Officials at the fund gave few details but said the attack earlier this year had been "a very major breach" of its systems, the New York Times reports.
Candid. Must be BIG.
In related news, Anonymous is back, baby..
Let's embrace the chaos together, shall we?
According to the site, the cable is dated November 9, 2005 and is connected to the Kiev embassy. It admonishes embassy officials not to discuss “under any circumstances” the military’s policy toward UFOs.
The report also says that the cable specifically mentions Department of Defense “concerns” related to the possibility of UFOs entering orbit and warns officials not to confirm that the US commits resources to the possibility.
And:
The more interesting aspect is that the State Department was so obsessed with secrecy that they actually took time to caution officials not to “confirm” it in off-the-record conversations.
Juicy. In almost any situation, the more one insists a point, the more the others know otherwise. Meanwhile, another whistle blower handed over more data in a very public news conference.
A former senior Swiss bank executive said Monday that he had given
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange details of more than 2,000 prominent individuals and companies that he contends engaged in tax evasion and other possible criminal activity.
He told The Observer newspaper over the weekend that those named in theRudolf Elmer, who ran the Caribbean
operations of the Swiss bank
Julius Baer for eight years until he was
dismissed in 2002, refused to
identify any of the individuals or companies,
but he told reporters at a news conference that about 40 politicians and
"pillars of society" were among them.
Elmer handed two computer disks to Assange at the news conference..
And:
WikiLeaks and Bank Julius Baer previously clashed in early 2008 when the anti-secrecy organization published hundreds of documents pertaining to its offshore activities. The bank succeeded, briefly, in gaining a court order to shut down the WikiLeaks.org website. The injunction was subsequently overturned and the case dropped.
The offshore banking industry has come under increasing pressure amid accusations that places like the Caribbean, with looser financial laws, allowed investors to avoid taxes and that some banks helped to create complex webs of companies and trust funds there to confuse tax authorities abroad.And still, no cables about Bank of America. Yet. Which shoe drops first?
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in a recent interview that he is holding back "insurance files" which could embarrass Rupert Murdoch and his international media empire at News Corporation.
The secrets website was also holding of over 500 US State Department cables about one broadcasting organization in particular, he added.
Assange made the disclosure while speaking to New Statesman, saying the files "will be released" if something happens to him or his organization.
"There are 504 US embassy cables on one broadcasting organisation and there are cables on Murdoch and News Corp.," he said.
And:
Appearing on the BBC, Assange's lawyer defended the move. "They need to protect themselves," Mark Stephens said. "This is what they believe to be a thermo-nuclear device effectively in the electronic age."Do tell.. The other major Murdoch shenanigans this week include the possible demise of myspace, Murdoch's 580 million dollar investment/ albatross. Poor Rupert, I guess he'll have to take comfort in his other billions.. Unless, of course, those cables are what Julian Assange says they are: True Insurance.
In that case, in the future, if the whole WikiLeaks deal goes down twisted, "Poor Rupert" might actually be more appropriate..
The public line out of Beijing has always been simple: China's military is for the defense of the homeland.The reality, however, may be more complicated. Newly released leaked U.S. diplomatic cables claim China is probably hiding both the size of its military buildup, as well as, on occasion, its intentions.
Australia's national intelligence agency conducted a strategic assessment of China's military spending, and concluded that the communist countries military buildup "threatens regional stability," reports the Australian daily The Age.
A leaked cable states that the agency found that China spent $90 billion on its military in 2006 - double the $45 billion budget publicly announced by Beijing, The Age reports.
While this is just a fraction of the nearly $500 billion the U.S. spends annually on its military, it is still noticeable for the fact that they were probably not publicly forthright about their military spending.
Allow me to respond to the four highlighted passages: 1, 2, and 3: Duh: Ya think? And 4: But America is?
C'mon.. If we've learned anything about how large government/ corporations/ entities work, NONE OF THEM are remotely close to transparent! To think the average citizen in the U.S. (as opposed to any other average citizen in any other country)has more knowledge of our military's black ops or secret spending or the second, third, or fourth set of books involved in how the entire operation(any operation) functions is naive, bordering on stupid/insane. I'm not knocking WikiLeaks for releasing this, nor am I knocking the military for operating in this manner; It's just the way things have always been done. Not that that makes current operations all right, but if we don't have a realistic assessment of systems function, we cannot fix given system without crippling it.
Thank you, WikiLeaks, for the confirmation, however un-necessary, and to CBS News: For God's sake, step it up and give me some real news, please..
Julian Assange has never explicitly said that WikiLeaks's next target is
Bank of America, but fear that it might be was enough to send the bank’s stock
tumbling in November after he hinted a major, damaging disclosure about an
American bank would be forthcoming. (The idea that BoA was the target came from a year-old interview in which he said he had access to a hard drive of a BoA
executive.)
Now The New York Times looks into all the preventive action the
bank is taking just in case, as well as the internal attempts to find the leak.
The going theory, which the Times sets up and then mostly knocks down, is that
the leak was coming from within the House.Xymphora's neat little round up of the big bombshells here..
And what it all means..
WikiLeaks' Most Terrifying Revelation: Just How Much Our Government Lies to Us
Do you believe that it is in Americans' interest to allow a small group of U.S. leaders to unilaterally murder, maim, imprison and/or torture anyone they choose anywhere in the world, without the knowledge let alone oversight of their citizens or the international community? And, despite their proven record of failure to protect America -- from Indochina to Iran to Iraq -- do you believe they should be permitted to clandestinely expand their war-making without informed public debate? If so, you are betraying the principles upon which America was founded, endangering your nation, and displaying a distinctly "unamerican" subservience to unaccountable authority. But if you oppose autocratic power, you are called to support Wikileaks and others trying to limit U.S. Executive Branch mass murder abroad and failure to protect Americans at home.
WikiLeaks has been forced to take a media back burner at the moment. I'm sure Julian Assange accounted for such a possibility. What will he do to counter this turn of events? What's his next move? Is this a brief pause before another round of whistle blowing fireworks?