Between 20,000 and 80,000 barrels of crude oil are being pumped per day from Ghana’s Jubilee oil field as part of a test run of equipment at the sit. The quantity will rise to 100,000 barrels by the end of the first quarter of next year and to 120,000 barrels by the second quarter, citing Kwame Ntow, head of economic evaluation at the state-owned Ghana National Petroleum Corp.
The first phase of the Jubilee project has been completed at a total cost of $3.35 billion, Ntow said, according to the newspaper. The oil field is operated by Tullow Oil Plc.
Friday, December 3, 2010
PayPal Restricts WikiLeaks Account as Website Comes Under Global Scrutiny
PayPal Inc., the payment processor owned by EBay Inc., cut access today to the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.org for violating its acceptable use policy.
PayPal suspended the account after the U.S. said WikiLeaks activities were in violation of the law, a spokesman for the company said. PayPal wasn’t contacted by any government agency and took the action on its own, the spokesman said.
PayPal’s move marks a further crippling of WikiLeaks, which is releasing about 250,000 classified diplomatic cables that the U.S., France and the U.K. say could endanger lives. Amazon.com Inc. dropped WikiLeaks from its website-hosting service this week for breaching terms of service.
“PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity,” PayPal said in a blog posting. “We’ve notified the account holder of this action.”
WikiLeaks had an earlier run-in with PayPal in January, when it was temporarily blocked. The payment processor cut the organization’s access after it failed to respond to a request for more information when fundraising efforts triggered an influx of money. The flood of cash triggered automatic money- laundering alerts, though the situation was resolved about a day later, the spokesman said.
Terms of Service
Amazon, the Seattle-based online retailer and Web-hosting service, said that WikiLeaks had violated its terms of service by posting material it didn’t own and that it was potentially “putting innocent people in jeopardy.”
WikiLeaks’ U.S. site was shut down after electronic attacks threatened the stability of access to other websites, according to EveryDNS.net, the U.S. service that translates online addresses to Internet protocol numbers.
Since it began releasing the cables on Nov. 28, WikiLeaks also has faced so-called denial-of-service attacks, where hackers attempt to overwhelm a website with repeated requests for data.
The site moved its domain name to Switzerland, WikiLeaks said yesterday in its Twitter feed.
PayPal suspended the account after the U.S. said WikiLeaks activities were in violation of the law, a spokesman for the company said. PayPal wasn’t contacted by any government agency and took the action on its own, the spokesman said.
PayPal’s move marks a further crippling of WikiLeaks, which is releasing about 250,000 classified diplomatic cables that the U.S., France and the U.K. say could endanger lives. Amazon.com Inc. dropped WikiLeaks from its website-hosting service this week for breaching terms of service.
“PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity,” PayPal said in a blog posting. “We’ve notified the account holder of this action.”
WikiLeaks had an earlier run-in with PayPal in January, when it was temporarily blocked. The payment processor cut the organization’s access after it failed to respond to a request for more information when fundraising efforts triggered an influx of money. The flood of cash triggered automatic money- laundering alerts, though the situation was resolved about a day later, the spokesman said.
Terms of Service
Amazon, the Seattle-based online retailer and Web-hosting service, said that WikiLeaks had violated its terms of service by posting material it didn’t own and that it was potentially “putting innocent people in jeopardy.”
WikiLeaks’ U.S. site was shut down after electronic attacks threatened the stability of access to other websites, according to EveryDNS.net, the U.S. service that translates online addresses to Internet protocol numbers.
Since it began releasing the cables on Nov. 28, WikiLeaks also has faced so-called denial-of-service attacks, where hackers attempt to overwhelm a website with repeated requests for data.
The site moved its domain name to Switzerland, WikiLeaks said yesterday in its Twitter feed.
Wikileaks reorganizes amidst shutdown efforts
The controversial website Wikileaks came back a few hours after it was denied DNS publishing right by its domain handler under a new URL http://213.251.145.96/ Such a move is usually employed by hackers and webmasters to avoid DF on self assigned computer addresses and channels.
Ben Ephson: Wrong move, Nana Addo
Courtesy Modern Ghana
By Malik Abass Daabu
Pollster and elections watcher Ben Ephson says the New Patriotic Party (NPP) flagbearer Nana Akufo-Addo erred in responding to allegations that he is a drug addict.
Nana Addo told NPP supporters in the Northern Region that contrary to widespread claims he uses cocaine, he has never sniffed the illegal drug and challenged his accusers to prove their allegations or forever hold their peace.
But Ben Ephson thinks it would have been prudent if Nana Addo had remained silent because, in his view, taking on people who level unfounded allegations against him can only be an unnecessary distraction.
He reminded the NPP flagbearer that despite these allegations, he lost the last election by the narrowest of margins.
The Daily Dispatch editor told Joy FM's Super Morning Show Nana Addo, like his predecessor John Kufuor and president John Atta Mills, has a huge advantage going into elections 2012 because his opponents will have nothing more to say about him.
Putting himself up for a situation where he will be in and out of court over such churlish allegations was counterproductive, Mr. Ephson observed.
He said the Ghanaian electorate had become so savvy that politicians who unjustifiably attack the reputation of their opponents and focus on the non essentials were at best ignored and at worst punished electorally.
Politics of insults and personal attacks, he stated, did not address the myriad of problems confronting the people.
Abu Jinapor, aide to Nana Addo however said all the NPP flagbearer sought to do was to set the records straight.
He said Nana Addo's political opponents who could not find any trace of corruption, malfeasance or incompetence with which to link him, deliberately and maliciously fabricated wicked lies to try and dent the man's image.
Abu Jinapor maintained the NPP flag-bearers' abiding belief is that politicians must channel their efforts and energies to debating issues of substance, adding that personal attacks didn't put food on the table of the ordinary Ghanaian.
By Malik Abass Daabu
Pollster and elections watcher Ben Ephson says the New Patriotic Party (NPP) flagbearer Nana Akufo-Addo erred in responding to allegations that he is a drug addict.
Nana Addo told NPP supporters in the Northern Region that contrary to widespread claims he uses cocaine, he has never sniffed the illegal drug and challenged his accusers to prove their allegations or forever hold their peace.
But Ben Ephson thinks it would have been prudent if Nana Addo had remained silent because, in his view, taking on people who level unfounded allegations against him can only be an unnecessary distraction.
He reminded the NPP flagbearer that despite these allegations, he lost the last election by the narrowest of margins.
The Daily Dispatch editor told Joy FM's Super Morning Show Nana Addo, like his predecessor John Kufuor and president John Atta Mills, has a huge advantage going into elections 2012 because his opponents will have nothing more to say about him.
Putting himself up for a situation where he will be in and out of court over such churlish allegations was counterproductive, Mr. Ephson observed.
He said the Ghanaian electorate had become so savvy that politicians who unjustifiably attack the reputation of their opponents and focus on the non essentials were at best ignored and at worst punished electorally.
Politics of insults and personal attacks, he stated, did not address the myriad of problems confronting the people.
Abu Jinapor, aide to Nana Addo however said all the NPP flagbearer sought to do was to set the records straight.
He said Nana Addo's political opponents who could not find any trace of corruption, malfeasance or incompetence with which to link him, deliberately and maliciously fabricated wicked lies to try and dent the man's image.
Abu Jinapor maintained the NPP flag-bearers' abiding belief is that politicians must channel their efforts and energies to debating issues of substance, adding that personal attacks didn't put food on the table of the ordinary Ghanaian.
WikiLeaks dropped by domain name provider
STOCKHOLM – WikiLeaks' domain name system provider says it has withdrawn service to the wikileaks.org name.
EveryDNS says it dropped the website late Thursday after it became the "target of multiple distributed denial of service attacks."
The American provider says in a statement that the attacks have threatened the stability of its infrastructure.
From its website the provider EveryDNS.net offered the following explanation and update of its systems to the public :
" All systems are functioning normally.
EveryDNS.net provided domain name system (DNS) services to the wikileaks.org domain name until 10PM EST, December 2, 2010, when such services were terminated. As with other users of the EveryDNS.net network, this service was provided for free. The termination of services was effected pursuant to, and in accordance with, the EveryDNS.net Acceptable Use Policy.
More specifically, the services were terminated for violation of the provision which states that "Member shall not interfere with another Member's use and enjoyment of the Service or another entity's use and enjoyment of similar services." The interference at issues arises from the fact that wikileaks.org has become the target of multiple distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks. These attacks have, and future attacks would, threaten the stability of the EveryDNS.net infrastructure, which enables access to almost 500,000 other websites.
Thus, last night, at approximately 10PM EST, December 1, 2010 a 24 hour termination notification email was sent to the email address associated with the wikileaks.org account. In addition to this email, notices were sent to Wikileaks via Twitter and the chat function available through the wikileaks.org website. Any downtime of the wikileaks.org website has resulted from its failure to use another hosted DNS service provider."
EveryDNS says it dropped the website late Thursday after it became the "target of multiple distributed denial of service attacks."
The American provider says in a statement that the attacks have threatened the stability of its infrastructure.
From its website the provider EveryDNS.net offered the following explanation and update of its systems to the public :
" All systems are functioning normally.
EveryDNS.net provided domain name system (DNS) services to the wikileaks.org domain name until 10PM EST, December 2, 2010, when such services were terminated. As with other users of the EveryDNS.net network, this service was provided for free. The termination of services was effected pursuant to, and in accordance with, the EveryDNS.net Acceptable Use Policy.
More specifically, the services were terminated for violation of the provision which states that "Member shall not interfere with another Member's use and enjoyment of the Service or another entity's use and enjoyment of similar services." The interference at issues arises from the fact that wikileaks.org has become the target of multiple distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks. These attacks have, and future attacks would, threaten the stability of the EveryDNS.net infrastructure, which enables access to almost 500,000 other websites.
Thus, last night, at approximately 10PM EST, December 1, 2010 a 24 hour termination notification email was sent to the email address associated with the wikileaks.org account. In addition to this email, notices were sent to Wikileaks via Twitter and the chat function available through the wikileaks.org website. Any downtime of the wikileaks.org website has resulted from its failure to use another hosted DNS service provider."
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Tension AT Makola Market
Courtesy Daily Guide
Information reaching DAILY GUIDE indicates that all is set for the sale of Makola Market Limited to new investors to develop the markets into a modern millennium one.
According to the information, tension was mounting at the market among traders, thus putting fear and panic in them that the place was going to be taken away from them.
Some of the traders, according to reports, developed upset stomachs as some started visiting the lavatory after hearing the news yesterday morning.
Meanwhile, some strong and vocal women amongst the traders yesterday marched to the offices of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) for an explanation and to know their fate as traders.
The agitated traders stormed the AMA offices to show express their grievances about the new development.
Confirming the story to DAILY GUIDE, the Public Relations Officer for Makola Market Limited, Rose Mary Laryea, stated that initial reports received indicated that the market had been tendered to investors.
'We did not take the news serious and continued with our day-to-day business until Tuesday morning when we officially received the information.'
She said one Nana Akua of Key Fotus Integrated Solutions, a consultancy firm in charge of the bidding process, met the traders to explain to them, the concept of Makola Market being awarded to investors to develop the place into a modern millennium market.
She stated that traders, according Nana Akua, would be sent to Agbogbloshie and Amasaman to continue with their business until the reconstruction was complete.
The agitated trader said, 'How can government do that? In short we do not want any development at the market and we are also not prepared to relocate to anywhere.'
She alleged that information reaching the traders also indicated that the place had already been sold to one Nana Agyeman Akatakyie of Zoomlion Ghana.
'Nana Akua claims it will take five years for the investors to finish with the project.'
The Makola Women PRO said at the head office of the AMA, officials of a body alleged to be in charge of the bidding process denied the report that the place had been sold.
Meanwhile, Nana Akua, when contacted by DAILY GUIDE, confirmed meeting with the traders but stated that she would get in touch with the paper soon for further details but as at press time, she had not contacted the paper.
By Linda Tenyah
WikiLeaks' Assange in UK, police know where: report
LONDON (Reuters) – WikiLeaks website founder Julian Assange is in Britain and police know his whereabouts but have refrained so far from acting on an international warrant for his arrest, a British newspaper said on Thursday.
A spokesman for WikiLeaks said Assange had faced assassination threats and had to remain out of the public eye.
The 39-year-old Australian, who founded the whistle-blowing website that has disclosed a trove of U.S. diplomatic cables, gave British police contact details when he arrived in the country in October, The Independent said.
The newspaper cited police sources who said they knew where Assange was staying and had his telephone number. It added that it was believed he was in southeast England.
The release of sensitive diplomatic cables has angered the United States who have vowed to shut down such activities.
Speaking at an event in London on Wednesday night, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson said Assange was working on the project at a secret location.
"When you have people calling for his assassination, it is best to keep a low profile. This is inciting violence. And apparently it is unlawful in some countries," he said.
NOMADIC EXISTENCE
The international police agency Interpol this week issued a "red notice" to assist in the arrest of Assange, who is wanted in Sweden on suspicion of sexual crimes, but Britain's Serious Organized Crime Agency (Soca) so far has refused to authorize this, the paper said.
Citing unnamed sources, the Independent said Soca needed clarifications about the European Arrest Warrant issued by Swedish prosecutors but it described the delay as technical.
The Metropolitan Police and Soca declined to comment when contacted by Reuters.
Sweden's highest court said on Thursday it had refused Assange permission to appeal against the arrest order issued over alleged sexual crimes.
Assange, a former computer hacker, leads a nomadic existence and cultivates an aura of mystery. He left Sweden last month after authorities there said they wanted to question him about allegations of rape and other sexual offenses.
U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley interviewed by BBC Radio 4, said Assange had failed to cooperate with a U.S. investigation into the leak.
"We've made clear in an exchange this weekend with Mr Assange the fact that he is in possession of classified material of the United States government, it's stolen property and we have asked him to return it. He has declined to do that and we would investigate the implications of this."
A spokesman for WikiLeaks said Assange had faced assassination threats and had to remain out of the public eye.
The 39-year-old Australian, who founded the whistle-blowing website that has disclosed a trove of U.S. diplomatic cables, gave British police contact details when he arrived in the country in October, The Independent said.
The newspaper cited police sources who said they knew where Assange was staying and had his telephone number. It added that it was believed he was in southeast England.
The release of sensitive diplomatic cables has angered the United States who have vowed to shut down such activities.
Speaking at an event in London on Wednesday night, WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson said Assange was working on the project at a secret location.
"When you have people calling for his assassination, it is best to keep a low profile. This is inciting violence. And apparently it is unlawful in some countries," he said.
NOMADIC EXISTENCE
The international police agency Interpol this week issued a "red notice" to assist in the arrest of Assange, who is wanted in Sweden on suspicion of sexual crimes, but Britain's Serious Organized Crime Agency (Soca) so far has refused to authorize this, the paper said.
Citing unnamed sources, the Independent said Soca needed clarifications about the European Arrest Warrant issued by Swedish prosecutors but it described the delay as technical.
The Metropolitan Police and Soca declined to comment when contacted by Reuters.
Sweden's highest court said on Thursday it had refused Assange permission to appeal against the arrest order issued over alleged sexual crimes.
Assange, a former computer hacker, leads a nomadic existence and cultivates an aura of mystery. He left Sweden last month after authorities there said they wanted to question him about allegations of rape and other sexual offenses.
U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley interviewed by BBC Radio 4, said Assange had failed to cooperate with a U.S. investigation into the leak.
"We've made clear in an exchange this weekend with Mr Assange the fact that he is in possession of classified material of the United States government, it's stolen property and we have asked him to return it. He has declined to do that and we would investigate the implications of this."
TIME's Julian Assange Interview: Full Transcript Audio
RICHARD STENGEL: Hi, Mr. Assange, it's Rick Stengel. I'm the editor of TIME magazine, and thank you for joining us this evening.
JULIAN ASSANGE: You're welcome.
RS: So sorry about the technical difficulties, but I'm sure it's something you're used to. So here we go.
JA: Thousands of them.
RS: What is the effect thus far of the latest round of leaks and what effect do you hope to have from those leaks?
JA: I can see that the media scrutiny and the reaction from government are so tremendous that it actually eclipses our ability to understand it. And I think there is a new story appearing, a new, original story appearing about once every two minutes somewhere around the world. Google News has managed to index. At this stage, we can only have a feeling for what the effect is based upon just looking at what the tips of the wave are doing, moving currents under the surface. There is simply too much volume for us to even be able to see. But looking at what we can, I can see that there is a tremendous rearrangement of viewings about many different countries. And so that will result in some new kind of harmonization [variant: harm minimization]. And we can see the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu coming out with a very interesting statement that leaders should speak in public like they do in private whenever they can. He believes that the result of this publication, which makes the sentiments of many privately held beliefs public, are promising a pretty good [indecipherable] will lead to some kind of increase in the peace process in the Middle East and particularly in relation to Iran. I just noticed today Iran has agreed to nuclear talks. Maybe that's coincidence or maybe it's coming out of this process, but it's certainly not being canceled by this process.
RS: One of the unintended consequences is the opposite effect, which is what we've seen with the Department of Defense, and even the State Department, here in the U.S., of trying to make secrets more impenetrable rather than less and trying to take precautions against what has happened from happening again in the future. How do you regard that?
JA: Well, I think that's very positive. Since 2006, we have been working along this philosophy that organizations which are abusive and need to be [in] the public eye. If their behavior is revealed to the public, they have one of two choices: one is to reform in such a way that they can be proud of their endeavors, and proud to display them to the public. Or the other is to lock down internally and to balkanize, and as a result, of course, cease to be as efficient as they were. To me, that is a very good outcome, because organizations can either be efficient, open and honest, or they can be closed, conspiratorial and inefficient.
RS: Are there any instances [in] diplomacy or global affairs in which you see secrecy as necessary and as an asset?
JA: Yes, of course. We keep secret the identity of our sources, as an example, [and] take great pains to do it. So secrecy is important for many things but shouldn't be used to cover up abuses, which leads us to the question of who decides and who is responsible. It shouldn't really be that people are thinking about, Should something be secret? I would rather it be thought, Who has a responsibility to keep certain things secret? And, Who has a responsibility to bring matters to the public? And those responsibilities fall on different players. And it is our responsibility to bring matters to the public.
RS: You mention the public. Do you believe the American public in this particular instance was either dissatisfied or unhappy with the way the U.S. government was conducting diplomacy, so that you felt compelled to expose it to them? Because it seems to me that the public is reacting negatively to a lot of this exposure of diplomatic secrets that they presumably feel were actually in their interest.
JA: Well, I think the response by the American public has been very favorable to our endeavor. In fact, I think the State Department is going to have a hard time of it trying to spin this. It's one thing to tap into [audio lost]. It's one thing to talk about the need to protect this image of the innocent young soldier; it's another thing to talk about how diplomats are hard done by when they find their very privileged position in life undermined by having their lies revealed. And it doesn't seem to me that there is grass-roots, broad support for the behavior of diplomats, say, stealing [inaudible] DNA. That's just something that doesn't resonate well with the average person.
RS: And I know you've e-mailed about this, but what is your reaction to Secretary [Hillary] Clinton's declaration that you've put lives in jeopardy and now the apparent attempts by the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute you? What is your reaction to that? And have you committed any crimes that they should be prosecuting you for?
JA: Well, this sort of nonsense about lives being put in jeopardy is trotted out every time a big military or intelligence organization is exposed by the press. It's nothing new, and it's not an exclusively American phenomenon by an means. It goes back at least 50 years, and in extremely different forms hundreds of years before that, so that sort of reactionary sentiment is equally expected. We get that on nearly every post that we do. However, this organization in its four years of publishing history — we don't need to speculate, it has a history — has never caused an individual, as far as we can determine or as far anyone else can determine, to come to any sort of physical harm or to be wrongly imprisoned and so on. That is a record compared to the organizations that we are trying to expose who have literally been involved in the deaths of hundreds or thousands or, potentially over the course of many years, millions.
Read More...
RS: How would you characterize your actions, both in this latest set of leaks as well as in the past? Would you say you're practicing civil disobedience against breaking the law in order to expose greater law-breaking? Is that the moral calculus that you use to justify the leaks?
JA: No, not at all. This organization practices civil obedience, that is, we are an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction. As for the law, we have now in our four-year history had over 100 legal attacks of various kinds and have been victorious in all of those matters.
So if you want to talk about the law, it's very important to remember the law is not what, not simply what, powerful people would want others to believe it is. The law is not what a general says it is. The law is not what Hillary Clinton says it is. The law is not what a bank says it is. The law, rather, is what the Supreme Court in [the] land in the end says it is, and the Supreme Court in the case of the United States has an enviable Constitution on which to base its decisions. And that Constitution comes out of a revolutionary movement and has a Bill of Rights appraised by James Madison and others that includes a nuanced understanding for the balancing of power of [the] states in relation to the government. Now, where the Supreme Court makeup now is such that it keeps to its traditions or proposes a radical reassessment of the power of the First Amendment and the U.S. Constitution remains to be seen. However, the U.S. Espionage Act is widely viewed to be overbroad, and that is perhaps one of the reasons it has never been properly tested in the Supreme Court. I think it was maybe found to be unconstitutional and struck out. Now we understand that there are attempts by [Attorney General Eric] Holder and others in the U.S. Administration to shoehorn the Espionage Act, Section G in particular, onto legitimate press functions. Those efforts are dangerous in the sense that they may give rise to a Supreme Court challenge, which throws out the Espionage Act, or at least that section, in its entirety. If that succeeds, that will of course only be good business for WikiLeaks, because the rest of the U.S. press will be further constrained and people will simply come to us.
RS: And obviously there are competing equities, even constitutionally, between the Espionage Act, which was, as you know, 1917, and the expansion of the First Amendment rights that have happened subsequent to that, but as you say, the law ultimately becomes what the Supreme Court says it is, and they could narrow some of those First Amendment rights and use some of that in the Espionage Act. Which leads me to my next question: One of the issues that's discussed a lot in American politics these days, in part because of criticism of President Obama, is this idea of American exceptionalism. You seem to also believe in American exceptionalism in a negative sense, that America is exceptional only in the harm and damage it does to the world. Would you describe that as a fair characterization of your view of the U.S.?
JA: Well, I think both of those views lack the necessary subtlety. The United States has some immutable traditions, which, to be fair, are based on the French Revolution and the European Enlightenment. The United States' Founding Fathers took those further, and the federalism of the United States also, of relatively powerful states trying to constrain federal government from becoming too centralized. Also added some important democratic controls and understandings. So there is a lot of good that has historically come from the United States. But after World War II, during World War II, the federal government of the United States started sucking the resources to the center, and the power of states started to diminish. Interestingly, the First Amendment started overriding states' laws around that time, which I see as a function of increasing central power in the United States. I think the problems with the United States as a foreign power stem from, simply, its economic success, whereby it's, historically at least, a very rich country with a number of people and the desire left over as a result of ... Let me explain this a bit better. The U.S. saw the French Revolution and it also saw the behavior of the U.K. and the other kings and dictatorships, so it intentionally produced a very weak President. The President was, however, given a lot of power for external relations, so as time has gone by, the presidency has managed to exercise its power through its foreign affairs function. If we look at what happened with Obama and health care reform, we see this extraordinary situation where Obama [indecipherable] can order strikes against U.S. citizens overseas but is not able to pass, at least not easily and not in the form that he wanted, a health reform bill domestically. And that seems to be ... the very good idea, which was to try and keep the country free from dictatorship by keeping the presidency weak. But as the United States has grown economically, that has led to a situation where the foreign affairs power is latched on to by central government to increase the power of the government, as opposed to state government. The U.S. is, I don't think by world standards, an exception, rather it is a very interesting case both for its abuses and for some of its founding principles.
RS: Rather than get in a conversation of Executive power, let me ask you about some other nations and your views of their role on the world stage. Certainly the rise of China, the power of Russia in the marketplace. They are two nations that compete with the U.S. in terms of wealth and influence. Would you put them in the same category as countries that you would indeed like to expose some of their secret dealings the way you have done with American documents?
JA: Yes, indeed. In fact, we believe it is the most closed societies that have the most reform potential. The Chinese case is quite interesting. Aspects of the Chinese government, Chinese Public Security Service, appear to be terrified of free speech, and while one might say that means something awful is happening in the country, I actually think that is a very optimistic sign, because it means that speech can still cause reform and that the power structure is still inherently political, as opposed to fiscal. So journalism and writing are capable of achieving change, and that is why Chinese authorities are so scared of it. Whereas in the United States to a large degree, and in other Western countries, the basic elements of society have been so heavily fiscalized through contractual obligations that political change doesn't seem to result in economic change, which in other words means that political change doesn't result in change.
RS: We talked a little bit about this earlier, your desired outcome from the leaking of this information is presumably, as you said, that world leaders and officials would say the same things in public that they say in private. Um, lots and lots of people would regard that as naive, in part because they in their own lives don't say the same things in public that they say in private. Is that the outcome that you would like, and how do you respond to the charge that that's the naive view of the way the world works?
JA: Well, I was quoting Netanyahu, who [is] certainly not a naive man. The, of course ...
RS: But the effect, by the way, Mr. Assange, for Netanyahu, is that what he's been saying publicly — i.e., Arab leaders have privately been saying that Iran is the greatest threat, and they want Israel and the U.S. to do something — the revelations have been in his interest.
JA: Of course. We're talking about a sophisticated politician who is of that sentiment he's on the side of, in this issue. But I suggest it is generally — of course, there are exceptions — but generally true, across every issue. We are negotiating ... We need to be able to negotiate with a clear understanding of what the ground is and what our [inaudible] positions are. Of course, one side has a disproportionate amount of knowledge compared to the other side. There cannot be negotiations or proper understanding of the playing field in which these events are to happen. Now, we would like to see all organizations that are key to their authority ... opened up as much as possible. Not entirely, but as much as possible, in order to level out that asymmetric information playing field. Now for the United States, its government actually has more information available to it than any other government. And so it is already in a symmetric position. I think this disclosure of diplomatic information, which is often third-hand, will allow people to understand more clearly these sort of broad activities of the U.S. State Department, which acts not, of course, in the interest of the U.S. people but in the interest of the State Department. It will allow people of other countries to see that. But it will also meet more reasonable negotiations and reveal a lot about the Arab states, and Central Asian republics, to the rest of the world and to their peoples.
Read More...
RS: But you do clearly have a hierarchy of societies that are more closed than open, and you mentioned China and Russia as two of them. I mean, in that hierarchy, the U.S. is probably the most open society on the planet.
JA: It's becoming more closed. But you know, the U.S. [as] a superpower. Let's just imagine that Russia had the same resources, the same temperate climate and the same number of people as the United States — would it be a better-behaved or worse-behaved superpower? The answer is, it would be, based upon its current [inaudible] it would be a much worse-behaved superpower. And what has kept the United States in check, to the degree that it has been kept in check from abusing its powers, is this federalism, this strength of the states. And a relative degree of openness, which probably peaked in about 1978, and has been on the way down, unfortunately, since.
RS: I want to ask you a broader question, about the role of technology and the burgeoning world of social media. How does that affect the goal you're trying to achieve of more transparent and more open societies? I assume that enables what you're trying to do.
JA: Let me just talk about transparency for a moment. It is not our goal to achieve a more transparent society; it's our goal to achieve a more just society. And most of the times, transparency and openness tends to lead in that direction, because abusive plans or behavior get opposed, and so those organizations which tend to commit them are opposed before the plan's implemented, or it's an exposure or something previously done, the organization tends to lose a [inaudible], which is then transferred to another, and then we [inaudible] organization. For the rise of social media, it's quite interesting. When we first started, we thought we would have the analytical work done by bloggers and people who wrote Wikipedia articles and so on. And we thought that was a natural, given that we had lots of quality, important content. Surely it's more interesting to write an article about top-secret Chinese [inaudible] or an internal document from Somalia or secret documents revealing what happened in [inaudible], all of which we published, than it is to simply write a blog about what's on the front page of the New York Times, or about your cat or something. But actually it turns out that that is not at all true. The bulk of the heavy lifting — heavy analytical lifting — that is done with our materials is done by us, and is done by professional journalists we work with and by professional human-rights activists. It is not done by the broader community. However, once the initial lifting is done, once a story becomes a story, becomes a news article, then we start to see community involvement, which digs deeper and provides more perspective. So the social networks tend to be, for us, an amplifier of what we are doing. And also a supply of sources for us.
So when I saw this problem early on in our first year, that the analytical effort which we thought would be supplied by Internet citizens around the world was not, I saw that, well, actually, in terms of articles, form tends to follow the funding. You can't expect to get news-style articles out of people that are not funded after a career structure in the same way that news organizations are. You will get a different sort of form, and that form may be commentary, which sometimes is very good and sometimes there are very senior people providing commentary that is within their media experience, or we get sources who hand over material, because once again, within their media experience, it is an important issue to them. But what we don't get from the [inaudible] community is people writing articles about an issue that they didn't have an intimate involvement with in the first place. And of course, if you think about it, that's natural — why would they be? The incentive's not there. When people write political commentary on blogs or other social media, it is my experience that it is not — with some exceptions — their goal to expose the truth. Rather, it is their goal to position themselves among their peers on whatever the issue of the day is. The most effective, the most economical way to do that is simply to take the story that's going around — it has already created a marketable audience for itself — and say whether they're in favor of that interpretation or not.
RS: That's interesting. And I want to go now from the macro back to the micro, um, and ask you a specific question about, uh, PFC [Bradley] Manning, um ... Was he the sole source of the latest dump?
[Pause]
JA: Can you hear me?
RS: Yes, I'm sorry, I don't know ... let me ask the question again. I wanted to ask a question about Bradley Manning, PFC Manning. Was he the sole source of all the documents in the latest WikiLeaks dump?
JA: Well, we're a source-protection organization, so the last thing we would do is discuss possible sources. However, we do know that the FBI has been ... the FBI, State Department and U.S. Army CID [Criminal Investigation Command] has been going around Boston visiting number of people there... people who have been detained coming back into the United States. The FBI visited, or raided, depending on how you want to describe it, Bradley Manning's mother's home in Wales, in the U.K. There's a lot more action and people ... U.S. government authorities are certainly looking to try and grill other individuals ... apart from [inaudible], in the wake of a variety of materials that we have published.
Read More ...
RS: There's been, again, just very close to the ground, a speculation in the media that Secretary Clinton would be the fall guy for the embarrassment that you've caused the U.S. and the State Department. Would her resignation or firing be an outcome that you would want out of this?
JA: I believe ... I don't think it would make much of a difference either way. But she should resign if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations, in violation of the international covenants to which the U.S. has signed up. Yes, she should resign over that.
RS: Let me ask you what the future has in store for you and WikiLeaks. You've been quoted recently as saying your next target is Big Business and/or Wall Street. What's next coming down the pipe?
JA: We don't have targets, other than organizations that use secrecy to conceal unjust behavior ... that's created a general target. Otherwise we're completely source-dependent. We are a source-protection organization and a publishing-protection organization. Quite a bit of our effort, historically, has been taking articles from journalists who were censored or a book that was censored and republishing them as a way of disarming the censorship [inaudible]. But yes, we have a lot of source material that ... collection that remains unpublished. And that is actually something not to be proud of, but rather a great distress to us. We don't have the resources that are required to get through this very valuable material and sources that are given to us, those past sources are given to us ... We're working on various mechanisms to speed that up and to acquire those resources. So yes, the banks are in there, many different multinational organizations are in the upcoming weeks, but that is a continuation of what we have been doing for the past four years. However, there are greater volumes of material, that is true. The upcoming bank material is 10,000 documents, as opposed to hundreds, which we have gotten in the other cases.
RS: And are there any, Mr. Assange, any more documents from this latest dump that will be coming out in the next days or weeks?
JA: Yes, we're doing about 80 a day, presently, and that will gradually step up as the other media partners kick in.
RS: And as you were saying, do you review every document before you release it?
JA: All the Cablegate documents, every document is the backing document to a story appearing on a news website or in a newspaper or on a TV program or that we ourselves have released as an analysis. So yes, they're all reviewed and they're all redacted, either by us or by the newspapers concerned.
RS: And how — and I know we're running out of time, but — and the standards by which you do the redaction, how would you define that?
JA: Carefully. Also, what we have asked the State Department, we have formally asked the State Department for assistance with that. That request was formally rejected, and they also refused to engage in any harmonization [variant: harm minimization] negotiation. So that tends to lead us to the view, given what we think about it, that they've being working on the material for some four months now, and we have intelligence of many organizations and individuals [inaudible] have been contacted by the State Department. They do not believe that there are many people that would be vulnerable, but we are still conducting with [inaudible], and the New York Times, the State Department already mentioned eight broad areas of concern. And some of those were people trying to cover up some embarrassing activities, which the New York Times also rightfully rejected.
RS: Mr. Assange, I think we've run out of time. I appreciate your having taken the time to talk to us. I hope you will do so again.
JA: Absolutely, thank you.
RS: Thank you.
JULIAN ASSANGE: You're welcome.
RS: So sorry about the technical difficulties, but I'm sure it's something you're used to. So here we go.
JA: Thousands of them.
RS: What is the effect thus far of the latest round of leaks and what effect do you hope to have from those leaks?
JA: I can see that the media scrutiny and the reaction from government are so tremendous that it actually eclipses our ability to understand it. And I think there is a new story appearing, a new, original story appearing about once every two minutes somewhere around the world. Google News has managed to index. At this stage, we can only have a feeling for what the effect is based upon just looking at what the tips of the wave are doing, moving currents under the surface. There is simply too much volume for us to even be able to see. But looking at what we can, I can see that there is a tremendous rearrangement of viewings about many different countries. And so that will result in some new kind of harmonization [variant: harm minimization]. And we can see the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu coming out with a very interesting statement that leaders should speak in public like they do in private whenever they can. He believes that the result of this publication, which makes the sentiments of many privately held beliefs public, are promising a pretty good [indecipherable] will lead to some kind of increase in the peace process in the Middle East and particularly in relation to Iran. I just noticed today Iran has agreed to nuclear talks. Maybe that's coincidence or maybe it's coming out of this process, but it's certainly not being canceled by this process.
RS: One of the unintended consequences is the opposite effect, which is what we've seen with the Department of Defense, and even the State Department, here in the U.S., of trying to make secrets more impenetrable rather than less and trying to take precautions against what has happened from happening again in the future. How do you regard that?
JA: Well, I think that's very positive. Since 2006, we have been working along this philosophy that organizations which are abusive and need to be [in] the public eye. If their behavior is revealed to the public, they have one of two choices: one is to reform in such a way that they can be proud of their endeavors, and proud to display them to the public. Or the other is to lock down internally and to balkanize, and as a result, of course, cease to be as efficient as they were. To me, that is a very good outcome, because organizations can either be efficient, open and honest, or they can be closed, conspiratorial and inefficient.
RS: Are there any instances [in] diplomacy or global affairs in which you see secrecy as necessary and as an asset?
JA: Yes, of course. We keep secret the identity of our sources, as an example, [and] take great pains to do it. So secrecy is important for many things but shouldn't be used to cover up abuses, which leads us to the question of who decides and who is responsible. It shouldn't really be that people are thinking about, Should something be secret? I would rather it be thought, Who has a responsibility to keep certain things secret? And, Who has a responsibility to bring matters to the public? And those responsibilities fall on different players. And it is our responsibility to bring matters to the public.
RS: You mention the public. Do you believe the American public in this particular instance was either dissatisfied or unhappy with the way the U.S. government was conducting diplomacy, so that you felt compelled to expose it to them? Because it seems to me that the public is reacting negatively to a lot of this exposure of diplomatic secrets that they presumably feel were actually in their interest.
JA: Well, I think the response by the American public has been very favorable to our endeavor. In fact, I think the State Department is going to have a hard time of it trying to spin this. It's one thing to tap into [audio lost]. It's one thing to talk about the need to protect this image of the innocent young soldier; it's another thing to talk about how diplomats are hard done by when they find their very privileged position in life undermined by having their lies revealed. And it doesn't seem to me that there is grass-roots, broad support for the behavior of diplomats, say, stealing [inaudible] DNA. That's just something that doesn't resonate well with the average person.
RS: And I know you've e-mailed about this, but what is your reaction to Secretary [Hillary] Clinton's declaration that you've put lives in jeopardy and now the apparent attempts by the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute you? What is your reaction to that? And have you committed any crimes that they should be prosecuting you for?
JA: Well, this sort of nonsense about lives being put in jeopardy is trotted out every time a big military or intelligence organization is exposed by the press. It's nothing new, and it's not an exclusively American phenomenon by an means. It goes back at least 50 years, and in extremely different forms hundreds of years before that, so that sort of reactionary sentiment is equally expected. We get that on nearly every post that we do. However, this organization in its four years of publishing history — we don't need to speculate, it has a history — has never caused an individual, as far as we can determine or as far anyone else can determine, to come to any sort of physical harm or to be wrongly imprisoned and so on. That is a record compared to the organizations that we are trying to expose who have literally been involved in the deaths of hundreds or thousands or, potentially over the course of many years, millions.
Read More...
RS: How would you characterize your actions, both in this latest set of leaks as well as in the past? Would you say you're practicing civil disobedience against breaking the law in order to expose greater law-breaking? Is that the moral calculus that you use to justify the leaks?
JA: No, not at all. This organization practices civil obedience, that is, we are an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction. As for the law, we have now in our four-year history had over 100 legal attacks of various kinds and have been victorious in all of those matters.
So if you want to talk about the law, it's very important to remember the law is not what, not simply what, powerful people would want others to believe it is. The law is not what a general says it is. The law is not what Hillary Clinton says it is. The law is not what a bank says it is. The law, rather, is what the Supreme Court in [the] land in the end says it is, and the Supreme Court in the case of the United States has an enviable Constitution on which to base its decisions. And that Constitution comes out of a revolutionary movement and has a Bill of Rights appraised by James Madison and others that includes a nuanced understanding for the balancing of power of [the] states in relation to the government. Now, where the Supreme Court makeup now is such that it keeps to its traditions or proposes a radical reassessment of the power of the First Amendment and the U.S. Constitution remains to be seen. However, the U.S. Espionage Act is widely viewed to be overbroad, and that is perhaps one of the reasons it has never been properly tested in the Supreme Court. I think it was maybe found to be unconstitutional and struck out. Now we understand that there are attempts by [Attorney General Eric] Holder and others in the U.S. Administration to shoehorn the Espionage Act, Section G in particular, onto legitimate press functions. Those efforts are dangerous in the sense that they may give rise to a Supreme Court challenge, which throws out the Espionage Act, or at least that section, in its entirety. If that succeeds, that will of course only be good business for WikiLeaks, because the rest of the U.S. press will be further constrained and people will simply come to us.
RS: And obviously there are competing equities, even constitutionally, between the Espionage Act, which was, as you know, 1917, and the expansion of the First Amendment rights that have happened subsequent to that, but as you say, the law ultimately becomes what the Supreme Court says it is, and they could narrow some of those First Amendment rights and use some of that in the Espionage Act. Which leads me to my next question: One of the issues that's discussed a lot in American politics these days, in part because of criticism of President Obama, is this idea of American exceptionalism. You seem to also believe in American exceptionalism in a negative sense, that America is exceptional only in the harm and damage it does to the world. Would you describe that as a fair characterization of your view of the U.S.?
JA: Well, I think both of those views lack the necessary subtlety. The United States has some immutable traditions, which, to be fair, are based on the French Revolution and the European Enlightenment. The United States' Founding Fathers took those further, and the federalism of the United States also, of relatively powerful states trying to constrain federal government from becoming too centralized. Also added some important democratic controls and understandings. So there is a lot of good that has historically come from the United States. But after World War II, during World War II, the federal government of the United States started sucking the resources to the center, and the power of states started to diminish. Interestingly, the First Amendment started overriding states' laws around that time, which I see as a function of increasing central power in the United States. I think the problems with the United States as a foreign power stem from, simply, its economic success, whereby it's, historically at least, a very rich country with a number of people and the desire left over as a result of ... Let me explain this a bit better. The U.S. saw the French Revolution and it also saw the behavior of the U.K. and the other kings and dictatorships, so it intentionally produced a very weak President. The President was, however, given a lot of power for external relations, so as time has gone by, the presidency has managed to exercise its power through its foreign affairs function. If we look at what happened with Obama and health care reform, we see this extraordinary situation where Obama [indecipherable] can order strikes against U.S. citizens overseas but is not able to pass, at least not easily and not in the form that he wanted, a health reform bill domestically. And that seems to be ... the very good idea, which was to try and keep the country free from dictatorship by keeping the presidency weak. But as the United States has grown economically, that has led to a situation where the foreign affairs power is latched on to by central government to increase the power of the government, as opposed to state government. The U.S. is, I don't think by world standards, an exception, rather it is a very interesting case both for its abuses and for some of its founding principles.
RS: Rather than get in a conversation of Executive power, let me ask you about some other nations and your views of their role on the world stage. Certainly the rise of China, the power of Russia in the marketplace. They are two nations that compete with the U.S. in terms of wealth and influence. Would you put them in the same category as countries that you would indeed like to expose some of their secret dealings the way you have done with American documents?
JA: Yes, indeed. In fact, we believe it is the most closed societies that have the most reform potential. The Chinese case is quite interesting. Aspects of the Chinese government, Chinese Public Security Service, appear to be terrified of free speech, and while one might say that means something awful is happening in the country, I actually think that is a very optimistic sign, because it means that speech can still cause reform and that the power structure is still inherently political, as opposed to fiscal. So journalism and writing are capable of achieving change, and that is why Chinese authorities are so scared of it. Whereas in the United States to a large degree, and in other Western countries, the basic elements of society have been so heavily fiscalized through contractual obligations that political change doesn't seem to result in economic change, which in other words means that political change doesn't result in change.
RS: We talked a little bit about this earlier, your desired outcome from the leaking of this information is presumably, as you said, that world leaders and officials would say the same things in public that they say in private. Um, lots and lots of people would regard that as naive, in part because they in their own lives don't say the same things in public that they say in private. Is that the outcome that you would like, and how do you respond to the charge that that's the naive view of the way the world works?
JA: Well, I was quoting Netanyahu, who [is] certainly not a naive man. The, of course ...
RS: But the effect, by the way, Mr. Assange, for Netanyahu, is that what he's been saying publicly — i.e., Arab leaders have privately been saying that Iran is the greatest threat, and they want Israel and the U.S. to do something — the revelations have been in his interest.
JA: Of course. We're talking about a sophisticated politician who is of that sentiment he's on the side of, in this issue. But I suggest it is generally — of course, there are exceptions — but generally true, across every issue. We are negotiating ... We need to be able to negotiate with a clear understanding of what the ground is and what our [inaudible] positions are. Of course, one side has a disproportionate amount of knowledge compared to the other side. There cannot be negotiations or proper understanding of the playing field in which these events are to happen. Now, we would like to see all organizations that are key to their authority ... opened up as much as possible. Not entirely, but as much as possible, in order to level out that asymmetric information playing field. Now for the United States, its government actually has more information available to it than any other government. And so it is already in a symmetric position. I think this disclosure of diplomatic information, which is often third-hand, will allow people to understand more clearly these sort of broad activities of the U.S. State Department, which acts not, of course, in the interest of the U.S. people but in the interest of the State Department. It will allow people of other countries to see that. But it will also meet more reasonable negotiations and reveal a lot about the Arab states, and Central Asian republics, to the rest of the world and to their peoples.
Read More...
RS: But you do clearly have a hierarchy of societies that are more closed than open, and you mentioned China and Russia as two of them. I mean, in that hierarchy, the U.S. is probably the most open society on the planet.
JA: It's becoming more closed. But you know, the U.S. [as] a superpower. Let's just imagine that Russia had the same resources, the same temperate climate and the same number of people as the United States — would it be a better-behaved or worse-behaved superpower? The answer is, it would be, based upon its current [inaudible] it would be a much worse-behaved superpower. And what has kept the United States in check, to the degree that it has been kept in check from abusing its powers, is this federalism, this strength of the states. And a relative degree of openness, which probably peaked in about 1978, and has been on the way down, unfortunately, since.
RS: I want to ask you a broader question, about the role of technology and the burgeoning world of social media. How does that affect the goal you're trying to achieve of more transparent and more open societies? I assume that enables what you're trying to do.
JA: Let me just talk about transparency for a moment. It is not our goal to achieve a more transparent society; it's our goal to achieve a more just society. And most of the times, transparency and openness tends to lead in that direction, because abusive plans or behavior get opposed, and so those organizations which tend to commit them are opposed before the plan's implemented, or it's an exposure or something previously done, the organization tends to lose a [inaudible], which is then transferred to another, and then we [inaudible] organization. For the rise of social media, it's quite interesting. When we first started, we thought we would have the analytical work done by bloggers and people who wrote Wikipedia articles and so on. And we thought that was a natural, given that we had lots of quality, important content. Surely it's more interesting to write an article about top-secret Chinese [inaudible] or an internal document from Somalia or secret documents revealing what happened in [inaudible], all of which we published, than it is to simply write a blog about what's on the front page of the New York Times, or about your cat or something. But actually it turns out that that is not at all true. The bulk of the heavy lifting — heavy analytical lifting — that is done with our materials is done by us, and is done by professional journalists we work with and by professional human-rights activists. It is not done by the broader community. However, once the initial lifting is done, once a story becomes a story, becomes a news article, then we start to see community involvement, which digs deeper and provides more perspective. So the social networks tend to be, for us, an amplifier of what we are doing. And also a supply of sources for us.
So when I saw this problem early on in our first year, that the analytical effort which we thought would be supplied by Internet citizens around the world was not, I saw that, well, actually, in terms of articles, form tends to follow the funding. You can't expect to get news-style articles out of people that are not funded after a career structure in the same way that news organizations are. You will get a different sort of form, and that form may be commentary, which sometimes is very good and sometimes there are very senior people providing commentary that is within their media experience, or we get sources who hand over material, because once again, within their media experience, it is an important issue to them. But what we don't get from the [inaudible] community is people writing articles about an issue that they didn't have an intimate involvement with in the first place. And of course, if you think about it, that's natural — why would they be? The incentive's not there. When people write political commentary on blogs or other social media, it is my experience that it is not — with some exceptions — their goal to expose the truth. Rather, it is their goal to position themselves among their peers on whatever the issue of the day is. The most effective, the most economical way to do that is simply to take the story that's going around — it has already created a marketable audience for itself — and say whether they're in favor of that interpretation or not.
RS: That's interesting. And I want to go now from the macro back to the micro, um, and ask you a specific question about, uh, PFC [Bradley] Manning, um ... Was he the sole source of the latest dump?
[Pause]
JA: Can you hear me?
RS: Yes, I'm sorry, I don't know ... let me ask the question again. I wanted to ask a question about Bradley Manning, PFC Manning. Was he the sole source of all the documents in the latest WikiLeaks dump?
JA: Well, we're a source-protection organization, so the last thing we would do is discuss possible sources. However, we do know that the FBI has been ... the FBI, State Department and U.S. Army CID [Criminal Investigation Command] has been going around Boston visiting number of people there... people who have been detained coming back into the United States. The FBI visited, or raided, depending on how you want to describe it, Bradley Manning's mother's home in Wales, in the U.K. There's a lot more action and people ... U.S. government authorities are certainly looking to try and grill other individuals ... apart from [inaudible], in the wake of a variety of materials that we have published.
Read More ...
RS: There's been, again, just very close to the ground, a speculation in the media that Secretary Clinton would be the fall guy for the embarrassment that you've caused the U.S. and the State Department. Would her resignation or firing be an outcome that you would want out of this?
JA: I believe ... I don't think it would make much of a difference either way. But she should resign if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations, in violation of the international covenants to which the U.S. has signed up. Yes, she should resign over that.
RS: Let me ask you what the future has in store for you and WikiLeaks. You've been quoted recently as saying your next target is Big Business and/or Wall Street. What's next coming down the pipe?
JA: We don't have targets, other than organizations that use secrecy to conceal unjust behavior ... that's created a general target. Otherwise we're completely source-dependent. We are a source-protection organization and a publishing-protection organization. Quite a bit of our effort, historically, has been taking articles from journalists who were censored or a book that was censored and republishing them as a way of disarming the censorship [inaudible]. But yes, we have a lot of source material that ... collection that remains unpublished. And that is actually something not to be proud of, but rather a great distress to us. We don't have the resources that are required to get through this very valuable material and sources that are given to us, those past sources are given to us ... We're working on various mechanisms to speed that up and to acquire those resources. So yes, the banks are in there, many different multinational organizations are in the upcoming weeks, but that is a continuation of what we have been doing for the past four years. However, there are greater volumes of material, that is true. The upcoming bank material is 10,000 documents, as opposed to hundreds, which we have gotten in the other cases.
RS: And are there any, Mr. Assange, any more documents from this latest dump that will be coming out in the next days or weeks?
JA: Yes, we're doing about 80 a day, presently, and that will gradually step up as the other media partners kick in.
RS: And as you were saying, do you review every document before you release it?
JA: All the Cablegate documents, every document is the backing document to a story appearing on a news website or in a newspaper or on a TV program or that we ourselves have released as an analysis. So yes, they're all reviewed and they're all redacted, either by us or by the newspapers concerned.
RS: And how — and I know we're running out of time, but — and the standards by which you do the redaction, how would you define that?
JA: Carefully. Also, what we have asked the State Department, we have formally asked the State Department for assistance with that. That request was formally rejected, and they also refused to engage in any harmonization [variant: harm minimization] negotiation. So that tends to lead us to the view, given what we think about it, that they've being working on the material for some four months now, and we have intelligence of many organizations and individuals [inaudible] have been contacted by the State Department. They do not believe that there are many people that would be vulnerable, but we are still conducting with [inaudible], and the New York Times, the State Department already mentioned eight broad areas of concern. And some of those were people trying to cover up some embarrassing activities, which the New York Times also rightfully rejected.
RS: Mr. Assange, I think we've run out of time. I appreciate your having taken the time to talk to us. I hope you will do so again.
JA: Absolutely, thank you.
RS: Thank you.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Petroleum Exploration and Production Bill to replace PNDC law 84
Mr Inusah Fuseini, Deputy Minister for Energy, has stated that the Petroleum Exploration and Production bill would replace PNDC Law 84 when passed because the latter is limited in scope.
He said it would provide a legislative framework for exploration and production of petroleum in Ghana.
He said the Petroleum Revenue Management Bill which is also currently being considered in Parliament and expected to be passed on Tuesday November 30, offers one of the most transparent means by which revenue accruing from the commercialization of petroleum resources can be safeguarded and utilized in the most equitable manner.
Mr Fuseini was addressing a platform on oil and gas in Accra at the weekend.
He noted that other pieces of legislation and policies under consideration included the local content policy which was also being finalized after receiving cabinet blessing will ensure that Ghanaians benefit as much as possible from the oil and gas find in terms of employment, ownership and control and the provision of goods and services.
The occasion marked the first annual general meeting of the Civil Society Platform and the launch of a website for the platform.
Mr Fuseini said the establishment of a petroleum or oil and gas commission to regulate the petroleum industry was seriously being worked upon to ensure that the nascent industry was well managed to the expectation of all players-investors, workers or suppliers of goods and services.
He said in view of the multi billion dollar equipment deployed in the industry, appropriate measures are being put in place by multi-sectorial oil and gas security committee led by the Ministry of Defence to ensure maximum security and a peaceful atmosphere for operation of the industry.
The Deputy Minister said measures are also being put in place to ensure that the exploitation of the country's petroleum resources does not result in environmental degradation or leave host communities worse off economically.
He said the jubilee project was successfully carried out without any major environmental hitches.
Mr Fuseini said civil society has not relented in its advocacy for the best standards in the development of Ghana 's oil and gas policies and legislations
He said it would provide a legislative framework for exploration and production of petroleum in Ghana.
He said the Petroleum Revenue Management Bill which is also currently being considered in Parliament and expected to be passed on Tuesday November 30, offers one of the most transparent means by which revenue accruing from the commercialization of petroleum resources can be safeguarded and utilized in the most equitable manner.
Mr Fuseini was addressing a platform on oil and gas in Accra at the weekend.
He noted that other pieces of legislation and policies under consideration included the local content policy which was also being finalized after receiving cabinet blessing will ensure that Ghanaians benefit as much as possible from the oil and gas find in terms of employment, ownership and control and the provision of goods and services.
The occasion marked the first annual general meeting of the Civil Society Platform and the launch of a website for the platform.
Mr Fuseini said the establishment of a petroleum or oil and gas commission to regulate the petroleum industry was seriously being worked upon to ensure that the nascent industry was well managed to the expectation of all players-investors, workers or suppliers of goods and services.
He said in view of the multi billion dollar equipment deployed in the industry, appropriate measures are being put in place by multi-sectorial oil and gas security committee led by the Ministry of Defence to ensure maximum security and a peaceful atmosphere for operation of the industry.
The Deputy Minister said measures are also being put in place to ensure that the exploitation of the country's petroleum resources does not result in environmental degradation or leave host communities worse off economically.
He said the jubilee project was successfully carried out without any major environmental hitches.
Mr Fuseini said civil society has not relented in its advocacy for the best standards in the development of Ghana 's oil and gas policies and legislations
Nigerian tanker drivers halt delivery over 'army abuse'
LAGOS (AFP) – Nigerian tanker drivers have halted the supply of petrol nationwide in protest at alleged maltreatment and killing of their members by the military, union leaders said Tuesday.
"We ordered our members to stop loading petrol from the depots since yesterday and it will be like that for the next six days," Tokunbo Korodo, a union leader with the blue-collar National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers, told AFP.
He said the seven-day strike, which has led to long queues of motorists at petrol stations in Lagos and other parts of the country, was called at the expiration of an ultimatum asking government to look into grievances raised by the union.
"We have had three unpleasant cases of maltreatment and harassment of our member by soldiers in the past few weeks. In Jos, for instance, a driver was shot dead by an army officer who also impounded his truck," he said.
He claimed that another driver "was beaten mercilessly" by a soldier who also seized his vehicle in the city of Ibadan town near Lagos, while in the oil hub of Port Harcourt a driver was "malhandled by a security agent because of a minor traffic offence."
"The strike becomes necessary as the last resort because series of complaints we filed with relevant authorities for intervention on the matter have fallen on deaf ears," truck drivers' leader Dayyabu Gargai told AFP in the northern city of Kano.
Korodo said the strike will be suspended only if the government compensates the family of the shot driver and recover the two trucks seized by the soldiers.
A meeting was due to take place between union leaders and the labour minister on Tuesday.
In Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation with 159 million people and the world's eight largest oil exporter, petroleum products are mostly delivered by truck drivers.
In August, the drivers suspended fuel distribution to the capital Abuja in protest at the state of the country's roads.
"We ordered our members to stop loading petrol from the depots since yesterday and it will be like that for the next six days," Tokunbo Korodo, a union leader with the blue-collar National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers, told AFP.
He said the seven-day strike, which has led to long queues of motorists at petrol stations in Lagos and other parts of the country, was called at the expiration of an ultimatum asking government to look into grievances raised by the union.
"We have had three unpleasant cases of maltreatment and harassment of our member by soldiers in the past few weeks. In Jos, for instance, a driver was shot dead by an army officer who also impounded his truck," he said.
He claimed that another driver "was beaten mercilessly" by a soldier who also seized his vehicle in the city of Ibadan town near Lagos, while in the oil hub of Port Harcourt a driver was "malhandled by a security agent because of a minor traffic offence."
"The strike becomes necessary as the last resort because series of complaints we filed with relevant authorities for intervention on the matter have fallen on deaf ears," truck drivers' leader Dayyabu Gargai told AFP in the northern city of Kano.
Korodo said the strike will be suspended only if the government compensates the family of the shot driver and recover the two trucks seized by the soldiers.
A meeting was due to take place between union leaders and the labour minister on Tuesday.
In Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation with 159 million people and the world's eight largest oil exporter, petroleum products are mostly delivered by truck drivers.
In August, the drivers suspended fuel distribution to the capital Abuja in protest at the state of the country's roads.
Wal-Mart to pay $2.3 billion for control of Massmart
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N) has agreed to pay $2.3 billion for control of Massmart Holdings Ltd (MSMJ.J), giving the world's largest retailer a substantial presence in South Africa and paving the way for further expansion across the continent.
The Wal-Mart tie-up will help discount retailer Massmart speed up expansion in sub-Saharan Africa and increase its food retailing business, the South African company's chief executive said on Monday.
The deal will also likely pit Wal-Mart, which has long battled with organized labor in the United States, against South Africa's powerful trade unions, some of which have threatened to strike against the U.S. giant.
Massmart's chief executive, Grant Pattison, said the company would retain its local listing and South African management after the deal. Analysts have said local expertise would be critical to avoid a bruising union fight.
"What isn't going to happen is a bunch of Wal-Mart people around here start running the company," Pattison said on a conference call with reporters.
"South African management will continue to manage the business."
The two companies said in a joint statement Wal-Mart would pay 148 rand for a 51 percent stake in the South African company, which has a presence in 14 countries in Africa. The value of the deal is 16.5 billion rand ($2.3 billion), Massmart executives said.
Massmart shares were up 0.2 percent at 141.99 rand. Wal-Mart's bid, including the price, was first announced in September.
The Wal-Mart tie-up will help discount retailer Massmart speed up expansion in sub-Saharan Africa and increase its food retailing business, the South African company's chief executive said on Monday.
The deal will also likely pit Wal-Mart, which has long battled with organized labor in the United States, against South Africa's powerful trade unions, some of which have threatened to strike against the U.S. giant.
Massmart's chief executive, Grant Pattison, said the company would retain its local listing and South African management after the deal. Analysts have said local expertise would be critical to avoid a bruising union fight.
"What isn't going to happen is a bunch of Wal-Mart people around here start running the company," Pattison said on a conference call with reporters.
"South African management will continue to manage the business."
The two companies said in a joint statement Wal-Mart would pay 148 rand for a 51 percent stake in the South African company, which has a presence in 14 countries in Africa. The value of the deal is 16.5 billion rand ($2.3 billion), Massmart executives said.
Massmart shares were up 0.2 percent at 141.99 rand. Wal-Mart's bid, including the price, was first announced in September.
Netanyahu: WikiLeaks revelations were good for Israel
By Barak Ravid
For years he has warned of the dangers the Iranian nuclear program poses to the entire region. These warnings had been vindicated, Netanyahu said.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says newly leaked U.S. diplomatic memos about the Saudi king offer clear proof that the Arab world agrees with his country's assessment that Iran is the chief danger to the Middle East.
According to the documents released Sunday by online whistle-blower WikiLeaks, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear program. The king is just one of many Arab voices in the documents calling for tough action against Iran - proof that Israel is not alone in its belief that Tehran is a growing menace to the region, Netanyahu said.
"The greatest threat to world peace stems from the arming of the regime in Iran," Netanyahu told a news conference yesterday. "More and more states, governments and leaders in the Middle East and in far reaches of the world understand this is a fundamental threat."
But for Israel, the outcome is positive, Netanyahu said. For years he has warned of the dangers the Iranian nuclear program poses to the entire region. These warnings had been vindicated, Netanyahu said.
"Our region has been hostage to a narrative that is the result of 60 years of propaganda, which paints Israel as the greatest threat," Netanyahu said.
"In reality leaders understand that that view is bankrupt. For the first time in history there is agreement that Iran is the threat," he added.
"If leaders start saying openly what they have long been saying behind closed doors, we can make a real breakthrough on the road to peace."
Netanyahu added that Israel had worked in advance to limit any damage from leaks.
"Every Israeli leader has known for years that that dispatches are likely to leak out, so we adapted ourselves to the reality of leaks," he said. "That has a bearing on who I invite to meetings. No classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks."
Meanwhile, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the latest U.S. documents on WikiLeaks are proof of the transparency of the Palestinian Authority.
The papers said Israel tried to coordinate with the PA regarding its Gaza offensive in the winter of 2008-09, telling the Palestinians to be ready to take over the enclave. The PA rejected the offer, said the documents.
For years he has warned of the dangers the Iranian nuclear program poses to the entire region. These warnings had been vindicated, Netanyahu said.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says newly leaked U.S. diplomatic memos about the Saudi king offer clear proof that the Arab world agrees with his country's assessment that Iran is the chief danger to the Middle East.
According to the documents released Sunday by online whistle-blower WikiLeaks, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear program. The king is just one of many Arab voices in the documents calling for tough action against Iran - proof that Israel is not alone in its belief that Tehran is a growing menace to the region, Netanyahu said.
"The greatest threat to world peace stems from the arming of the regime in Iran," Netanyahu told a news conference yesterday. "More and more states, governments and leaders in the Middle East and in far reaches of the world understand this is a fundamental threat."
But for Israel, the outcome is positive, Netanyahu said. For years he has warned of the dangers the Iranian nuclear program poses to the entire region. These warnings had been vindicated, Netanyahu said.
"Our region has been hostage to a narrative that is the result of 60 years of propaganda, which paints Israel as the greatest threat," Netanyahu said.
"In reality leaders understand that that view is bankrupt. For the first time in history there is agreement that Iran is the threat," he added.
"If leaders start saying openly what they have long been saying behind closed doors, we can make a real breakthrough on the road to peace."
Netanyahu added that Israel had worked in advance to limit any damage from leaks.
"Every Israeli leader has known for years that that dispatches are likely to leak out, so we adapted ourselves to the reality of leaks," he said. "That has a bearing on who I invite to meetings. No classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks."
Meanwhile, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the latest U.S. documents on WikiLeaks are proof of the transparency of the Palestinian Authority.
The papers said Israel tried to coordinate with the PA regarding its Gaza offensive in the winter of 2008-09, telling the Palestinians to be ready to take over the enclave. The PA rejected the offer, said the documents.
VEEP LASHES JJ, SPIO
The persistent attacks on members of President John Evans Atta Mills' government by the pro-Rawlings bloc in the National Democratic Congress (NDC), led by the former President himself and Dr. Ekwow Spio Garbrah, Vice Chairman of the party, has now been met with equal-force by Vice President John Dramani Mahama.
Addressing a conference organised by the Tertiary Education Institutions Network (TEIN) of the party at Winneba in the Central Region over the weekend, John Mahama took strong exception to the unwarranted attacks on the government by these personalities, without mentioning names.
According to John Mahama, no matter what the communication team of the government would do, it would be very difficult to propagate the achievements of the government if members of the party were not disciplined.
He wondered how the party and the government could trumpet its achievements if leading members continue to describe ministers and other government appointees as 'Greedy Bastards' and 'Team B', among others.
The founder of the NDC, Flt. Lt. Jerry John Rawlings, sometime last year, described some of the Ministers serving in the Atta Mills' government as 'Greedy Bastards'. This was after some of the footsoldiers of the party had called on him at his Ridge Residence in Accra to complain that they were being denied contracts by the government.
A few weeks after this infamous statement, Dr. Ekwow Spio Garbrah also authored an article in the 'Daily Graphic,' where he described Ministers serving in the government as 'Team B,' insinuating that NDC members who deserved to be fielded had been by-passed in favour of those who, in football parlance, should have warmed the bench.
Apart from these two diatribes, the two personalities have also, on many occasions, spewed unprintable words against the President and his Ministers, with Mr. Rawlings in particular, accusing President Atta Mills of packing his government with 'strangers'.
He also described the President at a June 4 rally held in Tamale this year, where the presidential ambition of his wife, Nana Konadu, was unveiled, as a 'Konongo Kaya,' who could not carry his load, yet would not allow others to carry it.
The Chronicle has learnt from sources within the government that President Atta Mills took strong exception to this attack, but was compelled to keep quiet for the sake of peace in the party.
Apparently, it was with all these attacks in mind that John Mahama took the podium at Winneba and warned that divisions in the party front had the tendency of giving their political opponents ammunition to fire back at the NDC.
He made reference to the way the opposition parties had been using some of these words to launch blistering attacks on the government.
According to John Mahama, the history of this country could not be written without mentioning Rawlings' contribution, contending that he achieved a lot for the country during his nineteen year rule.
He, however, argued that the former President was able to make the mark because the entire party supported him throughout his reign. 'The history of this country cannot be written without his (Rawlings) name being there in bold letters.
He achieved many successes, but in all the achievements that we made in the PNDC and NDC era, we did it because we had discipline in the party. We learnt how to handle our disagreements, and above all, we were united as one party,' he added and, therefore, called for the same support for the Atta Mills government to also succeed.
Mahama regretted that the turbulence and divisions in the party had raised its ugly head within TEIN too. 'I want to urge you, as our younger brothers and sisters, to maintain the solidarity, truthfulness, your advocacy for justice, and the discipline that has brought you this far,' he said.
Meanwhile, TEIN members shocked the full-to-capacity hall at the University College of Education, Winneba, when they refused to allow the Executive Director of the National Service Secretariat, Vincent Kuagbenu, from addressing them, amid hooting.
They accused him of being arrogant and would, therefore, not allow him to address the meeting.
Addressing a conference organised by the Tertiary Education Institutions Network (TEIN) of the party at Winneba in the Central Region over the weekend, John Mahama took strong exception to the unwarranted attacks on the government by these personalities, without mentioning names.
According to John Mahama, no matter what the communication team of the government would do, it would be very difficult to propagate the achievements of the government if members of the party were not disciplined.
He wondered how the party and the government could trumpet its achievements if leading members continue to describe ministers and other government appointees as 'Greedy Bastards' and 'Team B', among others.
The founder of the NDC, Flt. Lt. Jerry John Rawlings, sometime last year, described some of the Ministers serving in the Atta Mills' government as 'Greedy Bastards'. This was after some of the footsoldiers of the party had called on him at his Ridge Residence in Accra to complain that they were being denied contracts by the government.
A few weeks after this infamous statement, Dr. Ekwow Spio Garbrah also authored an article in the 'Daily Graphic,' where he described Ministers serving in the government as 'Team B,' insinuating that NDC members who deserved to be fielded had been by-passed in favour of those who, in football parlance, should have warmed the bench.
Apart from these two diatribes, the two personalities have also, on many occasions, spewed unprintable words against the President and his Ministers, with Mr. Rawlings in particular, accusing President Atta Mills of packing his government with 'strangers'.
He also described the President at a June 4 rally held in Tamale this year, where the presidential ambition of his wife, Nana Konadu, was unveiled, as a 'Konongo Kaya,' who could not carry his load, yet would not allow others to carry it.
The Chronicle has learnt from sources within the government that President Atta Mills took strong exception to this attack, but was compelled to keep quiet for the sake of peace in the party.
Apparently, it was with all these attacks in mind that John Mahama took the podium at Winneba and warned that divisions in the party front had the tendency of giving their political opponents ammunition to fire back at the NDC.
He made reference to the way the opposition parties had been using some of these words to launch blistering attacks on the government.
According to John Mahama, the history of this country could not be written without mentioning Rawlings' contribution, contending that he achieved a lot for the country during his nineteen year rule.
He, however, argued that the former President was able to make the mark because the entire party supported him throughout his reign. 'The history of this country cannot be written without his (Rawlings) name being there in bold letters.
He achieved many successes, but in all the achievements that we made in the PNDC and NDC era, we did it because we had discipline in the party. We learnt how to handle our disagreements, and above all, we were united as one party,' he added and, therefore, called for the same support for the Atta Mills government to also succeed.
Mahama regretted that the turbulence and divisions in the party had raised its ugly head within TEIN too. 'I want to urge you, as our younger brothers and sisters, to maintain the solidarity, truthfulness, your advocacy for justice, and the discipline that has brought you this far,' he said.
Meanwhile, TEIN members shocked the full-to-capacity hall at the University College of Education, Winneba, when they refused to allow the Executive Director of the National Service Secretariat, Vincent Kuagbenu, from addressing them, amid hooting.
They accused him of being arrogant and would, therefore, not allow him to address the meeting.
AGI seeks waiver of duty on imported raw materials
The Association of Ghana Industries (AGI) is asking government to waive the duty on specific imported raw materials used mainly for manufacturing, to increase production levels and to accelerate the pace of industrialization.
The Association is also seeking a review of laws that make it mandatory for manufacturers to take a five per cent withholding tax from suppliers since this is added to the cost of supplies and thereby rendering local manufacturer uncompetitive.
Nana Owusu-Afari, President of AGI, who made the call, said the current 10 per cent duty on raw materials was rendering manufacturers less competitive both locally and internationally.
He said manufacturers were suffering from unfair competition due to poor administration of tariff regime, adding that the harmonised code system, which allowed five per cent concessionary duty on imported raw materials, was being abused to the detriment of local industries. “Similar abuse has been identified, regarding the special clearing permit, which allows clearing of goods of perishable nature without completing the entire clearing process,” Nana Owusu-Afari said.
He recommended to Government to ensure that importers, who applied to clear goods on permit, were made to pay the full tax plus a five per cent deposit to be refunded after submission of full documentation. While commending government for plans to initiate a comprehensive industrial development and competitiveness legislation for the development of local industries through domestic content, Nana Owusu-Afari said it was surprising to see VAT deferment being abolished.
“This will not be in the interest of industry, especially, at the crucial stage of development of our manufacturing industry. We wish, therefore, to call on your Ministry to abandon any idea of abolishing such a progressive and pro-manufacturing policy,” he said.
Nana Owusu-Afari called on the Ghana Revenue Authority to deal with the challenges affecting tax administration and called on government to ensure a speedy implementation of the National Identification Scheme (NIS) to identify all persons of age to respond to the taxman and also get the Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies to name streets and houses to help levying and payment of property taxes. There must also be sustained education to get the citizenry to understand and respect the tax laws.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)