Mon Oct 15 04:19:15 UTC 2012



Basic solidarity in WikiLeaks & Anonymous.



By Julian Assange



Freedom isn't free, justice isn't free and solidarity isn't

free. They all require generosity, self-discipline, courage and a sense of perspective.



Groups with unity flourish and those without unity are

destroyed and replaced by those who have it.



Traditional armies gain unity through isolation, ritualized

obedience, and through coercive measures applied to

dissenters up to and including death.



Groups who do not have techniques of unity derived from

solidarity and common cause will be dominated by groups with coercive unity.



In the end it is the techniques of unity that dominate our

civilization. Unified groups grow and multiply. Groups which lack unity imperil themselves and their allies.



It doesn't matter what principles a group espouses. If it

is not able to demonstrate basic unity it will be dominated

by alliances that do.



When a group grows large the public press becomes a medium through which the group talks to itself. This gives the public press influence over the groups self-awareness. The public press has its agendas. So do insiders who speak to it.



For large groups, group insiders who interface with the public press are able to lever themselves into a position of

internal influence via press influence.



Because Anonymous is anonymous, those who obtain this or other forms of leadership influence can be secretly decapitated and replaced by other interests.



This is exactly what happened in the Sabu affair. An

important part of Anonymous ended up being controlled by the FBI. The cooption of its most visible figure, Sabu, was then used to entrap others.



FBI agents or informers have subsequently run entrapment

operations against WikiLeaks presenting as figures from

Anonymous.



According to FBI indictments the FBI has at various times

controlled Anonymous servers. We must assume that currently

a substantial number of Anonymous severs and "leadership"

figures are compromised. This doesn't mean Anonymous

should be paralyzed by paranoia. But it must recognize the

reality of infiltration. The promotion of "anonhosting.biz"

and similar assets which are indistinguishable from an

entrapment operations must not be tolerated.



The strength of Anonymous was not having leadership or

other targetable assets. When each person has little

influence over the whole, and no assets have special

significance, compromise operations are expensive

and ineffective. The cryptography used in Friends of

WikiLeaks is based on this principle while WikiLeaks as

an organization has a well tested public leadership cohort

inorder to prevent covert leadership replacement.



Assets create patronage and conflict around asset

control. This includes virtual assets such as servers,

Twitter accounts and IRC channels.



The question Anonymous must ask is does it want to be

a mere gang ("expect us") or a movement of solidarity. A

movement of solidaarity obtains its unity through common value and through the symbolic celebration of individuals whose actions strive towards common virtues.





Assessing the statement by "@AnonymousIRC".



In relation to alleged associates of WikiLeaks. It is

rarely in an alleged associates interest, especially

early in a case, for us to be seen to be helping them

or endorsing them. Such actions can be used as evidence

against them. It raises the prestige stakes for prosecutors

who are likely to use these alleged associates in a public

proxy war against WikiLeaks. We do not publicly campaign

for alleged associates until we know their legal team

approves and our private actions must remain private. This calculous should be obvious.



Several weeks ago, WikiLeaks began a US election related

donations campaign which expires on election day, Nov 6.



The WikiLeaks campaign pop-up, which, was activated weeks

ago, requires tweeting, sharing, waiting or donating once

per day.



Torrents, unaffected even by this pop-up remain available

from the front page.



These details should have been clearer but were available

to anyone who cared to read. The exact logic and number of

seconds are in the page source. We are time and resource

constrained. We have many battles to deal with. Other than

adding a line of clarification, we have not changed the

campaign and nor do we intend to.



We know it is annoying. It is meant to be annoying. It is

there to remind you that the prospective destruction of

WikiLeaks by an unlawful financial blockade and an array

of military, intelligence, DoJ and FBI investigations,

and associated court cases is a serious business.



WikiLeaks faces unprecedented costs due to involvement

in over 12 concurrent legal matters around the world,

including our litigation of the US military in the Bradley

Manning case. Our FBI file as of the start of the year

had grown to 42,135 pages.



US officials stated to Australian diplomats the the

investigation into WikiLeaks is of "unprecedented scale

and nature". Our people are routinely detained. Our editor

was imprisoned, placed under house arrest for 18 months,

and is now encircled in an embassy in London where he has

been formally granted political asylum. Our people and

associates are routinely pressured by the FBI to become

informers against our leadership.



Since late 2010 we have been under an unlawful financial

blockade. The blockade was found to be unlawful in the

Icelandic courts, but the credit companies have appealed

to the Supreme Court. Actions in other jurisdictions are

in progress, including a European Commission investigation

which has been going for over a year.



Despite this we have won every publishing battle and

prevailed over every threat. Last month the Pentagon

reissued its demands for us to cease publication of

military materials and to cease "soliciting" US military

sources. We will prevail there also, not because we are

adept, although we are, but because to do so is a virtue

that creates common cause.



Solidarity.



Julian Assange

Embassy of Ecuador

London

Reply · Report Post