WendyMcElroy.com

LET A THOUSAND LEAKS BLOOM
By Wendy McElroy

The ongoing torrent of released documents by WikiLeaks is an e-nightmare for the United States. WikiLeaks is the international document-leaking organization run by Julian Assange on the principle that the purpose of political secrecy is to protect the guilty. As authorities scramble frantically to silence the flow of information, technology is poised to make that task closer to impossible.

On November 5, a Wall Street Journal headline declared “WikiLeaks Faces New Competition.” The article stated, “A group that includes former WikiLeaks staffers...is pursuing plans for a rival document-leaking venture....[Daniel] Domscheit-Berg...is planning to launch new technology.”

In a sense, the WSJ headline is misleading. It implies a new organization is poised to join other document-leaking sites that currently 'compete' with WikiLeaks; for example, Cryptome run by architect John Young from New York and the Secrecy News blog run by Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. It is not entirely clear, however, if the new venture will be a 'rival' site, which publishes its own documents. Perhaps, as the article later suggests, the venture is to develop and distribute of “new technology to assist whistle-blowers who want to leak documents.” Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive goals.

What is known?

An interview with former WikiLeaks Lieutenant Berg in the German newspaper Der Spiegel (September 26th) was clearly intended as Berg's official statement and, so, may offer insight. The interview began by questioning 'Daniel Schmitt' – Berg's pseudonym as a WikiLeaks spokesman; it ended with Schmitt 'outing' himself as Daniel Domscheit-Berg – the first time Berg had revealed his identity.

Berg explanation of his goal seemed to de-emphasize the establishment of a single rival site so much as the facilitation of wide-spread document-leaking, “I will contribute to the...idea of a decentralized leak platform....In the end there must be a thousand WikiLeaks.”

The rivalry aspect between Assange and Berg also seems to be a bit over-stated by WSJ. A personality clash and, perhaps, some ill-will seem to exist; Berg was abruptly fired from WikiLeaks. But, unlike Cryptome that exposed internal WikiLeaks files, Berg is careful to not attack Assange. When pressed by Der Spiegel, he insisted the split was not a “struggle for power...but about our organization and its development.”

Berg believes WikiLeaks has drifted significantly from its original mission. The gradual centralization of decision-making in the hands of Assange is indicative of that drift.

At its inception in 2006, WikiLeaks was “discrimination-free” in what it published. Berg explained that “minor submissions” of limited or local interest “were always treated exactly the same as major documents” of international importance.

WikiLeaks grew at a phenomenal rate. Within a year, the site claimed a database of more than 1.2 million documents. It also grew in prestige with Assange receiving the 2009 UK Media Award from Amnesty International. In May, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks as first among five sites “that could totally change the news."

The assessment came a month after WikiLeaks posted the video of a 2007 American air strike in Baghdad, which caused an international furor and U.S. fury. At the same time, Berg explained, WikiLeaks had “other documents” to be released. Moreover, new material flooded in and needed “to be urgently worked on.”

Nevertheless, in July, the site concentrated on releasing approximately 77,000 previously unavailable documents on the war in Afghanistan. In October, it published approximately 400,000 U.S. Field reports on Iraq.

In short, WikiLeaks ceased to be “discrimination-free” and ignored “minor submissions.” The site has temporarily ceased to accept new documents due to a huge backlash and, so, a statement of “wishing Berg luck” by a WikiLeaks spokesman may be sincere as no competition for material exists. Berg has stated, “From my point of view material and all donated funds should remain with WikiLeaks.”

Nevertheless, he identifies another 'mission drift' within WikiLeaks: its targeting of the United States. Berg explained, “[T]his direct confrontation with the USA is not what we intended. We were always against corruption and abuse, to uncover the exercise of power wherever that takes place, whether in a small location generally speaking or the whole world.”

In response, the United States has targeted WikiLeaks and Assange both domestically and internationally.

For example, in the wake of WikiLeaks' July release, the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act advanced rapidly in Congress; the Act gives the Department of Justice authority to blacklist sites and, then, to demand Internet service providers and registrars block them. (The Act is stalled in the Senate on a technicality until the next session.)

Already on the CIA 'want list', Assange is described as “a man in a suitcase as he keeps one step ahead of an [American-led] international posse out to settle scores.” The incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Rep. Peter King is pushing to have WikiLeaks officially designated as a terrorist organization.


WikiLeaks calls itself “the intelligence agency of the people.” If the U.S. successfully silences Assange, then 'the people' may find a new voice through the technology Berg and his team of WikiLeaks-defectors are developing. In the race between silence and information, bet on 'the people.'