Upload
this-day-in-wikileaks
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
1/6
WikiLeaks Press Conference
July 14, 2011
Kristinn Hrafnsson: Before we go into the details, I just want to mention that this is the subject matter
of this meeting, we are all aware of the case that was in court next door, yesterday and the day before,
the Royal Court of Justice. I will ask you to refrain from questions with regard to that matter, but I thinkJulian will shortly address that issue before we continue with the matter at hand. So Julian, would you
like to comment there?
Julian Assange: Yes, just a very few brief comments about the matter yesterday and on Tuesday. I see
this morning that there has been a lot of false reportage in the press. I must remind people of the
seriousness of reporting court proceedings accurately and fairly. Its a difficult job that people have to
do in deciding such matters and they should not be unduly influenced by inaccurate reportage. For
those people who wish to have more detail and accurate information, it is not my place to report on
matters given before the courts. However, I understand that there are others who were there, and there
are some websites, such as Sweden versus Assange, which are devoted to placing the public information
in an easily accessible manner. And that includes the skeleton arguments by the defense, and I believe
by the prosecution, also. Those are well worth reading and contain accurate details of what the matter
is about.
Kristinn Hrafnsson: The real overview of what weve been having to face as an organization since late
last year, the relentless attacks by the biggest and strongest financial institutions in the world. Which in
my belief are unprecedented and almost reminds you of blacklisting in the McCarthy era.
Julian Assange: Kristinn is quite right. The nearest analogy to what has been going on here is the
blacklisting under McCarthy. That is, certain press organizations or Hollywood figures, were blacklisting
from economic activity and their free rights of association in the United States as a result of a hysteriaabout Communist activity. We all know now that that was wrong. And in hindsight we can see that it
should not have happened, and it should be prevented from occurring again.
Last year, although WikiLeaks has been publishing for over four and a half years from 120
countries around the world, last year saw us publish, not for the first time, information from the United
States government, but rather much more information; thousands of files exposing the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan, together with dramatic footage showing the slaying of two Reuters journalists in Baghdad.
In response to that, right-wing politicians from the United States, and some within the US
Democratic Party, called for this organization to be declared a terrorist organization, and for its staff to
be treated as enemy combatants and slain at will, without any regard to international law. That political
pressure from Washington didnt stop at mere rhetoric. Pressure was applied to a number of countries,
including my home country Australia. Pressure also seems to have been applied, not in any legal
manner, but through connections in Washington, to the major financial institutions. And in December
last year, we saw an economic blockade established against WikiLeaks by Visa, MasterCard, the Bank of
America, Western Union, and PayPal. Now you might think that such a blockade would need to exist
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
2/6
some kind of official process, some kind of investigation by the authorities in the United States, and
adding us to a list of organizations that must be blockaded economically. However, that didnt happen.
There are only two known formal investigations into whether WikiLeaks should be financially
blockaded. One was conducted by Teller, the company licensed by Visa to process payments in
Scandinavia. It is Teller through which all WikiLeaks Visa payments were moving. Teller concluded thatWikiLeaks and Sunshine Press, the corporate registration affiliated with WikiLeaks in Iceland, had not
broken any Visa rules or regulations. The other was by the US Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy C.
Geithner, who issued his finding on January 13, that WikiLeaks had done nothing to warrant it being
placed on the US Treasury blacklist. The so-called, US specially designated persons list. And yet, here we
are in July, with an active economic embargo, still occurring against this organization by US financial
companies and their licensees without any reasonable explanation. So, we should look at has there in
fact been an attempt to lift this embargo, and is there a reason that these companies have for
conducting the blockade that they do.
Teller, the Danish company responsible for processing Visa payments, conducted its own
internal investigation and found that WikiLeaks, Sunshine Press did not breach Visa rules. Subsequently,
there have been a number of other attempts to reactivate Visa processing for WikiLeaks in different
countries. Those include through VALITOR in Iceland last month and on the 12th
of June, 2011, for some
12 hours, the gateway of payments to WikiLeaks opened up again through Iceland. However let me
correct that. An agreement was made with VALITOR on the 12th of June in 2011, and earlier this month
that was our payment gateway opened up for a period of some 12 hours and was then immediately shut
down. Visa issuing a statement saying that it was shut down because it was being used to process
payments for WikiLeaks, and it was against the policy of that company to permit donations to be
processed for WikiLeaks. And an email was sent from VALITOR, notifying that the agreement had been
terminated to us Notifying that the agreement had been terminated due to violations of the inquirysterms and due to the fact that the international card organizations do not allow the services provided to
WikiLeaks.
So, there is a question, what form of redress can this organization take and what other
organizations are in danger of being politically censored by the major financial institutions? Now any
small milk bar can chose who it does business with or not if it is in a free market and there are many
other grocery stores or milk bar stores, but it cannot choose to refuse to sell milk to a black man. And
when a financial institution becomes so large, that together with its nearest competitor it forms a
duopolyVisa and MasterCard together have 95% of the inquiring business in Europeadditional
responsibilities come into play. This is no longer a matter of free choice in the market because there is
no longer a free market. At that point, such companies have encoded within their market dominance
the functions of government. Banking services are essential for people to act in a modern economic
state, and when Visa and MasterCard together control 96% of card processing in Europe, they must act
in a fair and rational manner. It is not a matter for these companies operating in Europe, operating in
Australia, operating in Iceland, to enforce unwritten rules of US foreign policy. How can it be right for
someone in England who is a supporter of WikiLeaks, who wishes to provide us with the support that we
need to expose the truth, to be prevented from doing so by Visa Europe as a result of the licensing
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
3/6
conditions that Visa Europe is forced to maintain from Visa in the United States? Similarly, how can it be
right that an Icelander wishing to send money to WikiLeaks in Iceland is prevented from doing so by Visa
as a result, in all probability, of influence from Washington, influence which has not gone through any
due process or any formal procedure? And for people in the United States that wish to affiliate with
WikiLeaks, and show their affiliation by their donations, how can it be right that this duopoly of Visa and
MasterCard is able to, in practice, violate their affiliative rights? Well its not right, and that is why were
engaging in a legal attack on Visa and MasterCard in every jurisdiction where they operate, and in every
place where people who have Visa and MasterCards want to exercise their free choice to affiliate and
support this organization.
It is not just WikiLeaks who is at threat; all activist organizations are at threat. All media
organizations worth their salt, who maintain their cash flows as a result of generosity of the public, are
also at threat. For instance, the excuse used by Visa and MasterCard in some of their public statements
is that there are allegations flowing around that some of our publishing is sometimes, somehow.
Excuses used by Visa and MasterCard are that some of our publishing, sometime, somehow encourages
somewhere, some illegal activity, presumably referring to alleged sources. However, organizations likeGreen Peace are well known for engaging in what is sometimes to be alleged as illegal activity done for
the greater good. Similarly, Amnesty International is working all over the world, and journalists working
all over the world collecting information that the public needs to know are often accused by one country
or another of having encouraged or facilitated some illegal activity somewhere. However, WikiLeaks, its
directors, employees, and contractors have not been charged with any illegal activity. You compare that
to, for example, News International, who has had staff, employees, and contractors imprisoned for
illegal activity, and yet still we do not see US financial companies cutting off their services to News
International. Why not?
Julian Assange: The largest donation WikiLeaks has ever received was 20,000 Euro. Our donations comefrom a very large group of generous people who believe in our work. That is something that keeps us
impartial and also keeps us honest. On the last day of the Visa/MasterCard payment system being
opened we received 130,000 Euros and that was also the similar figure in proceeding days to that. I
understand that when the payment gateway opened very briefly for some hours last week, that there
were around 100,000 Euros, although it hadnt been advertised, was pushed through during that time.
So, we have lost around 90% of our donations in value terms and the estimated lost based on those
rough figures that we have so far, this is not a detailed analysis, but the estimated loss is some 15 million
Euros.
And on your question about News of the World, actually, we do have something to say about
that. First of all note that no person, no director, spokesperson, employee, or contractor of WikiLeaks
has even been charged with a crime in any country. And yet we have suffered this economic embargo
for the past six months, seven months now. And that News International, News of the World has been
charged multiple times for sourcing-related matters. Now, that said, it does appear based on the
allegations that in some cases News International overstepped the boundaries of what was ethical. That
does not mean that an entire newspaper should receive the death sentence. Rather, the few employees
or staff or managers should be investigated perhaps, and dealt with. But, should all the journalists in
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
4/6
News International and the entire paper go? Its always a loss to a community when it loses one of its
newspapers. So I would ask that people think carefully and distinguish between destroying an institution
and cleaning up bad apples.
Reporter 1: And how much money does WikiLeaks have today? How well have you run funds during this
campaign?
Julian Assange: The blockade has been combined with other difficulties. Recall it is not merely Visa and
MasterCard who are involved in this blockade, but they are the first two companies that we are going
after. It has made our operations difficult, trying. We have an intense duty of care to people who are at
threat around the world. And the blockade has interfered with our ability to dispense that duty of care.
So, it is more than just a monetary issue.
Reporter 1: Sure but, is there a risk of WikiLeaks to become financially unviable if you dont get this
blockade?
Julian Assange: There is a risk. That said, we are committed to staying afloat and we will fight to dowhatever it takes to stay afloat and continue to dispense our mission. And this legal case being one of
those actions.
Reporter 2: I just want to repeat the question of differentiating between receiving information in order
to help the public, and receiving information by people like News Corp who cross the line. Can you
distinguish between the two cases?
Julian Assange: The News Corp case is not one that I have been following closely in recent weeks. So I
would not like to go into details of the wrongs and rights of that case. Only to say, more generally, that
in our fervor to deal with the unethical practices that seem to have occurred in News Corp, that we
should be careful of producing collateral damage that will destroy the ability of investigative journalists
to act in the public good.
Reporter 3: Its obviously been quite a few months since the sensational diplomatic cables was leaked. Is
this solely due to the blockade, as you call that, that weve heard less from WikiLeaks? (inaudible) I know
you cant talk about the extradition trial, but has that factored into it? Why is that we havent heard so
much from you in the last seven or eight months or have you got something coming up for us?
Kristinn Hrafnsson: Can I just correct you on the Cablegate project. It is very much ongoing and it has
been ongoing since the end of November. It has been expanding in scope. It has been creating
sensational stories in countries around the world, even though we in this little corner of the world calledWestern Europe have been deprived of that information because of our narrow scope. But as of now we
have released about 20,000 of the cables, which is less that 10% of the entire process. With an ongoing
project with regard to how slowly that has been ongoing, we and possibly the affect of the obstructions
weve had from financial or blockades with financial companies, it is quite possible we could have
worked on a rather faster pace. It has slowed us down, the operations. As has the case that was in court
next door, yesterday and the day before, as weve said before.
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
5/6
Julian Assange: And Id like to agree with Kristinn, it has tremendously impeded our operations, just like
any organization thats cut off from 90% of its revenues. That said, we have released some 4,000 cables
this week. The elections in Peru seem to have been effected by the recent work that we have done.
Theres over 30 front pages of The Hindu in India that have come out since March 17. So all around the
world the effects of WikiLeaks are being felt in an ongoing way. Because we started first with the English
press, that material that the English press found to be relevant to its own countries has diminished.
Although I note that a statistical analyses about a month ago showed that one in every two issues of the
New York Times on a daily basis cited our material.
Reporter 4: Julian, this is from Times of India and (inaudible). This question has to do with India. There
were lots of people hoping that the Rudolph Elmer discs would have a lot of Indian names. But there
was a story in the Reuters recently that you didnt find anything on those discs. Is that correct?
Julian Assange: We cant comment on issues that have to do with sourcing. However, let us note that
Rudolph Elmer has been in prison, in Switzerland, for six months now without charge. And let us
contemplate what kind of regime the west is falling into when I can be held, without charge, for seven
months under house arrest, where Rudolph Elmer can be held in Switzerland for six months without
charge, and where people, as we all know, can be held for over seven years in Guantanamo bay, without
charge, and in fact seem to have no hope of being released.
Reporter 4: You have also said there have been messages sent to you that say if you return those discs
Rudolph Elmer might be free. (inaudible)
Julian Assange: Those messages which were bordering on coercion were sent to us over that case, that
is correct.
R
eporter 4: And nothing has changed even though nothing has been found on those
Julian Assange: And nothing has changed.
Reporter 5: May I ask you if you are worried about your freedom?
Kristinn Hrafnsson: Is this a question for Julian?
Julian Assange: About my personal freedom?
Reporter 5: Yes.
Julian Assange: We have an ongoing grand jury process in the United States, six kilometers from thecenter of Washington, that has been rounding up people believed to be associated with WikiLeaks in
one way or another, and forcing them to coercively testify with no lawyers present and no judge
present. There are four prosecutors. There is a grand jury selected from that suburb in the United States
which has the highest density of military and defense employees anywhere. So it is a rubber-stamping
process for the Department of Justice to do anything they want, in particular to violate separation
between executive and the judiciary. That is a well-known problem in jurisprudence; it is something that
8/6/2019 WikiLeaks Press Conference 14Jul11
6/6
the United Kingdom banished years ago. It is a star-chamber process. And well see where it goes. At this
stage, no one has been charged as a result of the grand jury investigation, but it continues.
Kristinn Hrafnsson: Any other question before we call it a day?
Reporter 6: Given all this stuff in December, why are you only taking action now?
Kristinn Hrafnsson: Well I mean, there has been correspondence between WikiLeaks and the lawyers
acting on behalf of DataCell and WikiLeaks, the card companies there have been attempts to have
these gateways reopened over time. We have been in preparation of the legal issues and formally over a
month ago, the credit companies were told that we were ready to take this last step and they were
offered a chance to negotiate a settlement, which they did not, and have not yet formally replied to.
Although, they have acknowledged the receipt of our letter and claims. So this has been a long
procedure, but there has been correspondence between us, meaning WikiLeaks and DataCell, and the
card companies, leading up to this decision today.
Julian Assange: So this is a complaint to the European Commission. Its a non-trivial document toproduce if its going to be effective, which I believe it will be. This doesnt include the annexes which
(inaudible). As a small journalism organization, we have been attacked through legal means and illegal
means since, especially since last December. We have lost 90% of our revenues as a result of the
Visa/MasterCard attack. We have lost other revenues as a result of the PayPal attack. We have lost
other revenues as a result of Bank of Americas blockade. Similarly, had you not only deal with the
largest publishing operation we have done to date, now in over 50 countries with over 90 media
partners, we have had to defend ourselves and our sources from various threats and consider those
cases of the two alleged sources that are both now in prison. So, it has been a very difficult and
productive six months for us. So, that is part of the reason it has taken this amount of time. But, we have
also tried to negotiate a reasonable settlement with these card companies. Its not that we do notunderstand the McCarthyist hysteria that was around in December and January. But that hysteria has
now largely passed. And so, any excuse by these companies that thats just the Realpolitik of dealing
with Washington, can no longer be maintained. They have a responsibility as European registered
companies, sub-licensed from the United States, to act within the European law, and they have not.
(transcript by m_cetera)