WikiLeaks Volunteer Was a Paid Informant for the FBI

WikiLeaks Volunteer Was a Paid Informant for the FBI

www.wired.com

On an August workday in 2011, a cherubic 18-year-old Icelandic man named Sigurdur “Siggi” Thordarson walked through the stately doors of the U.S. embassy in Reykjavík, his jacket pocket concealing his calling card: a crumpled photocopy of an Australian passport. The passport photo showed a man with a unruly shock of platinum blonde hair and the name Julian Paul Assange.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Iceland shows - FBI Banned from Iceland

A young Icelander made first contact and sold himself to the FBI for $5000 dollars fearing he may get himself arrested, for reasons only known to himself, because he asked members of LulzSec to hack Iceland's gov't computers in the name of Wikileaks. Odd huh?

A 17 year old Thordarson got his start back in 2010 being one of many Icelanders who joined and supported Wikileaks through volunteer work. In that same year Wikileaks experienced a staff revolt leaving the organization short handed which lead to the young Icelander receiving new responsibilities such as being in charge of the chatroom, assigning volunteers jobs like going through the "Kissenger cables to creating videos to Wikileaks web page design, and working on the Bradley Manning defense fund. Whatever he knew the FBI now knew. He was fired in 2011 for setting up his own online Wikileaks t-shirt store where all $50,000 dollars in profits went to him.

I highly recommend reading the article because this story is very interesting and just goes to show ya informants and whistleblowers are everywhere, no one is safe. At least Judas was asked to betray, this guy contacted the authorities looking to betray while claiming the whole time Assange was his friend .

www.wired.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I'm not sure why this would be considered "news". Any organization that accepts volunteers is probably rife with people who are there for reasons other than helping (well, any controversial organization -- I doubt that your local food bank is staffed by FBI informants.)

Loose organizations are unlikely to vet their staffers, and informants/spies are trained in fitting in and being accepted without suspicion -- that's their job, so one would assume that every organization that is of interest to the government has snitches at pretty much every level of membership.

reply to post by adjensen


I suppose these spy volunteers are everywhere but this guy wasn't a gov't plant, he's just an A-hole. Reading the article you learn this young man had a close relationship with Assange, an odd one at that where Assange would promise to overlook all Thordarson's wrong doings as long as he pledges complete loyalty to him. Too bad for Assange the kid must have had his fingers crossed. He was a volunteer who was very close to Assange and was apart of the Wikileak's inner circle.

So the news is that this story is shedding light as to why the FBI were in Iceland & what their Wikileak investigation was all about, the investigation they withheld from the Icelandic gov't causing their ban.

reply to post by Swills


Ironic and hypocritical all at the same time...

Its funny people dont see issues with what Manning and Assange have done yet they find it abhorent when the tables get turned and the exact same method is used.

If you are going to claim to the be the standard bearer of truth and transparency via less than lawful methods while targeting nation states then one should be prepared for the inevitable response.

reply to post by adjensen


Aside to agree with you in general, I have to say that such behavior as shown by this young person in doing what he did, brings shame to a name that contains the letters T.H.O.R. , and I hope his father gives him a firm kick up the backside.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Ironic and hypocritical for the young Icelander. He joins Wikileaks when his nation was at the height of it's economic woes, the very same nation who actually arrested corrupt bankers and politicians, but then he later contacts the US embassy willingly wanting to become an informant while also pocketing money he makes off of the Wikileaks name.

Eh, Manning released information he felt the world should know about. Now some people over exaggerate and try to say Manning put military members in harms way but I see no evidence of that what so ever. He did sign many contracts to never divulge any secrets to anyone, especially a foreigner, so he was fully aware of the consequences. Manning wasn't seeking compensation when he gave Wikileaks all of those gigs of information. Was it worth it in the end? I don't think so and now this young man will forever be behind bars.

Assange and his Wikileaks, god bless them because clearly these gov'ts, all of them, are corrupt, immoral, and down right evil so it's nice there's some sort of checks and balances no matter how small.

Btw, that comic pic is so small, I cannot read it.

reply to post by TrueBrit


Damn right this kid needs a beatin' but we'll just have to settle with him facing jail time for embezzling $50,000 off of the Wikileaks name. That and he became a willing informant because he fear he may one day be in trouble because he, not Wikileaks or Assange, asked LulzSec to hack Icelandic gov't computers in the name of Wikileaks.

In prison he may just get his just desserts.

It is sad and funny that THOR is spelt out in his long name

Apparently the FBI paid the person $5000.

People are cheap these days no? Will have a long time to regret it being so young.

reply to post by Pinke


He begged for money from them since he got fired from Wikileaks because he was selling Wikleaks tshirt on an online store he started and was pocketing every penny for himself. Appartantly he made a good chunk of change so even without his cushy Wikileaks gig you would think he would be okay having $50,000 in the bank, unless he either spent it all like a teenager would or it was confiscated.

From the OP's article,

For the next few months, Thordarson begged the FBI for money, while the FBI alternately ignored him and courted him for more assistance. In the end, Thordarson says, the FBI agreed to compensate him for the work he missed while meeting with agents (he says he worked at a bodyguard-training school), totaling about $5,000.

Bodyguard training school? Mmmmmmkay, Once the FBI got all they could get from him they ditched him like a bad habit.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Swills

 

Ironic and hypocritical all at the same time...

Its funny people dont see issues with what Manning and Assange have done yet they find it abhorent when the tables get turned and the exact same method is used.

If you are going to claim to the be the standard bearer of truth and transparency via less than lawful methods while targeting nation states then one should be prepared for the inevitable response.

I was just thinking the very same thing. Aren't we supposed to embrace his freedom of conscience and ability to seek truth and justice his way because he thought it best? Aren't we supposed to praise his courage and resourcefulness?

Oh.. Wait.. that's only a good thing when it's from people we agree with and causes we support, huh? When the same betrayal comes from the other side, well, then it's clearly wrong and evil and any fool should see it...huh?

Indeed.. people don't even appreciate that their hero worship of leakers and people who betrayed all they swore an oath to is precisely what this kid did to Assange. A big knife in the back. Well.... Same conduct, different motives from where I sit.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


The FBI got tons of information from this kid but at the end of the day it will probably amount to nothing for them, although I'm sure they're very interested in the chat logs but then again the US Gov't is spying on every form of electronic communication so chances are they already had copies of said chat logs.

And are you saying we are to embrace the young Icelander as if he is some kind of hero and praise him? If you read the article you'll learn there's really nothing to praise. He's a selfish kid who is most likely going to prison.

reply to post by Swills


Theres alot in a name. One should respect ones ancestors enough to ensure that even if one cannot be a hero, or a great success, one does not bring shame on them. Do not get me wrong, I am not into the idea of some of the obviously unhealthy traditionalisms to do with family, which restrict freedom, damage young people in some places across the globe.

But respecting ones ancestors enough to keep thier names shiny, or clean them up if they were tarnished, is in my opinion the first line of the book of life. This kid fell at the first hurdle, because he had a name that he ought to be proud of, containing a reference to the ancient mythology of his region, and crapped all over it.

reply to post by Swills


You read me just the opposite. 100% the opposite. I don't see that fat little punk as someone to admire...and now perhaps, while still disagreeing, you and others may at least see a taste of why I hate little Bradley Manning about the same and think of him about as low as I do that punk next to Assange in the picture.

Betrayal is Betrayal and I don't care what a man's motivations are. It's STILL Betrayal. One case here, people will condemn because the betrayal came against a cause they like ...while the other cases are praised because betrayal came to support those same causes. A rat is still a rat.

Now I've never considered Assange in that light because, frankly, there but for the Grace of God go every last one of us. How many ATS Contributors would just flat turn down something like Manning was offering? Some perhaps...but most wouldn't. Nor should they. I'd have taken his material just like Assange did...and under my breath, cussed Manning the same way cops detest informants. Useful...but scum, just the same.

* Snowden and Ellsberg both being in a different class...because they stood tall and spoke their identity for all to see and know. They didn't need hunted down while hiding in the shadows like scared rats ...such as the one in this OP story playing informant to the Feds. The jury on Snowden is still out...but the term Rat or Informer will never quite fit him, even if it all goes bad from here, IMO.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Trust me, I don't think you see the little man as a hero, I was being facetious. If you hate Manning for being an oath breaker then you must not be a fan of the current US establishment and their constant oath breaking & betrayal. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. But may I ask why you hate Manning so? Is the difference between him & Snowden is that Manning was in the Air Force & Snowden a civilian?

reply to post by Swills


Well, I don't want to rehash the whole thing on another thread so I'll keep to a straight answer for your straight question.

I see Manning and Snowden as very different in two unmistakable ways. #1. Snowden stood tall and took credit for what he'd done. He didn't remain in place, hacking away from the inside, while literally sitting among men who trusted him (and were hunting HIM) while he was actively doing it. #2. Snowden stated on the first day he released his name, he was taking care to read and review every single paper that he released and consider damage to individuals before doing it. Like Ellsberg...he meant to release what he thought served the purpose without going to the moon with shotgunning the whole system in the process.

(#2 is getting a bit shaky with some of what Snowden is releasing now...but I'm still on the fence, to be honest)

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Ok, so your issue with Manning is that he didn't come right out and say who he was and what he was doing. Well, the main problem Manning saw is that he felt he was releasing information he wanted the world to know, much like Snowden, but since he was active duty he knew full well the risks of releasing classified information and so do I since I too held a clearance in the USN. Unlike Snowden, Manning was not making 200,000 a year and was not able to just pack up and fly to Hong Kong before releasing his info. Manning was stuck because he was in the military and he couldn't go anywhere. Manning is young and foolish, clearly not thinking his plans through before enacting on them but he felt the information he saw was complete betrayal and classified or not he wanted the world to know what's going on. Manning didn't ask for money or anything of the sort for releasing this information, he thought he was doing it for the greater good and that's why so many people support him and want to see him set free.

He's not your typical POS "spy" trying to sell secrets to the enemy, like this guy:www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Swills

Well, my problem is two-fold and honestly? Snowden is starting to do the same thing. I just hope HE stops as he promised he wouldn't do it in the first place on this stuff.

Manning didn't just release what he knew anything about...like the gun camera footage (which he should have gotten a medal for releasing...even the Declassification expert in his trial testified this week that no reason existed for it to be classified) but he seemed to figure "If a little works well, then A LOT must work BEST!" ...so he went to dumping 700,000+ documents with more than he could possibly comprehend for material in sheer human limitations involved here.

Leaks are very important. Critical at times. Leakers ought to be protected where motivations aren't purely self serving. However... Document Dumpers aren't leakers. They're 5th Columnist Destroyers from the inside out ...and I don't necessarily suggest they are even aware of that role they play. They sure have the end result when discretion is thrown to the wind and the doors of law and regulation are kicked off the hinges to one young man's own personal judgement for what is and isn't fit to share.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Excellent point! He did release a lot of information but they weren't random documents, they all fall into their own categories, Baghdad airstrike, Afghan War logs, Iraq War logs, Diplomatic cables, Guantanamo Bay files, Granai airstrike. I agree he didn't go through each sentence to see what he was sending, that job he was leaving to Wikileaks. As far as I can tell he didn't put any service members lives in danger, or politician or US citizen. I have no problems with him releasing the Iraq war logs because that was a completely illegal war from the start and the same goes for Afghanistan and the GITMO files, and it turns out there was dirt in the diplomats cable files (go figure). He didn't sell this information to enemy for profit but gave it up freely to Wikileaks for exposure.

A person you should be pointing your hatred too is the spy I posted in my last post.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
However... Document Dumpers aren't leakers. They're 5th Columnist Destroyers from the inside out

Nail on the head there Wrabbit. That is exactly what is happening.
And funny thing that Obama is not all the riled up, now is he.