USG - Google Investigation of WikiLeaks Staff - Broad Attack on Free Speech & Free Press

Google, gag orders and WikiLeaks: who’s lying? Jeff John Roberts    Feb. 2, 2015 - 6:26 AM PST The political fallout of WikiLeaks has passed, but the fury of law enforcement has not. More than four years after the organization published a trove of U.S. diplomatic cables, federal agents continue to wage a secret legal campaign to put the screws to those responsible. This month, a new twist to the story emerged as lawyers for WikiLeaks accused Google of betraying its users by secretly turning over their communications to the Justice Department. Google shot back that it did all that it could, but the government stifled the company with gag orders. The dispute suggests someone is not telling the truth but, at a deeper level, points to the problem of secret rabbit holes in the U.S. justice system that obscure the existence of criminal investigations. [ ... ] ... the biggest liar in the Google-WikiLeaks affair: the U.S. government, which claims that national security requires it to disregard even the most basic principles of procedural justice by scrubbing the very existence of certain dockets — including ones that appear to have no obvious tie to security. Keep in mind that the secret court orders related to the Google-WikiLeaks conflict are not about disrupting potential terrorist plots. Instead, they represent a process for the Justice Department to search the correspondence of people who consider themselves to be journalists, and to use gag orders to ensure it takes years to learn a search has taken place at all. This is just the latest spread of a shadow justice system that serves to breed paranoia and distrust. Whether you believe Google or WikiLeaks, their current dispute wouldn’t exist in the first place if the Justice Department scaled back its use of secret investigations. “Central to this whole question, is not just Google, but the federal government,” Ratner said. “This entire investigation, including the search warrants, is a broad attack on free speech and free press. It should have never begun, and certainly should have ended long ago.” EXTRACT ONLY - FULL @ SOURCE https://gigaom.com/2015/02/02/google-gag-orders-and-wikileaks-whos-lying/ COMMENT An example of the US government misusing the law to target and punish foreign journalists exercising free speech and freedom of press. PS   The impact of US secret investigations campaign against these journalists would have an implication for all journalists, including Americans.

NZ -- Attack on Media -- 'Dirty Politics: Police raid Nicky Hager's home'

NZ >>> Dirty Politics: Police raid Nicky Hager's home Updated 16 min ago 4:28 PM Monday Oct 6, 2014 Dirty Politics author Nicky Hager has had his home raided by police searching for the hacker Rawshark. In a 10-hour search of his house, Hager said computers and papers were seized in what appeared to be an attempt to discover the identity of the person who provided information used in the Dirty Politics book. The book was an election bombshell based on hacked email and social media material belonging to WhaleOil blogger Cameron Slater. The person contacted the Herald and Fairfax using the identity Rawshark while using the Twitter handle @whaledump to release information publicly. Hager said five officers came to his Wellington home last Thursday with a search warrant. He was in Auckland at the time the police arrived giving lectures at the University of Auckland. "Soon after the police arrived, the lead detective stated that I was not a suspect in their case, merely a witness." Hager said he told the detective there was nothing in his house which held information that would uncover the source. "Nonetheless, he and his four colleagues seized a large collection of papers and electronic equipment belonging to my family, including computers, drives, phones, CDs, an IPOD and a camera." [Intimation and harassment?] Hager said the search and seizure of the material was a "fishing expedition" carried out by officers who had no idea who they were looking for, hoping for a lucky break. "I am confident that the police took nothing that will help them with their investigation." Hager said he would not cooperate with police in any way to reveal the Dirty Politics source - or any other source. "I believe the police actions are dangerous for journalism in New Zealand. "It matters to all people working in the media who could similarly have their property searched and seized to look for sources. People are less likely to help the media if the police act in this way. "The police want people to respect their role in society; they should in turn respect other people's roles in society." He said he was speaking to his lawyers about challenging the police action. Source:  NZ Herald - here.   COMMENT This is HUGE!   It's another attack on press/media by governments. In this case a newly elected Key government that waited until after the election to throw its weight around.  Gee, I wonder why. The press is under attack in the US (where the WH is clamping down on providing information & harassing journalists), in the UK where journalists are spied on by police abusing anti-terror powers, under attack in Australia with the new 'anti-terror' gagging laws ... and under attack in NZ, as above!!! It seems huge to me.  But I'm new to watching this stuff, so maybe this is an ongoing battle?  Or maybe not.  New laws; new mass surveillance; surveillance (Five Eye) in concert; world wide police state? Further reading: NZ - Whistleblower http://www.zdnet.com/hacker-rawshark-disrupts-nz-election-campaign-7000033148/ "A Cabinet minister has resigned after an email revealed her contact with a controversial blogger"  --  31/08/2014 US - EU Attack on Freedom of Press     Glen Greenwald (via Twitter) EU's "right to forget" law now resulting in forced removal of NYT articles from Google searches https://twitter.com/jenny8lee/status/518539859527741440 …

Article: 'How UK Liberals Helped Police Hack the Press'

UK >>> How UK Liberals Helped Police Hack the Press Tabloid-bashing crusaders enabled the state to treat journalists like jihadists. Now these same public figures are apparently up in arms about the Met’s use of RIPA secretly to hack into journalists’ phone records, protesting that these are the methods of a police state. If so, it is a police state that was armed and invited to curtail press freedom by our illiberal liberals. Source - SPIKEDONLINE - here COMMENT While I'm still on, thought I'd post a link to this exciting article.  Why exciting?  Because it affirms my view of all those unscrupulous 'victimhood' exploiters in the UK trying to shut down the free press.

Greenwald Article: Australia's Prime Minister gives a Master Class in Exploiting Terrorism Fears to Seize New Powers

AUSTRALIA Tony Abbott >> Gives a Master Class in Exploiting Terrorism Fears to Seize New Powers http://interc.pt/1r1sgC0  >> #auspol >> #FreeAssangeNow Glenn Greenwald is so funny: greater chance of being killed by following causes than you do by terrorist attack: slipping in bathtub ...LOL #auspol "It’s our acceptance that ppl can live & worship in the way they choose that bothers them, not our foreign policy” - [ABBOTT] LOL > “a sweeping suppression order will prevent reporting of ..preventative detention orders.." / No Press = No democracy #auspol -----------------------------------------  COMMENT The Greenwald article was informative and made its point; but it was also very funny.  Well, to me, it was.   The need to broaden existing powers of authorities is questionable, when they have extensive powers already. And, yes, I would have to agree that those in power use the fear-factor and 'matters of national security' to pronounce whatever laws they want. Mind you, governments tend to rush through whatever they want once they're in power, so this is probably just the extreme version of what goes on -- the extreme version that involves widening powers to ridiculous degrees (eg 'preventative detention') AND, worse yet, muzzling the press who are prohibited from reporting what's going on.   That right there is a recipe for abuse of power by the state. The state can basically do whatever it wants to do with you and there's nobody out there that can even report on it! Is this Stalinist Australia?

USA - Guantanamo Bay - Hunger Strike - Media Suppression

U.S.A. US 'Secret State' #US national security state w/in a state = 6 million classified persons (larger than Norway, NZ or Scotland pop)! >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aMYqzGwwoF8 … Guantanamo Info re Guantanamo Bay, #Cuba is being withheld from press (+ public) ... media don't know how many on hunger strike ... infowars > Get this: ".. or how frequently assaults on guards take place" infowars GTFOOH, it's the other way around. A joke article?    Torture "I prohibited – w/out exception or equivocation – the use of torture by ..USA. I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed" TheHill >> That was Obama 5 years ago @ UN Assembly - http://goo.gl/8QSRWg  >> Man, what happened? Still unwanted 'tenant' of Cuba? “Under international law, States have an obligation to prevent & combat torture ..." ohchr/org >> Does TonyAbbott's legislator know this? >> "Every nation must know: America will live its values, and we will lead by example." ... LOL ... Stop squatting in Cuba! Media http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/218224-global-commitment-to-healing-torture-survivors This article is SO COOL - "Global commitment to healing torture survivors" [TheHill]... Makes you feel all warm & cuddly when you read that. > "donations from ..international community into one fund for torture survivor rehabilitation" .. The Sadists' torture kitty? TheHill so obvious .. 1) Obama bull re commitment 2) Torture fund healing worlds tortured victims 3) launch into Real Agenda: slam #Syria "human rights atrocities committed in Syria " - ATROCITIES ppl!! > UN Puppet has run out of words 2 depict gravity of crimes! -----------------------------------------------------  COMMENT Guantanamo must be a sensitive subject for the Americans.   Just as soon as I posted the information that the press is being muzzled, some guy jumped on to point the finger at Cuba! Hopefully the above makes sense.  It does to me, but that might be because I handled the information and it's fresh in my mind. Not sure if the InfoWars people are referring to a *current* hunger strike, or if it was just general information that they're after that's being suppressed by the Obama government. In any event, it's an interesting snippet of America's goings on. Should mention this is part of a wider story -- journalists unhappy about White House suppression of press that's been ongoing (eg  picky re foreign affairs correspondents, reward those that comply & exclude those that challenge authorities (ie do their jobs), law suit regarding NY journalist (think he may have been investigated, spied on, searched and basically harassed, from recollection).  Don't remember the name of the journalist or too may of the particulars, but I think the case is a big deal and it relates to freedom of press etc.   From prior information, it's known that the NSA have been involved in vetting news (LA Times former reporter). Reporters also unhappy in USA that even common reporting (such as routine crime data & statistics etc, that were previously available at police stations as a matter of course) are now being blocked by officials at police stations, who consider the press an intrusion these days.   Just going by memory.  Citations are here somewhere on blog, I'm too lazy to search for links.   Tried to set up the standard Google search thing in Blogger, but it wasn't working.  Might have to tackle it again some time, as it's pretty handy. And check out the size of the US 'secret state'!

US - SURVEILLANCE & CONSTRAINTS ON PRESS

Pursuit of journalist endangers freedom of the press By Amy Goodman / Syndicated Columnist PUBLISHED: Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 12:02 am The Obama administration’s espionage case against alleged CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling is expected to come to trial soon, six years after he was indicted. In addition to Sterling, also on trial will be a central pillar of our democratic society: press freedom. Federal prosecutors allege that Sterling leaked classified information to New York Times reporter and author James Risen. Risen has written many exposes on national security issues. In one, published in his 2006 book “State of War,” he details a failed CIA operation to deliver faulty nuclear bomb blueprints to the government of Iran, to disrupt its alleged weapons program. Federal prosecutors think Sterling leaked the details to Risen. They want Risen to divulge his source in court, which he has so far refused to do, asserting the First Amendment’s protections of the free press. James Risen has vowed to go to jail rather than “give up everything I believe in.” The role that confidential sources play in investigative journalism was perhaps best popularly demonstrated by journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. They had a confidential source dubbed “Deep Throat,” who gave them leads, confirmed details and instructed them to “follow the money.” With the help of that source, they uncovered wrongdoing at the highest levels of government that ultimately led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation from office in 1974. At about the same time, revelations about FBI, CIA and NSA misconduct and outright criminality led to congressional investigations that prompted creation of new laws, like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was supposed to rein in abuses, requiring a court-issued warrant for surveillance. Then, 9/11 happened, and, as common wisdom now holds, “everything changed.” The administration of George W. Bush initiated a wide spectrum of activities, including torture, kidnapping, warrantless wiretapping and, of course, the invasion and occupation of Iraq based on falsified intelligence and a sprawling propaganda initiative, conducted with a largely compliant mass media. These abuses came to light thanks to the work of investigative journalists like James Risen and to whistleblowers who take great risks, personally and professionally, to bring abuses of power to public attention. Risen has taken his case to court, where a federal district judge threw out the subpoena against him. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the subpoena. The U.S. Supreme Court, at the Obama administration’s urging, declined to hear the case. Risen thus has exhausted his legal appeals and will either have to testify in Sterling’s trial or face contempt of court charges, which can include fines and jail time. “As long as I’m attorney general,” Eric Holder promised, “no reporter who is doing his job is going to go to jail.” If Sterling’s federal prosecutors compel Risen to testify, it’s not clear what Holder’s promise will be worth. One reason the district court judge threw out the subpoena against Risen is that the prosecutors already have a strong case against Sterling, and they don’t need Risen’s confirmation that Sterling was the source. The case against Sterling includes James Risen’s credit-card and bank statements, telephone records and other information allegedly linking the two. Therein lies another profound threat to journalism: the unprecedented level of surveillance of everyone, including journalists. Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union jointly released a report in July, “With Liberty to Monitor All: How Large-Scale U.S. Surveillance is Harming Journalism, Law and American Democracy.” In detailing the negative impacts on journalism by mass surveillance, they quote Brian Ross, chief investigative correspondent for ABC News, who said: “I feel … like somebody in the Mafia. You’ve got to go around with a bag full of quarters and, if you can find a pay phone, use it, or, like drug dealers use, throwaway burner phones. These are all the steps that we have to take to get rid of an electronic trail. To have to take those kind of steps makes journalists feel like we’re criminals and like we’re doing something wrong.” No, investigative journalists are not doing something wrong. The online activist group Roots Action has a petition with over 125,000 signatures to halt legal action against James Risen. A crackdown on the press makes it harder to get information out, ultimately violating the public’s right to know. There is a reason why journalism is protected by the U.S. Constitution: A free press is an essential check and balance, necessary to hold those in power accountable. Journalism is essential to the functioning of a democratic society. http://www.abqjournal.com/446840/opinion/pursuit-of-journalist-endangers-freedom-of-the-press.html

Human Rights Watch - Report

With Liberty to Monitor All
How Large-Scale US Surveillance is Harming Journalism,
Law, and American Democracy 

 - here.


How's this? 

Journalists are unbelievably under the thumb in the US.

I've not read the report but will go back and do so at some stage.

OBAMA - Where's the TRANSPARENCY?

Rift grows between Obama, media as press groups blast administration ‘spin’ Published August 13, 2014 July 16, 2014: President Obama talks in the press briefing room at the White House.Reuters While Congress is on recess and President Obama vacations in Martha's Vineyard, a coalition of free press groups is escalating an already-aggressive campaign against the Obama administration for allegedly freezing out the press and cracking down on reporters. The flood of critical letters and petitions and statements from First Amendment groups marks a new level of tension in a relationship that for years has been deteriorating. Though Obama, as a candidate in 2008, was widely seen to enjoy favorable media treatment, his administration now is fielding accusations that it's one of the least transparent in history. Society of Professional Journalists President David Cuillier, in a statement earlier this week, blasted the administration for what he called "excessive message management and preventing journalists from getting information on behalf of citizens." SPJ is among the groups that's been leading the charge on the issue. Last month, more than three dozen groups, including SPJ, wrote to the White House about what they described as growing censorship throughout federal agencies. [...] ... vowed greater transparency going forward and pointed to several steps the administration has taken: like processing more "freedom of information" requests, declassifying records and releasing information on White House visitors. "Typical spin and response through non-response," Cuillier shot back. He said he hopes the administration is "sincere" about being more open, "but we want action. We are tired of words and evasion." Media groups are gearing up for another confrontation on Thursday, when they plan to present a petition with 100,000 signatures -- backed by the Committee to Protect Journalists, the Freedom of the Press Foundation and others -- to the Justice Department. It calls for the administration to halt legal action against New York Times reporter James Risen, who detailed a botched CIA effort during the Clinton administration to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. Risen's reporting is at the center of criminal charges against former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling. Federal prosecutors want to force Risen to testify about his sources at Sterling's trial, and the Supreme Court recently refused to get involved in the case. Risen argued he has a right to protect his sources' identity, either under the Constitution or rules governing criminal trials. A federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., earlier rejected Risen's bid to avoid being forced to testify. At the same time federal prosecutors have fought Risen in court, Attorney General Eric Holder has suggested that the government would not seek to put Risen in jail should he refuse to testify as ordered. But journalist groups want assurances. Risen also is expected to speak during a press conference at the National Press Club on Thursday afternoon. The case follows tension last year surrounding the Justice Department's snooping on Fox News' reporter James Rosen's phone records and emails, and its seizure of AP phone records in the course of leak investigations. The controversy over those actions led to some reforms at the Justice Department. [...] EXTRACT ONLY  - FULL @ SOURCE http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/13/rift-grows-between-obama-media-as-press-groups-blast-administration-spin/

Hard to believe there's any tension b/w press and government when the mainstream press seems to always carry whatever the official government/corporate line may be (eg Ukraine reporting).

TURKEY & OTHERS GAOL JOURNALISTS

Turkey   By AFP 6:04PM BST 08 Aug 2014 Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey's prime minister, faced a new outcry on Friday over his attitude to the media and women after he branded a prominent female journalist a "shameless woman" and told her "to know your place". Just ahead of Sunday's presidential election which he is clear favourite to win, Erdogan attacked Amberin Zaman, who writes for the Economist and the Turkish daily Taraf, over comments she made in a television debate. She had asked the main opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu in the debate whether any Muslim society was capable of challenging its authorities. Mr Erdogan lashed out at Ms Zaman, without mentioning her directly by name, at an election rally in the eastern city of Malatya on Thursday, calling her a "shameless woman".  "A militant in the guise of a journalist, a shameless woman... Know your place!" he declared. "They gave you a pen and you are writing a column in a newspaper... and you insult a society that is 99 percent Muslim," he said, drawing loud boos from the crowd. This is not the first time Mr Erdogan has lashed out at journalists, who have come under increasing pressure in Turkey, which has more reporters behind bars than any other country in the world. [...] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/11022632/Turkish-PM-tells-female-reporter-to-know-your-place.html

Never mind the 'shameless woman' bit.  They gaol journalists!  I had no idea.  And it's not just one or two bad boys; it's 40 journalists in the one year.

Check out this article for places not to work if you're a journalist:

• Turkey, Iran, and China accounted for more than half of all journalists imprisoned around the world in 2013

• Eritrea remained Africa’s worst jailer of journalists, with 22 behind bars compared with 28 in 2012. Eritrea is the world’s worst abuser of due process; no Eritrean detainee has ever been publicly charged with a crime or brought before a court for trial.  

• Vietnam was holding 18 journalists, up from 14 a year earlier, as authorities intensified a crackdown on bloggers, who represent the country’s only independent press.

• The number of prisoners rose in Ethiopia, Bahrain, and Somalia, in addition to Vietnam.

[used mostly anti-state charges to silence a combined 107 critical reporters, bloggers, and editors]

 http://cpj.org/reports/2013/12/second-worst-year-on-record-for-jailed-journalists.php

That journalist that was expelled from Turkey the other day was LUCKY!

Turkey - No freedom of press / freedom of speech

Turkey Deports Journalist for Criticizing Government on Twitter

By SEBNEM ARSU and ROBERT MACKEY

February 8, 2014 8:29 pmFebruary 10, 2014 6:16 pm

ISTANBUL — Turkey deported an Azerbaijani journalist on Friday for “posting tweets against high-level state officials,” according to an Interior Ministry order obtained by his newspaper, the English-language daily Today’s Zaman.

The journalist, Mahir Zeynalov, was “put on a list of foreign individuals who are barred from entering Turkey,” the newspaper reported, one month after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan filed a criminal complaint against him for tweeting links to articles about a corruption scandal involving Mr. Erdogan’s government. According to the complaint, Mr. Zeynalov “committed a crime by exceeding the limit of criticism.”

As his followers on Twitter observed the drama in real time, Mr. Zeynalov and his wife, the Turkish national Sevda Nur Arslan, appeared at Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport early on Friday and surrendered to immigration officials. The couple had decided to leave the country on their own terms before the police showed up at their home. 

FULL @ SOURCE

SOURCE - here.

Deported?  OMG.  Over tweets?

Turkey's not big on press freedoms then.



 

AUSTRALIAN 'SUPER-INJUNCTION'

WikiLeaks and the courts: keep the debate open By Carla Silbert Posted about 7 hours ago The ability of state institutions to shield their actions from public scrutiny is scandalous, and WikiLeaks' latest exposé adds a new and disturbing dimension to this issue, writes Carla Silbert. Australians have found themselves the beneficiaries of WikiLeaks' latest exposé - the publication of a Victorian Supreme Court suppression order so broad in scope that even the order itself is suppressed. ... It comes as little surprise that this "super-injunction" - an order that suppresses not just information such as the identity of a witness from publication, but the contents of the order itself - has come from Victoria, the state notorious as the "gag order capital" of Australia. ... When the reasons behind a court's actions remain secret, there can't be any scrutiny of those actions. That can never be in the public interest. In an era when the privacy of Australians is being increasingly compromised by the introduction of powers such as those currently being considered by Parliament to enable ASIO and ASIS to spy on private citizens in the National Security Legislation Amendment Bill, the ability of state institutions to shield their actions from public scrutiny is all the more scandalous. The WikiLeaks release has added a new, and troubling, dimension to this. Not only does the court have the power to keep us both ignorant and unaware of information of national concern, but if the cat gets let out of the bag and the documents are leaked as they have been here, we immediately find our freedom of speech restricted by threats of prosecution if we dare discuss it. Such discussions are vital to our ability to challenge the reasons why this information was withheld from us in the first place. Without these discussions, those doing the withholding can't be held to account. Extracts SOURCE - ABC - here.

So you elect a government and then the government (along with unelected intelligence agencies who presumably work for the public) do whatever they like; and then they go running to court to use the excuse of 'national security' to erode civil liberties and to fetter freedom of press, while they're scrambling to cover up some international scandal that involves government.

Having shut down scrutiny and debate by way of secret court order, the government's deftly sidestepped transparency and accountability and has, ultimately, undermined notions of democratic government.

How can this possibly be right?

WHITE HOUSE CONTROL OF MEDIA

Ted Rall's Site

RE- KABUL CIA CHIEF

Fired journalist:

Until last week I was working this story for Pando Daily, where I was a staff writer and cartoonist. We intended to publish the name — not to endanger him (which in any case would not have been possible since Langley had yanked him off his post), but to take a stand for adversarial media.

Journalists ought to publish news wherever they find it, whatever it is, damn the consequences. Credible media organizations don’t protect government secrets. They don’t obey spy agencies. Real journalists don’t cooperate with government — any government, any time, for any reason. My editor and I believed that, by demonstrating a little fearlessness, we might inspire other media outfits to grow a pair and stop sucking up to the government.

There is no longer a “we.” Pando fired me over the weekend, along with the investigative journalist David Sirota.

... Read rest @ Rall's blog ...
http://rall.com/tag/cia

-------------------------------------------


So much for freedom of press and freedom of speech.

Welcome to 'Democracy', Ukraine.

COUNTERPUNCH: MEDIA IGNORES CIA IN UKRAINE

Counterpunch Article Extracts July 30, 2014 Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain The Media Ignores the CIA in Ukraine by BILL BLUNDEN http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/07/30/the-media-ignores-the-cia-in-ukraine/ A few days back the Economist published an essay which dismissed the idea of fascists in Kiev as an illusory product of Russian propaganda. Are readers supposed to categorically assume that U.S. intelligence has played absolutely no role in the coup d’état? So far the bulk of the American media’s coverage of the Ukraine deftly sidesteps the CIA’s role. Yet all of the signs are there. Former CIA Officer John Stockwell explained that “stirring up deadly ethnic and racial strife has been a standard technique used by the CIA.” Students of history (e.g. Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Chile, and Nicaragua) will also recognize many of the hallmarks of a covert destabilization operation. Senator John McCain sharing a stage with Oleh Tyahnybok [Svoboda] in the early days of the coup CIA director Brennan’s discreet visit to the Ukraine (buried near the end of a Reuters brief) taped phone call where Victoria Nuland essentially selects who would replace the deposed president disproportionate number of high-level officials in the new government linked to neo-fascist groups CIA has a well-documented history of supporting authoritarian regimes. If the far-right represents only a small contingent of the Ukrainian electorate, as we’ve been told by allegedly credible sources like Timothy Snyder, how exactly did they end up with so many powerful government slots? A report by FAIR provides unsettling details: “The new deputy prime minister, Oleksandr Sych, is from Svoboda; National Security Secretary Andriy Parubiy is a co-founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party, Svoboda’s earlier incarnation; the deputy secretary for National Security is Dmytro Yarosh, the head of Right Sector. Chief prosecutor Oleh Makhnitsky is another Svoboda member, as are the ministers for Agriculture and Ecology” Media’s penetration by the intelligence community ... May ... White House ... accidentally leaked the name of the CIA station chief in Afghanistan to roughly 6,000 reporters. The White House asked reporters to dutifully “zip it” and that’s exactly what they did. ... one reporter who dared to cross the line and mention the station chief’s name and in print, Ted Rall, was summarily fired before he got the chance. Never mind that this sort of information is all over the Internet. [US-NATO EXPANSION INTO UKRAINE] Karl Rove aptly crystallized the prevailing mindset: ... The empire has its sights on expansion. Despite promises made to Gorbachev decades ago by then Secretary of State James Baker that NATO wouldn’t expand into former Soviet countries, that’s exactly what’s been underway.  Putin can see this happening and if he’s meddling in the Ukraine it’s only because he’s following the CIA’s lead. Note:  this is not complete article - go to article link above to view entirety.

So what would be the chances of CIA not being involved?

That leopard ain't changing its spots.

This is only portions of the article.  Link to it - here - if interested.

USA - National Security - Intelligence Agencies - Carte Blanche

CIA spying on its own “internal channels” for whistleblowers Posted on July 28, 2014 McClatchy reports that the Central Intelligence Agency may be “intercepting the communications of officials who handle whistleblower cases.” The Senate Intelligence Committee’s classified 6,000-page report into the CIA’s post-9/11 interrogation programme is still yet to be published and the Committee has already accused the agency of illegally spying on that probe. Now it has emerged that the CIA retaliated against an official who cooperated with the Senate investigation, and Senate members emailed one another to accuse the agency’s inspector general of failing to investigate that retaliation – and the CIA has obtained at least one of those emails. As McClatchy writes, “The email controversy points to holes in the intelligence community’s whistleblower protection systems and raises fresh questions about the extent to which intelligence agencies can elude congressional oversight.” If the Senate cannot investigate the CIA independently and free of retaliation fears, who can? How can intelligence agencies be held accountable if they even intercept communications into their own operations? ... Thomas Drake’s criticisms of US warrantless wiretapping Drake subsequently blew the whistle to the media, and before the government’s case collapsed just days ahead of trial, he was facing an Espionage Act charge that could have imprisoned him for decades. Similarly, Edward Snowden made enquiries within the NSA about the legality and morality of that agency’s mass, unchecked surveillance. He spoke up at least ten separate times — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has in fact released one of Snowden’s emails. When he was ignored, Snowden was compelled to give documents detailing the NSA’s spying programs to investigative journalists. Insufficient security or insufficient democracy? The Insider Threat programme and the stated attitudes of the very officials responsible for facilitating internal channels draw a picture of a US administration that is deeply hostile, not only to disclosure of government information, but to internal criticism of its activities from those charged to carry them out. Famously, President Obama has overseen the prosecution of more Espionage Act cases than all previous presidents combined. The majority of those cases concern individuals trying to blow the whistle on wrongdoing. Within their number include cases, like that of Thomas Drake, where employees have tried to make their case within the ‘official channels’ ostensibly created to facilitate internal whistleblowing. It is ironic that the United States has responded to disclosures of illegality and abuse, not by subjecting its programmes to democratic input or ensuring that future whistleblowers have better options, but by cracking down on those who speak up and the journalism they enable. The US administration has treated whistleblowers as an issue of insufficient security rather than insufficient democracy. ...EXTRACTS ONLY...full article @... https://couragefound.org/2014/07/cia-spying-on-its-own-internal-channels/

Doesn't sound too good when agencies under the US government appear to be able to do whatever they want.

AUSTRALIA - PRESS GAGGED - SUPPRESSION ORDER 'SUPER-INJUNCTION' - WIKILEAKS - CORRUPTION SCANDAL COVER UP

Social media users could be charged for sharing Wikileaks story Date July 30, 2014 - 12:55PM Julian Assange, Wikileaks publisher, described the Victorian Supreme Court suppression order as 'unprecedented'. Social media users could land themselves in legal hot water if they share Wikileaks' reporting of a secret suppression order made by the Victorian Supreme Court. The wide-ranging suppression order was published on the group's website on Wednesday and was quickly shared on websites including Twitter and Google+. Fairfax Media's report of Wikileaks' action created a strong response on social media, and was shared thousands of times within minutes of the exclusive report's publication. It is against the law for Australian media organisations to publish the contents of the suppression order. Media lawyer Peter Bartlett, from Minter Ellison, said anyone who tweets a link to the Wikileaks report, posts it on Facebook, or shares it in any way online could also face charges. Using a hashtag such as "Wikileaks" is not in breach of the order but any mention on social media of the information detailed in it, such as people's names, is banned. Mr Bartlett said it would be difficult to prosecute Wikileaks and its publisher, Julian Assange, given they are outside Victoria. Mr Assange remains at the Ecuador embassy in London where he has been given political asylum to avoid being extradited to the United States in relation to the leaking of secret US documents. However, any Victorian social media users, or the person who gave the documents to Wikileaks, may be easier to find and prosecute. "Unless someone within Australia somehow authorised or was deemed to have published that suppression order on Wikileaks it would be difficult to find someone to prosecute," Mr Bartlett said. "The person within the state of Victoria who has sent the suppression order to Wikileaks themselves has breached the suppression order so if police could find that person they could prosecute them." Mr Bartlett said he did not know of any person being prosecuted for sharing a court order on social media. A case involving former Manchester United player Ryan Giggs sparked debate in England about the effectiveness of court orders given the prevalence of social media. Giggs went to court to try to stop The Sun newspaper from publishing details of his extra-marital affair. The court initially banned the publication of his identity but the court's order was then widely disseminated through social media and tweeted by about 500,000 people. Giggs' case against the newspaper was eventually thrown out of court and no one was charged in relation to the tweets. The Victorian Supreme Court has been contacted for comment. SOURCE - BRISBANE TIMES - HERE.

First of all, the government uses 'national security' grounds to obtain a court 'super-injunction' suppression order to gag media coverage on some kind of international corruption scandal involving the Australian government, and THEN the press is gagged AND every Australian is threatened with imprisonment -- for the sake of this government cover up -- according to WikiLeaks.

Bloody, hell.   It would help knowing in advance which information can get you in strife.  Not clear to some (namely blogger) ... Doh!  

Will let you know how gaol was, if I've breached anything.  LOL. 

Anyway, this is democracy, freedom of press and freedom of speech at work in Australia.

----------------------------------------------------
P.S. 

What is the point of these gag orders when overseas press is reporting pretty much on the contents, the issue and on prior arrests of overseas people?