Attack on WikiLeaks

And supporters, proposed by a data intelligence firm that was recommended to the banksters by the Department of Justice!

The proposal starts with an overview of WikiLeaks, including some history and employee statistics. From there it moves into a profile of Julian Assange and an organizational chart. The chart lists several people, including volunteers and actual staff.

One of those listed as a volunteer, columnist, Glenn Greenwald, was singled out by the proposal. Greenwald, previously a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York, has been a vocal supporter of Bradley Manning, who is alleged to have given diplomatic cables and other government information to WikiLeaks. He has yet to be charged in the matter.

Greenwald became a household name in December when he reported on the “inhumane conditions” of Bradley Manning’s confinement at the Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia. Since that report, Greenwald has reported on WikiLeaks and Manning several times.

“Glenn was critical in the Amazon to OVH transition,” the proposal says, referencing the hosting switch WikiLeaks was forced to make after political pressure caused Amazon to drop their domain.

I’ve said before that the average American, much to his disadvantage, is oblivious to the amount of coercive misinformation that’s put out there to mislead us. And even people like us, who pay a lot of attention, are naive when it comes to the sophistication and range of those methods.

We’re a wholly-owned subsidiary of the banksters and their friends. That’s why I can’t wait to see WikiLeaks unleash the banking documents they have.

8 thoughts on “Attack on WikiLeaks

  1. See also EmptyWheel’s assessment on this.

    Now aside from the predictable, but nevertheless rather shocking detail, that these security firms believed the best way to take WikiLeaks out was to push Glenn to stop supporting them, what the fuck are they thinking by claiming that Glenn weighs “professional preservation” against “cause”? Could they be more wrong, painting Glenn as a squeamish careerist whose loud support for WikiLeaks (which dates back far longer than these security firms seem to understand) is secondary to “professional preservation”? Do they know Glenn is a journalist? Do they know he left the stuffy world of law? Have they thought about why he might have done that? Are they familiar at all with who Glenn is? Do they really believe Glenn became a household name–to the extent that he did–just in December?

    I hope Bank of America did buy the work of these firms. Aside from the knowledge that the money would be–to the extent that we keep bailing out Bank of America–taxpayer money, I’d be thrilled to think of BoA pissing away its money like that. The plan these firms are pushing is absolutely ignorant rubbish. They apparently know almost nothing about what they’re pitching, and have no ability to do very basic research.

    Which is precisely the approach I’d love to see BoA use to combat whatever WikiLeaks has coming its way. (Emphasis in original)

    I also love that by attacking Anonymous, the consultants/security firm got their comeuppance. This is not good publicity for a security firm, eh?

    But, also, no wonder Holder is going after Anonymous, Big Time. When the FBI raided the wrong student’s dorm room, taking computers, books, things he needed to do his course work, one of the agents said getting Anonymous was second only to getting child pornographers.

    Gotta luv Obama et al’s priorities, eh? This is our government on Republican ConservaMemes and Republican objectives. Tell me again, at the top, what is the difference between D’s and R’s??? At the bottom, yes, there are still pols who want to act like the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party. They get investigated and no support from the O administration. At the bottom of the Republican Party are some libertarians and Tea Partiers who do want to maintain individual freedoms (as far as they fit within their world view), and those House members voted against renewing the Patriot Act. But, they will be brought into line or…else.

    We need to change the top, which may be well nigh impossible as long as the MOTU’s have control and more money than we can imagine. This may well be our nation collapsing, our empire imploding to leave ony the corporate shells. (Yes, I am indeed depressed by our leaders, so sadly lacking in these parlous times.)

    Thanks for this post, Susie. You are a great resource.

    It had to happen: Greenwald is outspoken, avaialble for TV and on Salon, and he gets readers. He has to be neutralized in some way by The Powers That Be. Banksters do not like having their dirty laundry aired, nor does the Obama administration which goes after whistleblowers even harder than BushBoy did.


  2. did you see what Anonymous did to HBGary?:

    After the Financial Times story broke, including Barr’s claims of infiltration, Anonymous responded. The response was brutal, resulting in full control over and They were also able to compromise HBGary’s network, including full access to all their financials, software products, PBX systems, Malware data, and email, which they released to the public in a 4.71 GB Torrent file.

    In a statement emailed to The Tech Herald, Anonymous called Barr’s actions media-whoring, and noted that his claims had amused them.

    “Let us teach you a lesson you’ll never forget: you don’t mess with Anonymous. You especially don’t mess with Anonymous simply because you want to jump on a trend for public attention,” the statement directed to HBGary and Barr said.

    “You have blindly charged into the Anonymous hive, a hive from which you’ve tried to steal honey. Did you think the bees would not defend it? Well here we are. You’ve angered the hive, and now you are being stung. It would appear that security experts are not expertly secured.”

    Just fucking brutal. here’s what HBGary woke up to.

  3. Why Greenwald? Why not you, or me, or Digby? (Because, really. I am at least as influential as you guys.)

  4. Then HBGary execs had to meet with Anonymous (via IRC I think) and walk back everything they said and did. Reading the account, it’s clear the company is humiliated. I’m not sure anonymous has restored their service either.
    and have you noticed that in Big Media, there is NO mention of this? I would think that when a barely organized group of hackers takes down an internet security company, working on behalf of Bank of America and the FBI, that would be a story.

  5. Re: Brendan noting MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) is not talking about WHAT Anonymous disclosed about HBGary, DOJ, and BofA, go listen to the NPR Morning Edition on this. Nary a word* about HBGary recommending hacking EU Wiki supporters’ sites (which might, uh, be illegal, eh?). Nary a word about DOJ’s involvement. Nary a word about what HBGary was recommending.

    Audio up now at FBI Tracks Internet Activist Known as Anonymous. Transcript to follow. BTW, it took some hunting to find this segment; it was not in any of the featured reports. Go figure.

    *I did listen before I got up, so may have dosed….

Comments are closed.