Ex-Spokesman destroyed unreleased Wikileaks Files, page 1

Ex-Spokesman destroyed unreleased Wikileaks Files, page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times

Topic started on 21-8-2011 @ 06:59 AM by CriticalCK

Former Wikileaks spokesman Daniel Domscheit-Berger allegedly destroyed 3500 unreleased Wikileaks Files before leaving the organisation. The files were stored until the late summer of 2010 on the Wikileaks server and were taken by a group including Domscheit-Berg upon their leaving. Among the files was the No-Fly List of the US government.
Domescheit argues that he destroyed the files, because he did not believe Julian Assange to handle the information provided responsibly.

CCC (Chaos Computer Club) amongst others criticized Domscheits for his close ties to US secret agencies. CCC chose to exclude the snitch from its ranks.

Here's the news source. Unfortunately I couldn't find any news on this in english.
www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,781458,00.html

Here is what I think. Domescheit was bought by the CIA. He then damaged Wikileaks severily. His new organization OpenLeaks is often criticized for its intransparancy - probably it's just a placebo organization. Discuss.

edit on 21-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-8-2011 @ 07:03 AM by loves a conspiricy

Lets hope this is all in the insurance file then....ive still got it, just waiting for the code to open it

reply posted on 21-8-2011 @ 07:23 AM by spav5

He thought Assange would act irresponsibly..So..he destroyed the documents....how can you get more irresponsible than that?

Peace

reply posted on 21-8-2011 @ 07:31 AM by new_here

reply to post by CriticalCK

This really makes me doubt WikiLeaks was ever 'for real' because what happened to duplicate copies of the files stored on servers in various countries? That is what Assange said on that TV interview. He said he wasn't afraid of the US government hacking into his servers because he had copies on computers in undisclosed locations throughout the world. Hmmm. Maybe WikiLeaks was just a faked stunt to get people on a list if they downloaded the file.

reply posted on 21-8-2011 @ 08:04 AM by CriticalCK

reply to post by new_here

Well, I wouldn't say Wikileaks wasn't ever for real. I just suppose it never had the level of professionalism Assange claimed it to have. Obviously trust is an important factor for whistleblowers to come forward with classified documents. Therefore it was important for Assange to portrait his organisation as highly qualified to protect the whistleblowers' identities and handle sensitive information. If people knew the truth, that Wikileaks was just Assange with not even a handful of supporters, the whistleblower platform would have hardly ever been used to begin with.

reply posted on 22-8-2011 @ 01:21 PM by Majic

But Who Leaks The Leaker?

Covered in English here:

Wik i war: 3500 unpublished leaks destroyed forever as Assange hits out

Let's see now...

We have a guy in a position of significant trust who publicly and dramatically backstabs the organization he worked for, writes a book about it and admits to destroying several gigabytes of information people may have risked their lives to disclose. Now he's starting a website, using technology he openly admits he stole, as a competitor to the organization he just backstabbed.

Brilliant. With a résumé like that, I'm sure people around the world will fall all over themselves to trust this guy with their sensitive information.

Meanwhile, we also have a guy in charge of the organization that allowed one person, who turned out to be a backstabber, to have full dominion and control over a huge amount of sensitive information and ultimately destroy it. Without any sort of distributed, secure backups to protect it. Um... yeah.

On top of that, he also suggests that said backstabber has been in contact with the FBI, and that his wife has been in contact with the CIA. So not only has the data been "destroyed" and thus cannot be published as hoped by the people who submitted it, but copies of it may now be in the possession of two government agencies who have all the time and money in the world to use said data, and other inside information presumably passed along with it, to track down those who submitted it.

Oh, this just keeps getting better.

It's hard to imagine a more dismal state of affairs, or how WikiLeaks or this supposed "OpenLeaks" can possibly be trusted by anyone who actually has something worthwhile to disclose.

At this point, whistleblowers are probably better off posting their leaks to YouTube or 4chan than either of these miserable, dodgy sites. Although I feel compelled to point out that probably wouldn't be a good idea either, because the tendrils of bloated, corrupt governments and the people who make them that way are long and sticky.

With diligent, unflinching efficiency, these two narcissistic drama queens have managed to seriously harm and set back the cause of secure, online disclosure by several years and discourage uncountable numbers of potential whistleblowers from taking action, thus ensuring that a lot of information which should come to light probably won't.

Am I wrong to think both of these insufferable jackasses deserve to rot in prison for their crimes against humanity?

You decide.

edit on 8/22/2011 by Majic because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 22-8-2011 @ 01:59 PM by schuyler

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Lets hope this is all in the insurance file then....ive still got it, just waiting for the code to open it

So why do you think you don't have the code yet? Since this is ATS, please forgive me for suggesting that if you can't see into the file, you can't know if there is anything inside it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the file is completely fake, a publicity stunt.

reply posted on 22-8-2011 @ 02:52 PM by FriendlyGopher

reply to post by new_here

I think you nailed it... wanted to post exactly the same.. Some other things to consider.

* Assange has been in IT like forever. There's no way he wouldn't keep some private copies of leaks as a backup, even if it would just be with some "unknown" friend of his. He had longer issues with this Daniel so looking at his overall intelligent appearance and knowing his skills from way back in the day I find this story hard to believe.

I was never sure whether wikileaks was part of a covert operation but looking at the Arabian spring and the down to the letter followed manuals on over trowing regimes it's all too convenient.

reply posted on 22-8-2011 @ 04:52 PM by new_here

Originally posted by FriendlyGopher
reply to post by new_here

I think you nailed it... wanted to post exactly the same.. Some other things to consider.

* Assange has been in IT like forever. There's no way he wouldn't keep some private copies of leaks as a backup, even if it would just be with some "unknown" friend of his. He had longer issues with this Daniel so looking at his overall intelligent appearance and knowing his skills from way back in the day I find this story hard to believe.

I was never sure whether wikileaks was part of a covert operation but looking at the Arabian spring and the down to the letter followed manuals on over throwing regimes it's all too convenient.

Absolutely, the whole thing reeks of a grand scheme to dissuade whistleblowers who have legitimate info so disclose. But tell me about your second paragraph... I missed the memo on that, LoL. Did the manuals come from WikiLeaks?

Also, just where is this Assange dude right now? In jail awaiting trial for rape? On the run? I don't hear about him anymore. It's sort of like the ruse has served it's purpose, so... 'files are gone, game over, thank-you-very-much' says the planning committee.