PDA

View Full Version : US Govt Demanding Twitter Info from Wikileaks


CriticalFunker
8th January 2011, 08:15 AM
Wow, this is what I call a paranoid security state at the brink. Not really a good move,imo. Other than being petty and juvenile, I'd say it's pushing way beyonds the limit to personal privacy and intimidation by a paranoid rising authoritarian state. Someone is mad. Last resorts: Give us your twitter information,credit cards,banking records ! :mad:

source:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

Last night, Birgitta Jónsdóttir -- a former WikiLeaks volunteer and current member of the Icelandic Parliament -- announced (on Twitter) that she had been notified by Twitter that the DOJ had served a Subpoena demanding information "about all my tweets and more since November 1st 2009." Several news outlets, including The Guardian, wrote about Jónsdóttir's announcement.

What hasn't been reported is that the Subpoena served on Twitter -- which is actually an Order from a federal court that the DOJ requested -- seeks the same information for numerous other individuals currently or formerly associated with WikiLeaks, including Jacob Appelbaum, Rop Gonggrijp, and Julian Assange. It also seeks the same information for Bradley Manning and for WikiLeaks' Twitter account.


The information demanded by the DOJ is sweeping in scope. It includes all mailing addresses and billing information known for the user, all connection records and session times, all IP addresses used to access Twitter, all known email accounts, as well as the "means and source of payment," including banking records and credit cards. It seeks all of that information for the period beginning November 1, 2009, through the present.

Document order:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/subpoena.pdf

UPDATE II: It's worth recalling -- and I hope journalists writing about this story remind themselves -- that all of this extraordinary probing and "criminal" investigating is stemming from WikiLeaks' doing nothing more than publishing classified information showing what the U.S. Government is doing: something investigative journalists, by definition, do all the time.

And the key question now is this: did other Internet and social network companies (Google, Facebook, etc.) receive similar Orders and then quietly comply? It's difficult to imagine why the DOJ would want information only from Twitter; if anything, given the limited information it has about users, Twitter would seem one of the least fruitful avenues to pursue. But if other companies did receive and quietly comply with these orders, it will be a long time before we know, if we ever do, given the prohibition in these orders on disclosing even its existence to anyone.

Seems to me more violations of personal rights and privacy concerns. :Cue the Apologist Symphony:

Simple Mathematical Formula

US Govt + Wikileaks volunteers + Wikileaks information=Y U Mad Tho?

http://images1.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/4042924
/y-u-mad-tho.jpg


If you don't think this is a serious battle for our rights as american citizens, you are fooling yourself. It's obvious the US Govt has gone off the rails off anything deemed as classified information. Not a good sign for the new decade.

CDFingers
8th January 2011, 08:32 AM
I see this as a 4th amendment violation.

CDFingers

CriticalFunker
8th January 2011, 08:45 AM
I see this as a 4th amendment violation.

CDFingers

I think everyone who received one of these orders should come forward. Just scan the orders for the world to see. I'd like to know who else got one of these childish desperate attempt at intimidation & excessive harrassment. US Govt has become the quinessential Hall Monitor for Global Citizen High School.

Oliver
8th January 2011, 08:50 AM
CNN's take on that story:

WikiLeaks backer: U.S. wants my info (http://us.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/08/us.wikileaks.twitter/index.html?hpt=T2)

Travis
8th January 2011, 08:52 AM
I think it's hilarious.

I also don't think they'll be successful.

CriticalFunker
8th January 2011, 09:07 AM
I think it's hilarious.

I also don't think they'll be successful.

I bet you this bluff has worked on one of these companies. I will take those odds. I would put on the header of the document a flashing US Govt Seal with an angry eagle. Presentation is important. :D

WildCat
8th January 2011, 09:32 AM
Wow, this is what I call a paranoid security state at the brink. Not really a good move,imo. Other than being petty and juvenile, I'd say it's pushing way beyonds the limit to personal privacy and intimidation by a paranoid rising authoritarian state. Someone is mad. Last resorts: Give us your twitter information,credit cards,banking records ! :mad:
I think what they're doing here is looking for evidence that Manning was in contact with Wikileaks prior to his actually stealing the documents. If this turns out to be the case, it makes Wikileaks an accomplice to that crime rather than simply a 3rd party.

WildCat
8th January 2011, 09:34 AM
I think it's hilarious.

I also don't think they'll be successful.
I think they will be successful.

casebro
8th January 2011, 09:57 AM
Or payment records via a U.S. bank would leave Assange open to some kind of prosecution in the States? "Doing business in America means abiding by American justice system,". Vs, it's not illegal for a foreigner to publish a countries secrets?

Beerina
8th January 2011, 09:59 AM
Did Wikileaks do anything illegal? The government must suspect they were bribing or coercing people to give them the info, right? I mean, that would be the only illegality. Publishing classified stuff people just gave you may be unethical, but it is not illegal.

WildCat
8th January 2011, 12:21 PM
Did Wikileaks do anything illegal? The government must suspect they were bribing or coercing people to give them the info, right? I mean, that would be the only illegality. Publishing classified stuff people just gave you may be unethical, but it is not illegal.
If it's shown that Wikileaks and Manning were communicating prior to the theft then that possibly makes them part of the crime.

INRM
8th January 2011, 08:30 PM
I think this is a very dangerous sign, it's a 4th Amendment violation, and is indicative of a government that is becoming a rising authoritarian state.

barium
8th January 2011, 11:48 PM
If it's shown that Wikileaks and Manning were communicating prior to the theft then that possibly makes them part of the crime.

Don't they already know he contacted Assange in 2009 and stole the data in 2010? I'm thinking they want to know if wikileaks knew how he was going to come by the data, and if they encouraged the theft.

Childlike Empress
9th January 2011, 12:04 AM
There's another thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=197141) in Social Issues, where i've posted this:

-----

Rop Gonggrijp is one of the three evil people (plus Assange and Manning) the DoJ wants to investigate, speaking less than two weeks ago at a conference in Berlin:

ALNovMk3fC8

The other two are Jacob Appelbaum, here at a conference in the USA, after the release of the "Collateral Murder" video, filling in for Julian Assange who did not make it because Seymour Hersh told him that it isn't safe:

FX5yWgMzNXg

And Birgitta Jonsdottir, member of the Icelandic Parlament, talking about how the "financial crisis" hit her country, and (IIRC, could be older) IMMI, the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (this is Radio):

GUNpIbhaY1Y

PhantomWolf
9th January 2011, 03:46 AM
If it's shown that Wikileaks and Manning were communicating prior to the theft then that possibly makes them part of the crime.

I guess they better put out warrents for every single KGB Chief too.

WildCat
9th January 2011, 07:47 AM
I guess they better put out warrents for every single KGB Chief too.
:confused:

Many Soviet spies were arrested. Many others were kicked out of the country because they had diplomatic immunity.

You're not immune to US laws just because you're a foreigner.

If agents of Wikileaks did aid and abet Manning they are no longer disinterested 3rd parties, but part of ther crime.

Checkmite
9th January 2011, 01:42 PM
Wow, this is what I call a paranoid security state at the brink. Not really a good move,imo. Other than being petty and juvenile, I'd say it's pushing way beyonds the limit to personal privacy and intimidation by a paranoid rising authoritarian state. Someone is mad.

Welcome to the fact that the internet is not, nor has ever been, the decentralized no-man's land of free expression that its biggest fans like to pretend it is.

PhantomWolf
9th January 2011, 04:29 PM
:confused:

Many Soviet spies were arrested. Many others were kicked out of the country because they had diplomatic immunity.

You're not immune to US laws just because you're a foreigner.

If agents of Wikileaks did aid and abet Manning they are no longer disinterested 3rd parties, but part of ther crime.

So you're saying that people outside the US should be prosecutable for crimes that occured in the US? If so, then every KGB chef that ever sent a KGB agent to the US knowing or instructing them to commit a crime should be prosecuted. And likewise the US better start handing over all their CIA chefs for prosectution too.

barium
9th January 2011, 04:51 PM
So you're saying that people outside the US should be prosecutable for crimes that occured in the US? If so, then every KGB chef that ever sent a KGB agent to the US knowing or instructing them to commit a crime should be prosecuted. And likewise the US better start handing over all their CIA chefs for prosectution too.

I'm sure intelligence agencies play by a different rulebook. If you start going after their spy chiefs, they might go after yours.

But yeah, you will be extradited if you pay a hitman to kill someone in another country. Or if you hack computer systems located in other countries. That's nothing new.