed that Facebook deleted their fan page, which had 30,000 fans.[60][61][62][63]

United States[edit]

Access to WikiLeaks is currently blocked in the United States Library of Congress.[64]

Iceland[edit]

In August 2009, Kaupthing, a large bank, succeeded in obtaining a court order gagging Iceland’s national broadcaster, RUV, from broadcasting a risk analysis report showing the bank's substantial exposure to debt default risk. This information had been leaked by a whistleblower to WikiLeaks and remained available on the WikiLeaks site; faced with an injunction minutes before broadcast the channel ran with a screen grab of the WikiLeaks site instead of the scheduled piece on the bank. Citizens of Iceland felt outraged that RUV was prevented from broadcasting news of relevance.[65] Therefore, WikiLeaks has been credited with inspiring the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, a bill meant to reclaim Iceland's 2007 Reporters sans frontières ranking as first in the world for free speech. It aims to enact a range of protections for sources, journalists, and publishers.[66][67] Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a former volunteer for WikiLeaks and member the Icelandic parliament, is the chief sponsor of the proposal.


Leaks[edit]

Full list of leaks articles


See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Wikileaks:About. WikiLeaks. Archived from source 14 March 2008. URL accessed on 3 June 2009.
  2. ↑ Wikileaks has 1.2 million documents?. WikiLeaks. Archived from source 16 February 2008. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  3. ↑ McGreal, Chris. Wikileaks reveals video showing U.S. air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians, The Guardian, 5 April 2010.
  4. ↑ Winners of Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Award Announceddead link reported 22 April 2008
  5. ↑ Kenya: The Cry of Blood â€“ Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances, Sep 2008dead link reported WikiLeaks.
  6. ↑ Amnesty announces Media Awards 2009 winners Amnesty.org.uk, 2 June 2009
  7. ↑ Reso, Paulina 5 pioneering Web sites that could totally change the news. Daily News. URL accessed on 8 June 2010.
  8. ↑ AP Interview: WikiLeaks to publish new documents. URL accessed on 8 August 2010. dead link reported
  9. ↑ "Reportedly spurred by the leak of the Pentagon papers, Assange unveiled WikiLeaks in December 2006" WikiLeaks' War on Secrecy: Truth's Consequences. URL accessed on 4 December 2010.
  10. ↑ "In December, 2006, WikiLeaks posted its first document" No Secrets. URL accessed on 1 December 2010.
  11. ↑ Paul Marks. How to leak a secret and not get caught. New Scientist. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  12. ↑ Agence France Press. Chinese cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers. The Age. URL accessed on 17 June 2010.
  13. ↑ Rudd Government blacklist hacker monitors police. The Australian author=Richard Guilliatt. URL accessed on 17 June 2010.
  14. ↑ WikiLeaks Founder on the Run, Trailed by Notoriety.
  15. ↑ WikiLeaks:Advisory Board. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 16 June 2010. dead link reported
  16. ↑ Inside WikiLeaks’ Leak Factory. Mother Jones. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  17. ↑ Cyber-dissidents launch WikiLeaks, a site for whistleblowers. South China Morning Post. Archived from source 12 February 2007. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  18. ↑ Kearny. Wikileaks and Untraceable Document Disclosure. Now Public News. Archived from source 27 September 2007. URL accessed on 28 February 2008., Wikileaks.
  19. ↑ WikiLeaks and Julian Paul Assange. The New Yorker. URL accessed on 8 June 2010.
  20. ↑ Wiktionary definition of tranche. En.wiktionary.org. URL accessed on 22 October 2010.
  21. ↑ Wikileaks denies Tor hacker eavesdropping gave site its starte. The Register. URL accessed on 10 July 2010.
  22. ↑ Wikileaks Releases Secret Report on Military Equipment. The New York Sun. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  23. ↑ Leak secrets trouble free. Scenta. Archived from source 27 November 2007. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Scott Bradner "WikiLeaks: a site for exposure", Linuxworld, 18 January 2007. Retrieved 18 January 2007.
  25. ↑ Staff Reports. Whistleblower Website Coming. Free-Market News Network. URL accessed on 28 February 2008. dead link reported
  26. ↑ twitter.com/wikiLeaks at 1.24 am 24 Dec 2009. Twitter. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  27. ↑ Wikileaks is overloaded. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 31 December 2009. "To concentrate on raising the funds necessary to keep us alive into 2010, we have reluctantly suspended all other operations, but will be back soon."wikileaks.org
  28. ↑ Wikileaks Mirror. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 13 February 2010.
  29. ↑ Another Wikileaks Mirror. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 13 February 2010.
  30. ↑ WikiLeaks is overloaded. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 17 February 2010.
  31. ↑ Butselaar, Emily Dig deep for WikiLeaks. The Guardian. URL accessed on 30 January 2010.
  32. ↑ Interview with Julian Assange, spokesperson of Wikileaks: Leak-o-nomy: The Economy of Wikileaks.
  33. ↑ WikiLeaks. at 7:42 am 5 Jan 2010. Twitter. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  34. ↑ www.twitter.com/wikileaks at 3 February 5.51 pm. Twitter. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  35. ↑ Paypal has again locked our.... WikiLeaks. Twitter. URL accessed on 26 January 2010.
  36. ↑ Paypal has freed up our.... WikiLeaks. Twitter. URL accessed on 26 January 2010.
  37. ↑ [1].
  38. ↑ No Secrets, by Raffi Khatchadourian, New Yorker, 7 June 2010.
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 Cohen, Noam Knight Foundation Hands Out Grants to 12 Groups, but Not WikiLeaks - Media Decoder Blog - NYTimes.com. Mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 WikiLeaks questions why it was rejected for Knight grant Yahoo! News, 17 June 2010
  41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 Previous post Next post. Wikileaks Reopens for Leakers | Threat Level. Wired.com. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  42. ↑ McCullagh, Declan Feds look for WikiLeaks founder at NYC hacker event | Security – CNET News. News.cnet.com. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  43. ↑ Jacob Appelbaum WikiLeaks Next HOPE Keynote Transcript – 07/17/10
  44. ↑ Surprise speaker at TEDGlobal: Julian Assange in Session 12. Blog.ted.com. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  45. ↑ Julian Assange – TED Talk – WikiLeaks. Geekosystem. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  46. ↑ 46.0 46.1 46.2 46.3 Mills, Elinor Researcher detained at U.S. border, questioned about WikiLeaks | InSecurity Complex – CNET News. News.cnet.com. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  47. ↑ Hausdurchsuchung bei Inhaber der Domain wikileaks.de. Archived from source 21 September 2009. URL accessed on 21 September 2009.
  48. ↑ Wikileaks raided by German police. Networkworld.com. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  49. ↑ Police raid home of Wikileaks.de domain owner over censorship listsdead link reported
  50. ↑ Police raid Wikileaks owner. Straitstimes.com. URL accessed on 30 April 2010.
  51. ↑ (2008). Is Wikileaks blocked by the Chinese government?. WikiLeaks. Archived from source 16 February 2008. URL accessed on 28 February 2008.
  52. ↑ Moses, Asher Banned hyperlinks could cost you $11,000 a day. The Age. URL accessed on 16 March 2009.
  53. ↑ Australia secretly censors Wikileaks press release and Danish Internet censorship list, 16 Mar 2009. WikiLeaks. URL accessed on 16 March 2009.dead link reported
  54. ↑ Taylor, Josh Wikileaks removed from ACMA blacklist – Communications – News. Zdnet.com.au. URL accessed on 1 December 2010.
  55. ↑ Thailand blocks access to WikiLeaks website. Thai Visa. URL accessed on 25 August 2010.
  56. ↑ Barta, Patrick Thai Groups Denounce Website Censorship. The Wall Street Journal date=17 August 2010. URL accessed on 25 August 2010.
  57. ↑ Error on call to template:cite web: Parameters url and title must be specified New York Times. URL accessed on 25 August 2010.
  58. ↑ 58.0 58.1 Matthew Campbell. Whistleblowers on US ‘massacre’ fear CIA stalkers. The Sunday Times.
  59. ↑ Thin Ice. CJR. URL accessed on 1 August 2010.
  60. ↑ Twitter / WikiLeaks: Facebook deletes WikiLeaks fanclub with 30k fans. Twitter. URL accessed on 22 April 2010.
  61. ↑ WikiLeaks claims Facebook deleted its page, 30000 fans. News.com.au. URL accessed on 23 April 2010.
  62. ↑ Wikileaks Claims Facebook Deleted Their Fan Page Because They "Promote Illegal Acts". Gawker. URL accessed on 21 April 2010.
  63. ↑ Wikileaks Fan Page Pulled Down for Being "Inauthentic," Says Facebook. techPresident. URL accessed on 22 April 2010.
  64. ↑ Raymond, Matt Why the Library of Congress Is Blocking Wikileaks. URL accessed on 3 December 2010.
  65. ↑ AP News, 2009, "Iceland Court Lifts Gag Order After Public Outrage," http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Iceland+court+lifts+gag+order+after+public+outrage-a01611956752
  66. ↑ Iceland's journalism freedom dream prompted by Wikileaks. BBC.
  67. ↑ Icelandic Modern Media Initiative. immi.is.

External links[edit]

You can help Anarchopedia by expanding this article by adding some of these quotes from Wikiquote
Template:Wikileaks

Worldwide Spelling Variations

  • ويكيليكس* Vikiliks* ویکی‌لیکس]]* 위키리크스]]* ÕŽÕ«Ö„Õ«Ô¼Õ«Ö„Õ½]]* विकिलीक्स]]* ויקיליקס]]* ვიკილიქსი]]* വിക്കിലീക്‌സ്]]** ويکيليکس]]* විකිලීක්ස්* Викиликс]]* விக்கிலீக்ஸ்]]* వీకీలీక్స్]]* วิกิลีกส์]]
Retrieved from "http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php?title=WikiLeaks&oldid=52646"