2011-08-30 Daniel Domscheit-Berg: a comparative analysis

In the light of the recent press statements by Openleaks spokesperson Daniel Domscheit-Berg we decided to have a look at some older coverage, in particular his Spiegel interview from the 27th of September 2010. It appeared soon after he had left Wikileaks, and it was also translated into English.

The first question of the Spiegel reporters concerned the state of the Wikileaks IT infrastructure. Asked why the Wikileaks e mail system was down, Domscheit-Berg answered:

"Es gibt technische Probleme und niemanden, der sich darum kümmert. WikiLeaks steckt in einer Phase, in der sich das Projekt verändern müsste. Wir sind in den letzten Monaten wahnsinnig schnell gewachsen und müssten uns dringend in allen Bereichen professionalisieren und transparenter werden. Diese Entwicklung wird intern blockiert."

"There are technical problems and no one to take care of them. WikiLeaks is stuck in a phase in which the project has to change itself. We grew insanely fast in recent months and we urgently need to become more professional and transparent in all areas. This development is being blocked internally."

He does not mention that it was him and an associate who took the servers offline, as he now admitted. Rather, he makes it appear that this was a general structural problem.

Another very interesting fact is that he admits to having coordinated the finances of Wikileaks. Thus, he acknowledges that he knew about the funds available via the Wau Holland Foundation. This makes it very difficult to comprehend, why he would have paid servers privately, as he has now claimed.

Most revealing is, however, the following passage about pending submissions:

"Und durch unsere gestiegene Bekanntheit ist im letzten halben Jahr noch einmal sehr viel Material hinzugekommen, das dringend bearbeitet und publiziert werden müsste."

"And through our rising recognition in the last six months, we have again received a lot of material that urgently needs to be processed and published."

This statement is in stark contrast to a recent interview with Austrian public TV station ORF:

"Alles Interessante an dem Material war schon längst veröffentlicht, etwa das CIA Red Cell Memorandum, die Loveparade-Geschichte und einige andere Einzelfälle. Es hat sich darunter nichts mehr befunden, was den Aufwand und das Risiko einer Veröffentlichung gerechtfertigt hätten."

"All of the interesting material had been published a long time ago, for instance the CIA Red Cell Memorandum, the Loveparade matter, and some other isolated things. Amongst it, there was nothing that would have justified the time [needed for the editorial efforts] or the risk it posed."

With regard to the ownership of the pending Wikileaks submissions and the servers, he says:

"Aus meiner Sicht sollten Material und alle Spendengelder bei WikiLeaks bleiben, denn beides ist explizit diesem Projekt zugeflossen."

"It is my view that material and money from donors should remain at WikiLeaks, because both were intended explicitly for this project."

At some point, he must have changed his mind about the matter. By February, he gave another interview to German weekly magazine Stern, stating that he would only return the data if Wikileaks could guarantee security. He criticizes amongst others that they did not have an encrypted website, and gives as a reason that Assange was obviously too busy exploiting the present releases.

At around the same time, Wikileaks' German solicitor Johannes Eisenberg sent Domscheit-Berg a letter asking for the material to be returned.

Overall, it has become clear that Domscheit-Berg changed his story. A year ago, he talked about a number of important submissions which were left aside, and uses this as a reason to criticize Wikileaks, whereas he now claims that the submissions were not worth the effort, to justify that he destroyed them.

Whoops...I put the comment in the wrong place.

Whoops....see below.

The Last Whistleblower?

I don't know where exactly to put this comment so here it is;

Over at LewRockwell.com the web-log has a sad but honorable story written about the possible future of Julian Assange;


The story is written by Paul Craig Roberts.

I hope Julian doesn't read it. As Solzhenitsyn said, "it's you today and me tomorrow."

We had all hoped that Julian would be released by now and the British court was supposedly going to give a verdict in late August. It's late August and no verdict.

Don't sweat it AIS

Mr. Assange has lived with the recognition of this threat since the begining. Without doubt many members of the American establishment would love to murder Mr. Assange...as painfully as they could devise. They will probably suceed one day. For the moment the stalemate is their best position. There would be quite a backlash around the world if something happened and they know it. That might just be enough to convince the fence sitters that there is no option but to join the fight. Also, while the British Government might also like to see Mr. Assange take the high jump because of their own exposure, both the Brits and the EU would have quite a problem with the apparent loss of soveriegnty if they acceeded to the American demands. Lucky for Mr. Assange that he is not in Canada!

As for "the last whistle blower", forget that. You and Roberts underestimate the integrity and the stubborness of some people. Most humans are surprisingly honest and many are very courageous, if these two attributes are combined in a person who gains access to information, critical to the wefare of others, you have a whistleblower. Unless the entire alternative media is shutdown, there will always be a way to get the story out.

Yes, sweat it.

You under estimate the ingenuity of the various goverments throughout the world. Assange has successfully angered the majority of the world's governments and a lot of rich people. It's not just the US that has an interest in getting rid of him. Anyone that has been exposed by Wikileaks has a great interest in seeing the founder of that organization brought to there version of "justice". As to the honesty of people....I wouldn't count on that too much.

In 1971 there was an assassination attempt on Solzhenitsyn while he was still in Russia. The attack took place in a candy shop and the assassins used an umbrella to spray some sort of chemical on him. He was sick for months and the doctors couldn't figure out what was wrong with him. He finally recovered. Solzhenitsyn was famous at that time but it wasn't until 1973 that The Gulag Archipelago was published in the "West". Julian Assange's work is almost as monumental as The Gulag Archipelago. Whereas Gulag pertained only to the Soviet Union Assange's work covers the world and has exposed countless evil deeds of governments and individuals. Wikileaks work shows the barbaric and vile nature of reprobate States.

I hope that the good people of Iceland, will do for Assange as they did for Bobby Fisher. That is; declare him an Icelandic citizen and rescue him from the clutches of the US.

So, yes, "sweat it".....the world is much less friendly than we can imagine.

With deep and due respect for the writers..

..on WikiLeaks Central, I would like to suggest that too much effort and energy has already been given to the merits of Daniel Domschite-Berg. I recognise that I contribute little to this forum, so my opinion is merely that. However, this matter is now past history and should be treated as such, lest it cause further division and distract from the important work the website has been doing.

Please accept my appology for intruding on this.

You are absolutely right.

You are absolutely right. The only reason why I am doing this is because the MSM tend to believe him, and I feel obliged to set the record straight. His theories, and his achievements would otherwise not be worth the effort.

These matters should be handled by a good lawyer. For instance, the financial transactions are auditable, as the Wau Holland Foundation is obliged to keep records.

Many thanks for your comment, as always it is much appreciated!

Too bad the BAC stuff is gone...???

As for "the last whistle

As for "the last whistle blower", forget that. You and Roberts underestimate the integrity and the stubborness of some people. Most humans are surprisingly honest and many are very courageous, if these two attributes are combined in a person who gains access to information, critical to the wefare of others, you have a whistleblower. Unless the entire alternative media is shutdown, there will always be a way to get the story out.

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer