08 January 2011

making headlines across the globe

[click image]


I so don't want to bother cleaning up another Salon post, but, as you must know already, the DoJ has subpoenaed Twitter for all their records on Julian Assange, Jacob Appelbaum, Birgitta Jónsdóttir, Rop Gonggrijp and Bradley Manning. It started out being a sealed order [here], but Twitter fought the confidentiality of it so they could notify their account holders of the subpoena, and won [here]. Here is the statute under which the subpoena was made.

As discussed relative to the Daley appointment, "the absolute stranglehold large-scale corporate interests exert over virtually all realms of government policy", the capture of our entire government by the very people who have caused and profit from the activities WikiLeaks exposes is complete. Here, clearly, is proof, if you yet needed any, they, not we, own the DoJ.

A snippet from Glenn's piece runs:
...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.
Indeed, Julian Assange has the same concern, and Glenn will have more on all this tomorrow..

I'm hoping he doesn't stick merely to bellyaching about this, but begins exhorting his fellow prominent proponents of the rule of law to DO SOMETHING dispositive about our government's CRIMINAL activity.


There are other concerns that need addressing:
Marc Rotenberg, president of the online watchdog the Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC) in Washington, said it appeared the US justice department was looking at building a case against WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, over its publication of secret US documents.

EPIC has already requested that the US authorities hand over information about their investigations into people who have donated to WikiLeaks via Mastercard, Visa or PayPal.

"The government has the right to get information, but that has to be done in a lawful way. Is there a lawful prosecution that could be brought against WikiLeaks? It seems unlikely to me. But it's a huge question here in the US," said Rotenberg.
This HAS TO BE stopped. We can't stump for the impeachment of Obama because the people who would be doing the impeaching need to be impeached themselves. Snap out of it! WE HAVE TO STOP THEM.

love, 99


  1. Twitter fought the confidentiality of it so they could notify their account holders of the subpoena

    Good for Twitter,
    But I too wonder about the others. They indeed seem more likely targets for the subpoenas.

  2. I see you coxed several versions out of the photos. In a blue mood now...

  3. Yes. Glad to see a San Francisco-based company taking a stand for the rule of law, but I think actually it wasn't much of one, would rather have seen them fight the subpoenaing at all, but seems better than what the others obviously did.

    I am serious. This shit has to stop. People must stop it. We can't keep TALKING about it. We have to STOP it.

  4. Except for some particular images, my blog cools off most before posting them. We are Winters, my blog and I, and so cooler colors are mostly the only ones that look good on us. Saffron is an exception, and certain reds.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.