Tag Archives: wikileaks

Democracy Now – Julian Assange Is FREE – Charges Dropped

Advertisements

Joseph Cox – Why All the Snowden Docs Should Be Public: An Interview with Cryptome

Ever since the phrase “Information wants to be free” was first uttered in the early 80s, activists have campaigned for technology to act as a vehicle for knowledge. We’ve since seen the advent of the internet, the proliferation of personal computers, and the rise of whistleblowing sites.

Before Snowden and Wikileaks grabbed the headlines, there was Cryptome. Launched in 1996, the website, or “digital library,” as its owners John Young and Deborah Natsios describe it, is a tome of classified documents. Including everything from lists of MI6 agents to details on nuclear technology, the archive currently stands at over 71,600 files, spanning nearly two decades of disclosures.

Among those is all the available information on the Snowden files, and the duo behind the venture are adamant that the entirety of the leaked NSA documents should be dumped online, rather than strategically trickled out by journalists. Cryptome has even made vague hints that the Snowden documents may be released in full this month.

I phoned up Young and Natsios to ask how they felt the freedom of information movement has changed, for better or worse, over the past two decades.

When Cryptome was launched as a bare-bones website and started to host an assortment of documents for anyone to sift through, there weren’t many ways to get information out onto the internet. “We happened to have the technology to turn paper documents into a digital form,” Young told me. “A lot of other people didn’t yet have that technology: scanners, formatters.”

They offered this service to the cypherpunks list, an email chain linking some of the biggest movers and shakers in cryptography. Julian Assange was an avid reader, and years later the first vestiges of Bitcoin would be posted among its members.

Young and Natsios are both licensed architects in New York. They said they thought it was ironic that Cryptome is considered an underground project, because “our work does increasingly take us to underground sites, in fact.” These might be a subway system expansion, or vaults beneath sidewalks. Young and Natsios quite literally expose what is lying underneath the city.

Below the glitz of Times Square and hubbub of Manhattan, there’s a different world that directly influences the surface. One of their jobs involves making sure that these hidden spaces are functioning correctly. “Because we’re called into urban infrastructures in moments of crisis and disrepair, you could say we’re involved in ‘radical’ cultures of repair,” Natsios said.

While their architectural work is keeping the city in a good state of repair, their freedom of information work (i.e. publishing classified documents) ​​does the same for the public domain, also in a “radical” way. “We are required by state laws as architects to police issues of public health, safety and welfare. This is in the name of the public good. From Cryptome’s perspective, we are obliged as architects to police the police, if you will. We are obliged to dissent, as required for the public good,” she said.

We are required by state laws as architects to police issues of public health, safety and welfare.

Of course, a counter analogy could suggest that the whirring of pipes underneath the surface needs to be closed off to avoid being tampered with by those with a malicious intent, that having them publicly accessible could put the city in danger, just as having government secrets available on the internet could pose its own risks.

Ten years after Cryptome first started, Wikileaks arrived. Wikileaks has been responsible for some of the most shattering disclosures in recent history, such as the Iraq war logs or the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and although both outlets act in fairly similar ways, Wikileaks differed in one key aspect.

“The critical thing [Wikileaks] brought to it, which we’ve never done, is that they used publicity and advertising, and sought press coverage,” Young said. “They ran a press operation with press releases. They went into a high profile operation.”

You might think that would be beneficial to freedom of information, encouraging more public engagement, but Natsios disagrees. “[Wikileaks] brought some troubling methodologies into the frame, that is the embracing of a kind of public relations sensationalism at each and every turn,” she said. The public, in her eyes, “are less educated, they’re not embracing the nuances of issues and are becoming passive themselves. They are passively consuming sensational tidbits, and the public good isn’t served by that kind of consumer behaviour.” Instead of taking Wikileaks’ material and dealing with it in a productive manner, she said, people are waiting “for the ever greater adrenaline jolt of the next sensational terabyte of leaks released.”

Cryptome has a similar stance on the handling of the Snowden documents. “Mr. Snowden, please send your 41 PRISM slides and other information to less easily cowed and overly coddled commercial outlets than Washington Post and Guardian,” the couple wrote on the site in June 2013.

 

When asked what they would do if Cryptome had access to the Snowden documents, Young told Gawker, “We would have dumped it, the whole thing. Everyone else likes to play this game: ‘What if we harm somebody’ or all this kind of crap. Which is strictly cowardice. Of course the companies who run the outlets, their lawyers won’t let them do this kind of thing, so if you’ve got money invested in your operation you won’t take these kind of risks.”

The Intercept recently decided not to disclose the name of one country that the Snowden documents reported had 100 percent of its phone traffic recorded. It justified its decision because of “specific, credible concerns that doing so could lead to increased violence,” according to the article. Wikileaks, however, later revealed the country to be Afghanistan.

In order to avoid pressures to suppress details, Young and Natsios are reluctant for Cryptome to be considered in any way an institution. “We find that increasingly because of legal and financial pressures, institutionalized freedom of information groups become quite inflexible, not agile, not tactical enough,” said Natsios.

“We prefer being independent agents: We prefer that agility, we prefer that daily lack of master-plan agitation, and not being limited by the annual report obligations upon freedom of information non-profits; we have no annual report.” This is perhaps why Cryptome releases more controversial files than other groups, such as graphic photos of the Iraq war.

Cryptome basically thinks that the more information released, the greater the benefit for an informed public. “The Snowden team has been flunked out of not releasing this stuff by saying it will harm the nation, and I think we’re about to see something more harmful to the nation if they don’t release,” said Young.

He suggested, for instance, that more details might help people resist NSA surveillance. “The internet has been completely compromised, so it is not a good place for freedom of information,” he said. “It has been turned on the public, and Snowden has revealed some of that, but only two percent of it. He’s not revealed any of the means we need to counter that takeover.”

“We think the entire thing should be released, in order that more people can work on the counter-surveillance side,” he continued. “Now there are people working on this, on how to take it back, but I think that they can’t take it back without the rest of Snowden’s material because they don’t know the depth of control [being carried out by intelligence agencies].”

The way that information is distributed has changed dramatically since Cryptome’s inception. From the cypherpunks to Wikileaks, and now journalism in a post-Snowden world, the public has undoubtedly become more informed about what its government is doing. But with more information available than ever before, Cryptome would argue, we still need to know more.

Editorial – Our Investigative Partnership with Wikileaks

Dear Readers,

it is a pleasure for me to inform you that we have been invited by Wikileaks to join their investigative partnership.

Here is what it means – defined by Wikileaks:

LONDON—WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files – more than five million emails from the Texas-headquartered “global intelligence” company Stratfor. The emails date from between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defense Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment-laundering techniques and psychological methods, for example :

“[Y]ou have to take control of him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control… This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase” – CEO George Friedman to Stratfor analyst Reva Bhalla on 6 December 2011, on how to exploit an Israeli intelligence informant providing information on the medical condition of the President of Venezuala, Hugo Chavez.

The material contains privileged information about the US government’s attacks against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and Stratfor’s own attempts to subvert WikiLeaks. There are more than 4,000 emails mentioning WikiLeaks or Julian Assange. The emails also expose the revolving door that operates in private intelligence companies in the United States. Government and diplomatic sources from around the world give Stratfor advance knowledge of global politics and events in exchange for money. The Global Intelligence Files exposes how Stratfor has recruited a global network of informants who are paid via Swiss banks accounts and pre-paid credit cards. Stratfor has a mix of covert and overt informants, which includes government employees, embassy staff and journalists around the world.

The material shows how a private intelligence agency works, and how they target individuals for their corporate and government clients. For example, Stratfor monitored and analysed the online activities of Bhopal activists, including the “Yes Men”, for the US chemical giant Dow Chemical. The activists seek redress for the 1984 Dow Chemical/Union Carbide gas disaster in Bhopal, India. The disaster led to thousands of deaths, injuries in more than half a million people, and lasting environmental damage.

Stratfor has realised that its routine use of secret cash bribes to get information from insiders is risky. In August 2011, Stratfor CEO George Friedman confidentially told his employees : “We are retaining a law firm to create a policy for Stratfor on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. I don’t plan to do the perp walk and I don’t want anyone here doing it either.”

Stratfor’s use of insiders for intelligence soon turned into a money-making scheme of questionable legality. The emails show that in 2009 then-Goldman Sachs Managing Director Shea Morenz and Stratfor CEO George Friedman hatched an idea to “utilise the intelligence” it was pulling in from its insider network to start up a captive strategic investment fund. CEO George Friedman explained in a confidential August 2011 document, marked DO NOT SHARE OR DISCUSS : “What StratCap will do is use our Stratfor’s intelligence and analysis to trade in a range of geopolitical instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like”. The emails show that in 2011 Goldman Sach’s Morenz invested “substantially” more than $4million and joined Stratfor’s board of directors. Throughout 2011, a complex offshore share structure extending as far as South Africa was erected, designed to make StratCap appear to be legally independent. But, confidentially, Friedman told StratFor staff : “Do not think of StratCap as an outside organisation. It will be integral… It will be useful to you if, for the sake of convenience, you think of it as another aspect of Stratfor and Shea as another executive in Stratfor… we are already working on mock portfolios and trades”. StratCap is due to launch in 2012.

The Stratfor emails reveal a company that cultivates close ties with US government agencies and employs former US government staff. It is preparing the 3-year Forecast for the Commandant of the US Marine Corps, and it trains US marines and “other government intelligence agencies” in “becoming government Stratfors”. Stratfor’s Vice-President for Intelligence, Fred Burton, was formerly a special agent with the US State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service and was their Deputy Chief of the counterterrorism division. Despite the governmental ties, Stratfor and similar companies operate in complete secrecy with no political oversight or accountability. Stratfor claims that it operates “without ideology, agenda or national bias”, yet the emails reveal private intelligence staff who align themselves closely with US government policies and channel tips to the Mossad – including through an information mule in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Yossi Melman, who conspired with Guardian journalist David Leigh to secretly, and in violation of WikiLeaks’ contract with the Guardian, move WikiLeaks US diplomatic cables to Israel.

Ironically, considering the present circumstances, Stratfor was trying to get into what it called the leak-focused “gravy train” that sprung up after WikiLeaks’ Afghanistan disclosures :

“[Is it] possible for us to get some of that ’leak-focused’ gravy train ? This is an obvious fear sale, so that’s a good thing. And we have something to offer that the IT security companies don’t, mainly our focus on counter-intelligence and surveillance that Fred and Stick know better than anyone on the planet… Could we develop some ideas and procedures on the idea of ´leak-focused’ network security that focuses on preventing one’s own employees from leaking sensitive information… In fact, I’m not so sure this is an IT problem that requires an IT solution.”

Like WikiLeaks’ diplomatic cables, much of the significance of the emails will be revealed over the coming weeks, as our coalition and the public search through them and discover connections. Readers will find that whereas large numbers of Stratfor’s subscribers and clients work in the US military and intelligence agencies, Stratfor gave a complimentary membership to the controversial Pakistan general Hamid Gul, former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service, who, according to US diplomatic cables, planned an IED attack on international forces in Afghanistan in 2006. Readers will discover Stratfor’s internal email classification system that codes correspondence according to categories such as ’alpha’, ’tactical’ and ’secure’. The correspondence also contains code names for people of particular interest such as ’Hizzies’ (members of Hezbollah), or ’Adogg’ (Mahmoud Ahmedinejad).

Stratfor did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists – from Reuters to the Kiev Post. The list of Stratfor’s “Confederation Partners”, whom Stratfor internally referred to as its “Confed Fuck House” are included in the release. While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting.

WikiLeaks has also obtained Stratfor’s list of informants and, in many cases, records of its payoffs, including $1,200 a month paid to the informant “Geronimo” , handled by Stratfor’s Former State Department agent Fred Burton.

WikiLeaks has built an investigative partnership with more than 25 media organisations and activists to inform the public about this huge body of documents. The organisations were provided access to a sophisticated investigative database developed by WikiLeaks and together with WikiLeaks are conducting journalistic evaluations of these emails. Important revelations discovered using this system will appear in the media in the coming weeks, together with the gradual release of the source documents.

End of Wikileaks Press Release

We are convinced that this cooperation will generate many benefits for all persons and the media involved and of course for our readers and users.

Sincerely yours

Bernd Pulch, MA

TOP-SECRET – Stratfor – Re: [OS] GERMANY – computer to reassemble 45 million shredded STASI files

Investigative Partnership organised by WikiLeaks – the Data was obtained by WikiLeaks.

Re: [OS] GERMANY – computer to reassemble 45 million shredded Stasi files

Date 2007-05-11 21:46:04
From goodrich@stratfor.com
To analysts@stratfor.com
davison@stratfor.com
aaric.eisenstein@stratfor.com
Others MessageId: <4644C7FC.5000007@stratfor.com>
InReplyTo: 0e6f01c79404$f1f258c0$8a01a8c0@stratfor.com
Text
OMG… you can tell you have a kid!Aaric Eisenstein wrote:Get this to The King right away. There may yet be time to save Humpty
Dumpty!

Aaric S. Eisenstein

Stratfor

VP Publishing

700 Lavaca St., Suite 900

Austin, TX 78701

512-744-4308

512-744-4334 fax

———————————————————————-

From: os@stratfor.com [mailto:os@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 2:38 PM
To: analysts@stratfor.com
Subject: [OS] GERMANY – computer to reassemble 45 million shredded Stasi
files
New Computer Program to Reassemble Shredded Stasi Files
Millions of files consigned to paper shredders in the late days of the
East German regime will be pieced together by computer. The massive job
of reassembling this puzzle from the late Cold War was performed, until
now, by hand.

It’s been years in the making, but finally software designed to
electronically piece together some 45 million shredded documents from
the East German secret police went into service in Berlin on Wednesday.
Now, a puzzle that would take 30 diligent Germans 600 to 800 years to
finish by hand, according to one estimate, might be solved by computer
in seven.

Photo Gallery: Reconstructing the Cold War
Click on a picture to launch the image gallery (4 Photos)

“It’s very exciting to decode Stasi papers,” said Jan Schneider, head
engineer on the project at the Fraunhofer Institute for Production
Systems and Design Technology located in the German capital. “You have
the feeling you are making history.”

Or at least putting it back together again. In 1989, with the looming
collapse of the Communist regime becoming increasingly evident, agents
of the East German Staatssicherheitsdienst or Stasi feverishly plowed
millions of active files through paper shredders, or just tore them up
by hand.

Rights activists interrupted the project and rescued a total of 16,250
garbage bags full of scraps. But rescuing the history on those sheets of
paper amounted to an absurdly difficult jigsaw puzzle. By 2000, no more
than 323 sacks were legible again — reconstructed by a team of 15
people working in Nuremburg — leaving 15,927 to go. So the German
government promised money to any group that could plausibly deal with
the remaining tons of paper.

The Fraunhofer Institute won the contract in 2003, and began a pilot
phase of the project on Wednesday. Four hundred sacks of scraps will be
scanned, front and back, and newly-refined software will try to arrange
the digitized fragments according to shape, texture, ink color,
handwriting style and recognizable official stamps.

NEWSLETTER
Sign up for Spiegel Online’s daily newsletter and get the best of Der
Spiegel’s and Spiegel Online’s international coverage in your In- Box
everyday.

Gu:nter Bormann, from the agency that oversees old Stasi documents (the
Federal Commission for the Records of the national Security Service of
the Former German Democratic Republic), says most of the paper probably
dates from the years 1988 and 1989. “This is what Stasi officers had on
their desks at the end,” he says. “It’s not material from dusty
archives.”

Still-unknown Stasi informants — ordinary East Germans who spied on
other East Germans — stand to be uncovered. International espionage
files are reportedly not among the thousands of sacks; most of those
having been more conclusively destroyed.

The Fraunhofer Institute’s computers will start with documents torn by
hand, because large irregular fragments lend themselves to shape
recognition more readily than uniform strips from shredding machines.
The institute received a promise of EUR6.3 million ($8.53 million) in
April from the German parliament for this phase, which is expected to
take about two years.

If it’s deemed successful, the rest of the job would take four to five
years, according to project chief Bertram Nickolay. The final cost will
be up to EUR30 million.

msm/ap

Re: [OS] GERMANY – computer to reassemble 45 million shredded Stasi files

Date 2007-05-11 21:46:04
From goodrich@stratfor.com
To analysts@stratfor.com
davison@stratfor.com
aaric.eisenstein@stratfor.com
Others MessageId: <4644C7FC.5000007@stratfor.com>
InReplyTo: 0e6f01c79404$f1f258c0$8a01a8c0@stratfor.com
Text
OMG… you can tell you have a kid!Aaric Eisenstein wrote:

Get this to The King right away. There may yet be time to save Humpty
Dumpty!

Aaric S. Eisenstein

Stratfor

VP Publishing

700 Lavaca St., Suite 900

Austin, TX 78701

512-744-4308

512-744-4334 fax

———————————————————————-

From: os@stratfor.com [mailto:os@stratfor.com]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 2:38 PM
To: analysts@stratfor.com
Subject: [OS] GERMANY – computer to reassemble 45 million shredded Stasi
files
New Computer Program to Reassemble Shredded Stasi Files
Millions of files consigned to paper shredders in the late days of the
East German regime will be pieced together by computer. The massive job
of reassembling this puzzle from the late Cold War was performed, until
now, by hand.

It’s been years in the making, but finally software designed to
electronically piece together some 45 million shredded documents from
the East German secret police went into service in Berlin on Wednesday.
Now, a puzzle that would take 30 diligent Germans 600 to 800 years to
finish by hand, according to one estimate, might be solved by computer
in seven.

Photo Gallery: Reconstructing the Cold War
Click on a picture to launch the image gallery (4 Photos)

“It’s very exciting to decode Stasi papers,” said Jan Schneider, head
engineer on the project at the Fraunhofer Institute for Production
Systems and Design Technology located in the German capital. “You have
the feeling you are making history.”

Or at least putting it back together again. In 1989, with the looming
collapse of the Communist regime becoming increasingly evident, agents
of the East German Staatssicherheitsdienst or Stasi feverishly plowed
millions of active files through paper shredders, or just tore them up
by hand.

Rights activists interrupted the project and rescued a total of 16,250
garbage bags full of scraps. But rescuing the history on those sheets of
paper amounted to an absurdly difficult jigsaw puzzle. By 2000, no more
than 323 sacks were legible again — reconstructed by a team of 15
people working in Nuremburg — leaving 15,927 to go. So the German
government promised money to any group that could plausibly deal with
the remaining tons of paper.

The Fraunhofer Institute won the contract in 2003, and began a pilot
phase of the project on Wednesday. Four hundred sacks of scraps will be
scanned, front and back, and newly-refined software will try to arrange
the digitized fragments according to shape, texture, ink color,
handwriting style and recognizable official stamps.

NEWSLETTER
Sign up for Spiegel Online’s daily newsletter and get the best of Der
Spiegel’s and Spiegel Online’s international coverage in your In- Box
everyday.

Gu:nter Bormann, from the agency that oversees old Stasi documents (the
Federal Commission for the Records of the national Security Service of
the Former German Democratic Republic), says most of the paper probably
dates from the years 1988 and 1989. “This is what Stasi officers had on
their desks at the end,” he says. “It’s not material from dusty
archives.”

Still-unknown Stasi informants — ordinary East Germans who spied on
other East Germans — stand to be uncovered. International espionage
files are reportedly not among the thousands of sacks; most of those
having been more conclusively destroyed.

The Fraunhofer Institute’s computers will start with documents torn by
hand, because large irregular fragments lend themselves to shape
recognition more readily than uniform strips from shredding machines.
The institute received a promise of EUR6.3 million ($8.53 million) in
April from the German parliament for this phase, which is expected to
take about two years.

If it’s deemed successful, the rest of the job would take four to five
years, according to project chief Bertram Nickolay. The final cost will
be up to EUR30 million.

msm/ap

Investigative Partnership organised by WikiLeaks – the Data was obtained by WikiLeaks.

CONFIDENTIAL: BLOGGER ALLEGES DPM’S WIFE AT MURDER SCENE

VZCZCXRO0823
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHKL #0529/01 1750915
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 230915Z JUN 08
FM AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1247
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHUM/AMEMBASSY ULAANBAATAR PRIORITY 0069
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KUALA LUMPUR 000529 

SIPDIS 

FOR EAP/MTS AND INR 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/23/2028
TAGS: PGOV PINR KJUS KDEM MY
SUBJECT: BLOGGER ALLEGES DPM'S WIFE AT MURDER SCENE 

REF: KUALA LUMPUR 335 - SEDITION CHARGES AGAINST BLOGGER 

Classified By: Political Section Chief Mark D. Clark, reason 1.4 (b and
 d). 

Summary
------- 

1.  (C) Controversial internet journalist Raja Petra executed
a sworn statement on June 18 to the effect that Deputy Prime
Minister Najib's wife, Rosmah Mansor, was at the scene of the
murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibbu in October
2006, and that PM Abdullah and a Royal received information
to that effect.  While the mainstream press has shied away
from printing Rosmah's name, Kuala Lumpur is abuzz with this
latest explosive allegation.  PM Abdullah has thus far
remained silent, while the national police chief and Attorney
General said they would investigate.  Raja Petra, who faces
sedition charges for earlier claims, informed us that the
Attorney General's Office filed a police report on the
matter, and he expected to be called in for questioning soon.
 While the latest allegations of Rosmah's presence at the
murder seem implausible, they nevertheless will have
resonance with a Malaysian public that does not have
confidence in the integrity of the Altantuya murder
investigation.  Continued public attention to such reports
also could damage Najib's front-runner status as PM
Abdullah's successor.  End Summary. 

Rosmah at Murder Scene, PM Has Report
------------------------------------- 

2.  (U) Controversial internet journalist Raja Petra
voluntarily completed a sworn statement ("statutory
declaration") at a Malaysian court on June 18, in which he
affirmed that he was "reliably informed" Deputy Prime
Minister Najib's wife Rosmah Mansor, together with her aide
Norhayati and acting Colonel Aziz Buyong (Norhayati's
husband), were present at the scene of the murder of
Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibbu in October 2006.
Raja Petra also stated that military intelligence provided a
report with this information to Prime Minister Abdullah,
which was subsequently given to Abdullah's son-in-law Khairy
Jamaluddin "for safe-keeping," and that one of Malaysia's
traditional rulers also was briefed on the matter.  Raja
Petra did not reveal the source of this information.  Raja
Petra remains indicted for sedition for his earlier internet
reports that implied DPM Najib and wife Rosmah were connected
to the on-going Altantuya murder case (ref A). 

3.  (SBU) Internet reports of Raja Petra's declaration
emerged on June 20, and the full text became available on his
Malaysia Today website.  Some of Malaysia's mainstream media
briefly reported Raja Petra's new allegations, but carefully
avoided identifying Rosmah Mansor as the "prominent VIP"
named in his statement.  An aide to Najib reportedly
described the statement as "mind-boggling."  Inspector
General of Police Musa Hassan told reporters the police would
look into the "highly inflammatory" allegations, and could
take action against Raja Petra if they were found to be
untrue, while Attorney General Abdul Gani Patil stated his
office would look "seriously" into the matter. 

Heavy Buzz in Parliament
------------------------ 

4.  (C) As members of Parliament gathered June 23 for the
opening of the second parliamentary session, Raja Petra's
story competed with speculation of a no-confidence vote
against PM Abdullah for the attention of lawmakers.
Opposition MPs, parliamentary watchers, and journalists who
spoke with us at Parliament all remarked that Raja Petra had
put himself at great risk, and therefore they speculated that
he must have some evidence in hand.  If this is a bluff, "it
will cost him and his family," one MP remarked.  Prominent
opposition MP Lim Kit Siang said he was troubled that the PM
had kept quiet about the allegations.  Later on June 23, Kit
Siang introduced an emergency parliamentary motion to discuss
Raja Petra's statement.  The Parliament Speaker is required
to accept or reject on an emergency motion within 24 hours. 

Raja Petra Ready for Police
--------------------------- 

5.  (C) We spoke briefly with Raja Petra and his wife Marina
on June 23.  They related that the AGO had filed a police
report regarding the affidavit.  A seemingly confident Raja
Petra said, "I am ready and eagerly waiting for the police to
question me," and took exception to the threatening tone of
IGP Musa's remarks.  He also implied he had further evidence
to implicate DPM Najib and his wife, and asked rhetorically
what action the police would take "if the allegations are
true." 

Comment
------- 

6.  (C) Putting aside the question of Najib's links to the
case, the allegation that Najib's wife would be present at
the Altantuya murder scene strikes us as very implausible,
though fully in keeping with Raja Petra's sometimes wild and
highly emotional reporting.  The Malaysian public and
political elite, however, have no confidence in the integrity
of the government's investigation into the 2006 murder of
Altantuya.  The government's inept and gruelingly slow
prosecution of the case against DPM Najib's former advisor
Razak Baginda and two soldiers from Najib's security detail,
and the authorities' decision early on to limit the scope of
the investigation to exclude any further links with DPM
Najib, have sent clear signals of political interference.
Against this backdrop, most Malaysians will believe there is
at least some truth in Raja Petra's affidavit.  Amidst the
leadership struggle within the ruling UMNO party, emerging
fractures in the National Front coalition, and maneuvering
for a no-confidence vote against PM Abdullah, the latest
allegations add to the nation's sense of political turmoil.
Continued public focus on such allegations also could harm
Najib's front-runner status as PM Abdullah's successor. 

KEITH

ALLE WIKILEAKS ARCHIVE AUF UNSERER WEBSITE

Liebe Leser,

im Zuge unserer Kooperation mit Wikileaks zeigen wir die kompletten Wikileaks-Archive hier:

http://ebizz.tv/wikileaks/

Im Zuge eines verantwortungsvollen und couragierten Journalismus, den fast alle Medien in Europa und weniger in den USA  aus finanziellen Interessen und aus Angst vermissen lassen, werden wir unsere Aktivitäten weiter verstärken.

Über Zensurbestrebungen und auch über illegale und legale Tricks, um die Wahrheit zu verschleiern werden wir Sie informieren.

Herzlichst Ihr

Magister Bernd Pulch

PS Wir finanzieren uns auch über Erotik-Programme, somit sollten diese Seite nur Personen übr 18 Jahre besuchen.