A.LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER

• More allegations that Wikileaks is helping terrorists
• Is Qatar unduly affecting al-Jazeera’s clarity?
• Of course MSM wish leakers had come to them first
• Ending the occupation by telling Israel there will be a price
• Rudd misses main message of Wikileaks dump
• Wikileaks insurance policy is the internet itself
• Finding ways to wipe Tamils from the picture entirely
• Leading Australian politician defends Wikileaks
• More on the Assange accuser
• New South Wales Greens embrace BDS

More allegations that Wikileaks is helping terrorists   Posted: 06 Dec 2010 01:00 PM PST More challenges to the heart of the US empire: Wikileaks raised the stakes in its battle with America last night by releasing a secret list of all the global industries and assets that the US most wishes to protect. Security experts said that the cable, published by the whistleblower website as part of an unauthorised package of diplomatic correspondence, was a gift for terrorist organisations. It spelt out hundreds of pipelines, undersea cables and factories across the world, including a number in Britain, that would cause most damage to US interests if destroyed. Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a former British Defence and Foreign Secretary and chairman of the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee, said WikiLeaks had made no credible attempt to find out whether the material could assist terrorists. “This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal. This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing,” he added. A spokesman for Downing Street condemned the unauthorised release of classified information, saying: “The leaks and their publication are damaging to national security in the United States, Britain and elsewhere. “It is vital that governments are able to co-operate on the basis of confidentiality of information.” In Washington, Philip Crowley, Assistant Secretary of State, said: “There are strong and valid reasons information is classified, including critical infrastructure and key resources that are vital to the national and economic security of any country. “Julian Assange [the founder of WikiLeaks] may be directing his efforts at the United States but he is placing the interests of many countries and regions at risk. This is irresponsible.” But WikiLeaks said that the document, approved by Hillary Clinton, provided further evidence that the US Administration was hoarding sensitive information on countries without their knowledge. The Secretary of State faced embarrassment after earlier cables revealed that US diplomats were asked to collect information on high-ranking UN diplomats and other individuals. Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for the website, said: “This further undermines claims made by the US Government that its embassy officials do not play an intelligence-gathering role. “In terms of security issues, while this cable details the strategic importance of assets across the world, it does not give any information as to their exact locations, security measures, vulnerabilities or any similar factors, though it does reveal the US asked its diplomats to report back on these matters.” US embassies were told to update a 2008 list of critical infrastructure and key resources in their host countries whose loss would “critically impact the public health, economic security and/or national and homeland security of the United States”, according to the leaked cable. The order was under the direction of the Department for Homeland Security in co-ordination with the Department of State. The cable said: “Department is surveying posts for their input on critical infrastructure and key resources within their host country which, if destroyed, disrupted or exploited, would likely have an immediate and deleterious effect on the United States. “Posts are not/not being asked to consult with host governments with respect to this request.” The leaked document, written in February last year, gives Washington’s 2008 list of key infrastructure and resources overseas, naming each relevant country and its factories, railways, ports or other areas of interest. The file identifies where the US is reliant on a range of substances, from smallpox vaccines in Denmark to bauxite in Guinea and liquefied natural gas in the Middle East. Several underwater pipelines are listed in Japan, China and Britain, while Indonesia is flagged up for its tin mines and Iraq for its oil. The embassies are specifically asked not to include US government or “war-fighting” facilities, but a number of defence-related sites are listed, including three in Britain run by BAE Systems. A spokeswoman for the company said: “BAE Systems recognises its role as a custodian of key industrial and military assets. We would be concerned at any activity which comprises this.” The British sites identified in the latest cable, which include a telecommunications hub in Hereford, and one end of an undersea cable that stretches from Cornwall to New York, were already in the public domain, but it was not helpful to have them listed as being of such importance to the US, added Sir Rifkind.

Is Qatar unduly affecting al-Jazeera’s clarity? Posted: 06 Dec 2010 03:00 AM PST Al-Jazeera is a truly unique news service that covers the world in a way that no other global network does. However, there is always a risk when the major sourcing of funding is a Middle East dictatorship: Qatar is using the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera as a bargaining chip in foreign policy negotiations by adapting its coverage to suit other foreign leaders and offering to cease critical transmissions in exchange for major concessions, US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks claim. The memos flatly contradict al-Jazeera’s insistence that it is editorially independent despite being heavily subsidised by the Gulf state. They will also be intensely embarrassing to Qatar, which last week controversially won the right to host the 2022 World Cup after presenting itself as the most open and modern Middle Eastern state. In the past, the emir of Qatar has publicly refused US requests to use his influence to temper al-Jazeera’s reporting. But a cable written in November 2009 predicted that the station could be used “as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by al-Jazeera’s broadcasts, including the United States” over the next three years. Doha-based al-Jazeera was launched in 1996 and has become the most watched satellite television station in the Middle East. It has been seen by many as relatively free and open in its coverage of the region, but government control over its reporting appears to US diplomats to be so direct that they said the channel’s output had become “part of our bilateral discussions – as it has been to favourable effect between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and other countries”. In February, the US embassy reported to Washington how “relations [between Qatar and Saudi Arabia] are generally improving after Qatar toned down criticism of the Saudi royal family on al-Jazeera”. In July 2009, the US embassy said the channel “has proved itself a useful tool for the station’s political masters“. In one dispatch, the US ambassador, Joseph LeBaron, reported that the Qatari prime minister, Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, had joked in an interview that al-Jazeera had caused the Gulf state such headaches that it might be better to sell it. But the ambassador remarked: “Such statements must not be taken at face value.” He went on: “Al-Jazeera’s ability to influence public opinion throughout the region is a substantial source of leverage for Qatar, one which it is unlikely to relinquish. Moreover, the network can also be used as a chip to improve relations. For example, al-Jazeera’s more favourable coverage of Saudi Arabia’s royal family has facilitated Qatari-Saudi reconciliation over the past year.” Although LeBaron noted that the station’s coverage of the Middle East was “relatively free and open”, he added: “Despite GOQ protestations to the contrary, al-Jazeera remains one of Qatar’s most valuable political and diplomatic tools.” US allegations of manipulation of al-Jazeera’s content for political ends also contradict Qatar’s claim to support a free press. “The Qatari government claims to champion press freedom elsewhere, but generally does not tolerate it at home,” the US embassy said after the French director of the Doha Centre for Media Freedom resigned in June 2009, citing restrictions on the centre’s freedom to operate. In a clear example of the regional news channel being exploited for political ends, the Doha embassy claimed Sheikh Hamad (HBJ) told the US senator John Kerry that he had proposed a bargain with the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, which involved stopping broadcasts in Egypt in exchange for a change in Cairo’s position on Israel-Palestinian negotiations. “HBJ had told Mubarak ‘we would stop al-Jazeera for a year’ if he agreed in that span of time to deliver a lasting settlement for the Palestinians,” according to a confidential cable from the US embassy in Doha in February. “Mubarak said nothing in response, according to HBJ.” The US has benefitted, too. “Anecdotal evidence suggests, and former al-Jazeera board members have affirmed, that theUnited States has been portrayed more positively since the advent of the Obama administration,” a cable in November 2009 said. “We expect that trend to continue and to further develop as US-Qatari relations improve.” In 2001 the emir, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, refused a US request to stop al-Jazeera giving so much airtime to Osama bin Laden and other anti-American figures, saying: “Parliamentary life requires you to have a free and credible media, and that is what we are trying to do. “Al-Jazeera is one of the most widely watched [TV stations] in the Arab world because of its editorial independence.” The Gulf state has frequently held up al-Jazeera as evidence of its relative openness. The independent Visit Qatar website states: “What makes al-Jazeera such a unique channel in the Middle East is its editorial independence. “This has been seen by many as evidence that Qatar is one of the region’s more liberal and democratic countries, and one which provides freedom of press and speech.” Qatar maintains a working relationship with Iran, and the US embassy was concerned by the lack of al-Jazeera coverage of the civil unrest in Iran after the disputed presidential election in the summer of 2009. “Al-Jazeera’s coverage of the Iranian election and its aftermath has been scanty by comparison to other hot topics in the region, such as Gaza,” reported the embassy at the time. Al-Jazeera “has proved itself a useful tool for the station’s political masters”, the cables said. Local media are also affected by government interference. “Over the past three [visits] we have assessed as steady the lack of overall media freedom in Qatar,” the November cable said. “Although overt and official censorship is not present, self and discreet official censorship continue to render Qatari domestic media tame and ineffective.” Al-Jazeera last night denied the claims. A spokesman for the station said: “This is the US embassy’s assessment, and it is very far from the truth. Despite all the pressure al-Jazeera has been subjected to by regional and international governments, it has never changed its bold editorial policies which remain guided by the principles of a free press.” The embassy of Qatar in London declined to comment on the story last night.

Of course MSM wish leakers had come to them first Posted: 05 Dec 2010 11:37 PM PST Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young tweets on the Gillard government’s selective outrage: Would the govt be talking about passports & charges if [Murdoch’s] The Oz had got their hands on the leaks given to WikiLeaks first? I think not.

Ending the occupation by telling Israel there will be a price Posted: 05 Dec 2010 11:16 PM PST About bloody time and this needs to be enforced. If Britain and the EU are serious about Zionist occupation (and that’s doubtful) they need to do something about it. No more excuses: Britain’s new shadow foreign minister has called for her government to pressure the European Union to introduce labelling on West Bank products to differentiate between goods produced by Palestinians and Israeli settlers. Yvette Cooper told The Guardian on Saturday that the government should step up pressure on Israel to stop building settlements by pushing for greater Europe-wide transparency on food products exported from the West Bank. “The continued building of settlements in the occupied territories is illegal and a serious obstacle to peace,” she told the paper. “If EU member states can speak with one voice, including guidance to retailers on produce from settlements in the West Bank, it will send a strong signal on how important this is.” The Labor politician, who recently returned from a visit to the region, said she was against a blanket boycott of Israeli goods but believed that retailers and consumers should be informed whether products are produced “by illegal settlers.” “Consumers should be able to choose what produce they buy,” Cooper told the Guardian. “That includes knowing exactly where it came from and having access to all markets, including Gaza, whose population is still unable to export to the wider world.” Cooper also blamed both Israel and the Palestinians for “a worrying lack of urgency in the peace process.” Last December, while Labor was still in power, the government introduced voluntary guidelines calling for the clear labeling of goods and produce originating from the West Bank. It said the advisory was a response to consumer demand for information about the origin of produce that had been produced in the West Bank, and dismissed the accusation that the move would lead to a wider boycott of Israeli goods. Leading the call for labeling was the radical fringe group Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which calls for a complete boycott of Israel. “Importers, retailers, NGOs and consumers have asked the government for clarity over the precise origin of products from the occupied Palestinian territories,” Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary of State Hilary Benn said at the time. “The label ‘West Bank’ does not allow consumers to distinguish between goods originating from Palestinian producers and goods originating from illegal Israeli settlements.” The advisory drew an angry response from Israel, which said the move would promote further radicalization of the Palestinians. In September, there were concerns within the Jewish community when Ed Miliband, Labor’s first Jewish head, won his party’s leadership contest. An ardent socialist, most of his leadership campaign had been directed toward the left of the party, describing the direction of the party as “brutish US-style capitalism.” His narrow victory – gaining 50.65% of votes – owed much to votes from trade unions. The Conservative party said this would mean he’ll remain in debt to them, while MPs who supported his brother David for the party leadership warned that Ed Miliband’s dependence on union votes would be a “disaster” for the party. Many of Britain’s top unions support a boycott of Israel and severing ties with the Histadrut labor federation. Miliband, who is an atheist, told the party conference in October that Britain must “strain every sinew” to make Israel end the blockade of Gaza, He also condemned Israel’s response to the Gaza flotilla incident in May.

Rudd misses main message of Wikileaks dump Posted: 05 Dec 2010 10:59 PM PST Australia’s Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd doesn’t seem to understand the paradigm shift of the Wikileaks release. His answer is more secrecy, less transparency and less democracy. He may find himself more shocked in the months and years ahead. Here’s hoping: Kevin Rudd has suggested the United States “tighten things up a bit” following the publishing by WikiLeaks of confidential US documents. The Foreign Minister also said Australia had a “robust” diplomatic relationship with China and would not contact Beijing to smooth over relations following the embarrassing leaking of a conversation he had with Hillary Clinton. Mr Rudd was responding to revelations that while prime minister he warned the US Secretary of State in March 2009 that the world must be prepared to “deploy force” if China could not be integrated into the international system. He said today such releases of diplomatic material could occur at any time and without prior warning from the United States. “I think foreign ministers around the world from countries of all sorts of political traditions are scratching their heads a bit about this one at the moment. And I’m just being frank with you,” Mr Rudd said in Canberra. “You’ve had recent reports concerning heads of government being accused of corruption, of being associated with the mafia, of…..urging the United States to go to war against particular countries……. it does create a separate and new dynamic,” he said. “What now happens? I think rule number one for our friends in the United States is `how do you tighten things up a bit?”’ Mr Rudd also said diplomacy was a “robust” business and leaked documents were “part and parcel of the business of the relations between states”.

Wikileaks insurance policy is the internet itself Posted: 05 Dec 2010 08:08 PM PST Julian Assange speaks to El Pais: If there is a battle between the US military and the preservation of History, we have insured History will win…I believe geopolitics will be separated into pre and post cablegate phases.

Finding ways to wipe Tamils from the picture entirely Posted: 05 Dec 2010 05:51 PM PST He’s back. “Terrorism expert” Rohan Gunaratna loves to talk about violence and evil and is very close to the Colombo brutes. Here he is wishing that any resistance to the autocratic Rajapaksa regime would disappear. Dream on: The cancellation of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Oxford Union speech and the events leading to that controversial decision is a good wake-up call for the External Affairs Ministry to get their act together to develop a proper communication strategy and plan, international terrorism expert Prof Rohan Gunaratna said. “I think this is a good reminder to the Sri Lankan Government that the country needs to develop proper counter propaganda strategies. They also need to develop a proper communication strategy and plan, to bring out the reality of what happened in Sri Lanka. They can point out that the civilian deaths in Sri Lanka is much lower as a percentage compared to the civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan by US and British troops,” he said. According to the professor, the first step in the strategy is to dismantle the Global Tamil Forum. The second step should be to disable Nediyavan’s organisation, which is operating in Norway with considerable strength and expanding influence, he added.  And thirdly, he said the Sri Lankan Government should engage the NGOs. With the demise of the LTTE’s military wing, Prof Gunaratna said the ‘public face’ of the terrorist group had become quite active in propagating their ideology in western countries, and they were mainly doing it through NGOs. “Up till this day, the Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry does not have an NGO division. You must create a specialist NGO division because today NGOs are very powerful in the international system. And if the government continues to resist the NGOs, the LTTE and its fronts like the Global Tamil Forum will keep engaging these NGOs, and getting what they want,” he added. He also said Sri Lanka should handle international relations very delicately and pointed out that when some of the British leaders visited Sri Lanka they faced a difficult time here. “When those politicians returned to their home country the Tamil Tigers very cunningly adopted them as friends, and it is those British leaders who were humiliated in Sri Lanka earlier, who are now playing an active role against Sri Lanka.”

Leading Australian politician defends Wikileaks Posted: 05 Dec 2010 05:41 PM PST Australian Federal independent MP Andrew Wilkie: Mr Wilkie believes WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has not broken any US or Australian laws in publishing the documents. “It’s not Assange’s fault that this information is leaking out of the [US] administration – it’s the administration’s fault.”

More on the Assange accuser Posted: 05 Dec 2010 05:16 PM PST Mmm: Yesterday Alexander Cockburn reminded us of the news Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett broke at Counterpunch in September.   Julian Assange’s chief accuser in Sweden has a significant history of work with anti-Castro groups, at least one of which is US funded and openly supported by a former CIA agent convicted in the mass murder of seventy three Cubans on an airliner he was involved in blowing up.

New South Wales Greens embrace BDS Posted: 05 Dec 2010 05:05 PM PST At its State Delegates Council meeting held on the weekend in Sydney, the NSW Greens unanimously endorsed the following proposal: That the Greens NSW call upon all Australians and the Australian government to boycott Israeli goods, trading and military arrangements, and sporting, cultural and academic events as a contribution to the struggle to end Israel’s occupation and colonisation of Palestinian territory, the siege of Gaza and imprisonment of 1.5 million people, and Israel’s institution of a system of apartheid, by endorsing the following actions: 1. condemning Israel’s apartheid and occupation policies; 2. censuring Israel’s violations of the human rights of Palestinians and its failure to abide by international law; 3. halting any military cooperation or trade with Israel; 4. refraining from participation in any form of sporting event, academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions or teams except those that publicly oppose Israel’s apartheid and occupation policies; 5. advocating a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at national and international levels, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies to these institutions; and 6. supporting and promoting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel.