By charles the moderator
While the identity(ies) of the source(s) of the Climategate files has never been identified, long time readers of WUWT and Climate Audit are quite familiar with the Climategate timeline as it unfolded here, there, and throughout the blogosphere.
We have open sourced the history and it was written up by the players.
We have the original notice of the emails, which went live on 11/19/2009
We have The Mosher Timeline. We have The CTM story. Both of which began on 11/17/2009
Now, basking in the celebrity spotlight from the various leaks of diplomatic communications, Julian Assange and wikileaks has attempted to take credit for things that they had little to do with. In this Video, Mr. Assange takes full credit for the release of “over ten years’ worth of emails.
Wikileaks role in the release of the Climategate files is, to say the least, exaggerated.
Over on Climate Audit, Steve McIntyre recounts:
Assange falsely claimed that the Climategate emails were broken by WikiLeaks. This is obviously untrue as CA readers know. I can date WikiLeaks’ entry by contemporary comments. The first notice of the emails at WikiLeaks was 2009/11/21 at 2.50 AM Eastern (12:50 AM blog time). The emails had been downloaded by many people (including me) from a Russian server on Nov 19 and had been downloaded by WUWT moderators on Nov 17. A contemporary comment in a CA thread says that WikiLeaks was down and refers people to megauploads. WikiLeaks has not even been a major reference for Climategate – that belongs to eastangliaemails.com (originally anelegantchaos.org) which was up on Nov 20 and provided a searchable database.
After an extensive Google search, I can find the first mention of wikileaks involvement on the web about 19 minutes earlier than Steve McIntyre found.
Paul Z. says:November 20, 2009 at 11:39 pm
The emails are on wikileaks.org now:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_emails,_data,_models,_1996-2009
I think it is safe to assume that since we were all glued to our screens for those couple days that it is unlikely the files were available from wikileaks for over an hour before the comment above was placed.
Mr. Assange’s indiscretion is not going unnoticed though. He has been called on this story by some of the UK press.
Mr Assange has lied about aspects of his work. At a public meeting in London, he falsely claimed that the ‘Climategate’ emails from the University of East Anglia were first published by WikiLeaks. In fact, the emails were published by specialist climate websites in America and Canada – yet Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics.
I think Ross McKitrick’s comment on Climate Audit from the earlier link sums up Assange’s performance best:
What a pair of blowhards. They were obviously unnerved by the question. They evidently like leaks that embarrass their political opponents, but in this case they found themselves tagged with a leak that had damaged the side they like; and since it seems to be more about political warfare against governments they dislike than some impartial ideal of transparency and freedom of information, they were stuck scrambling to make up a story about how it really served some nobler purpose. Of course they should simply have said that they weren’t the source of the leak, that it was in full circulation long before anyone looked to them for a copy and they didn’t know much about the details of what followed. But that would have been too humble, especially in front of a room full of simpering hero-worshippers. So they pretended to be insiders and proceeded to deliver a few minutes of sheer drivel.
While I was in the UK last fall, there was brief interest by the UK tabloids in the Russian angle, and an article appeared in the Daily Mail speculating that Russian intelligence officials had hacked the UEA and stolen the emails. But nobody took that line seriously and the story died within 48 hours. If Assange has a shred of evidence to support his lunatic theory he should release it. What’s with these secret communications between him and UK intelligence: out with it, Mr Wikileaks! Bloody poser.
On this issue at least they are nothing but fakes and cretins. Saying that UEA released all the background emails and whatnot to provide the full context is beyond idiocy; and Assange’s discussion of the “trick” is just painful to watch.
Now trying to backtrack wikileaks involvement, we find that:
Way back at 4:09 Pacific Time on the 19th the first mention of wikileaks occurred here on WUWT:
Jagman619 says:November 19, 2009 at 4:08 pm (Edit)
Someone who has the file, please post it to http://wikileaks.org/
Which did not go unnoticed. It is around that time that I submitted the files to wikileaks. Was I the first? I have no way to know. It was a frantic day.
But if Mr. Assange wants to clear the air my IP address is 20880.64.xxx
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Everyone here knows this is nonsense. This is a desperate man who finally stepped on the wrong toes. Two groupies and the USA. Bush would have been hiding in the closet (if the emails were as easily downloaded during his Presidency). Obama feels free to go after leftist creeps and throw them overboard. Like Stalin and Trotsky.
charles –
would u ever have believed the sceptic websites would end up in a headline like this? however, pity the websites are not listed, and pity the rest of the MSM have not reported assange’s lies on this particular score.
19 Dec: UK Daily Mail: David Rose: The wildly promiscuous lifestyle of WikiLeaks boss Julian Assange: Look away now Jemima as our report reveals the sordid truth
Our investigation also reveals that:…
Mr Assange has lied about aspects of his work. At a public meeting in London, he falsely claimed that the ‘Climategate’ emails from the University of East Anglia were first published by WikiLeaks. In fact, the emails were published by specialist climate websites in America and Canada – yet Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339859/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-promiscuous-lifestyle-revealed-Jemima-Khan-look-away-now.html
Australians can be sure that the vast majority of Americans would never, ever support a group whose founder is dedicated to the harm and downfall of Australia. It would never enter our minds or hearts to do that.
Australian Julian Assange of Wikilieaks has declared himself the enemy of the US and seeks its harm and downfall. Assange wrote a pair of essays in 2006, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies” and “Conspiracy as Governance,” in which he sees the U.S. as an authoritarian conspiracy. His motive in his own words “to act by decreasing total conspiratorial power until it is no longer able to understand, and hence respond effectively to its environment. . . .” by making it “dumber and slower and smaller.”
Please become acquainted with the well-documented fact that his plan is to reduce effective detection by the US to threats, by sabotaging our fairly open system. He has also published the Social Security Numbers of our troops in Afghanistan out of pure spite.
Whether he is guilty of rape or not, with so much information he can threaten people with, do you not think he now has international immunity from being convicted of any crimes against women?
And while liberals and some conservatives (eg Tony Blankley) may oppose our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is possible to do that without seeking the actual destruction of the Country with which you disagree.
Our Aus cousins have our sympathy and support as crops have been lost due to flooding. 🙁
Post Script
Australians can be sure that the vast majority of Americans would never, ever support a group whose founder is dedicated to the harm and downfall of Australia. It would never enter our minds or hearts to do that.
Australian Julian Assange of Wikilieaks has declared himself the enemy of the US and seeks its harm and downfall. Assange wrote a pair of essays in 2006, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies” and “Conspiracy as Governance,” in which he sees the U.S. as an authoritarian conspiracy. His motive in his own words “to act by decreasing total conspiratorial power until it is no longer able to understand, and hence respond effectively to its environment. . . .” by making it “dumber and slower and smaller.”
Please become acquainted with the well-documented fact that his plan is to reduce effective detection by the US to threats, by sabotaging our fairly open system. He has also published the Social Security Numbers of our troops in Afghanistan out of pure spite.
Whether he is guilty of rape or not, with so much information he can threaten people with, do you not think he now has international immunity from being convicted of any crimes against women?
And while liberals and some conservatives (eg Tony Blankley) may oppose our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is possible to do that without seeking the actual destruction of the Country with which you disagree.
Yup, “Bloody posers” sums it up. Thanks Dr McKitrick.
What a load of self-righteous, self-promoting pomposity from that blow-hard.
He got to the party late and now has the audacity to act as if he was at the party before it started.
This guy Assange will never receive the full measure of opprobrium that he deserves. He spoonfed the leftist media and now they are turning on him. Just desserts. If you want to be taken seriously as a some kind of moral force in this world, you have to behave accordingly. You have to be like Caesar’s wife, if for no other reason than you demonstrate a fidelity to your message. If you are a sex addict and a jerk, it tends to overshadow your larger message. If you doubt me, ask Bill Clinton.
And then there is the usual case of the political left claiming credit for things they had no part in. It’s their way. It’s what they do. It’s how they survive.
Does it really matter who released the letters first? Do we really want to find out who was the first one releasing the truth and bash the others? The more people say the truth the better, isn’t it?
I don’t have much time for Mr Assange…. Can’t have any respect for a man that molests women.
There are no government orgnizations pursuing him for his little data dump of diplomatic cables. The only people interested in Mr Assange are the Swedish police who are chasing him for sexual misconduct and rape charges.
…. Mr Assange is no champion of truth and justice…. He’s just a strange little man with a very weird childhood and personal history.
Agreed that this chap is a bit of a plonker, but I do wonder why the US is going out of its way to try and extradite him… I imagine the biggest worry is what he may have on a major US bank and threatened to release early next year.
WikiLeaks latest is a cloak for many things not the least of which could be rape.
Assange is someones useful idiot.
Mr Asssaange is merely obsessed with all matters below the belt (particularly his own!).
[snip]
Wasn’t it “The Air Vent” who was first with the climategate release?
I love this story!
“Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics.”
This sentence says it all!
Ecotretas
I don’t see him claiming to be the first. Wikileaks did host the files when they were eventually sent there. Give the man credit for adhering to his principles. Clearly he found the climategate leaks an uncomfortable fit with his personal politics. But he hosted them anyway. He isn’t a hypocrite.
The level of vilification and character assassination in these comments is disgusting. Apparently (shock horror) Assange likes sex. Is anyone surprised? I mean – he is a man. A man who likes sex – now there is a surpise! What is the big deal?
I’m a wikileaks supporter. I managed to get my last donation through just before Visa and Mastercard cravenly caved in to political pressure and blocked them. The world needs sites like wikileaks and people like Assange, even if I don’t agree with his politics. And I’m really extremely enraged at the attempts to get him and the mob mentality so evident in these comments.
So much for America – land of the free. What a joke! First amendment – freedom of the press. Don’t make we laugh. We see now just how little Americans truly care for these principles when they propose to extradite and murder an editor for simply publishing a story and telling the truth.
Yes I’m angry. People fought and died in the 20th century for freedom and to stop things like lynch mobs. Yet here we are in the 21st century and we see yet again the ugly American lynch mob in full cry.
The lieing basket, it was me and Sherlock Holmes and Captain Nemo, we also had help with security in the form of Reepacheep.
It took 12 months and we were not listening to Lady Gaga or cavorting with Swedish strumpets rudely or badly, let it be said we do not cavort with Scandinavian strumpets rudely or badly.
Truthfully what a tosser, there were rumors the Beeb had them first and buried them.
No offence to this coalition of sleuths.
Perhaps reading too many spy novels and one quite reputable, notably, A bodyguard of lies by Anthony Cave Brown, together with the odd James Bond, Mission Impossible and Bourne Identity movies thrown in, I find it hard to believe that the intelligence community might not have “created” at least some of the leaks, or at least moved to distort the information to render it partially useless, or even set up the whole wikileaks thing as a disinformation “sting”. Failing that it is also difficult to believe that, if this guy was really holding sensitive “damaging” intelligence, he would not by now already have had the chat with St Peter.
Assange is doing good work with wikileaks. It’s no surprise he gets a lot of leftie tail.
It’s not surprising. All that wikileaks has revealed except for a handful of stories tell us nothing new about anything in geopolitics. So it is with the climategate emails; Asange, late to the party.
KPO said:
“Failing that it is also difficult to believe that, if this guy was really holding sensitive “damaging” intelligence, he would not by now already have had the chat with St Peter.”
True enough. Nothing over the level of classified revealed. Where’s the actual Top Secret info.
Interesting to note that Asange had something to do with programming for Los Alamos and NASA in 1994.
I guess the pro-AGW folk will just figure that Climate Disruption will get him in the end.
Julian Assange´s lawyer, Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent is the legal adviser of Rothschild in Rothschild´s Waddesdon Trust. Three trustees are: Lord Rothschild, Lady Rothschild, Beth Matilda Rothschild.
He only claims they published the leaks, which they did, never that they were the first.We should be thanking them for spreading this info to a wider audience, not bickering about motives. In any case, I think their motives were pure.
Assange merely talks about how they dealt with the information recieved, and whether it was worthy of publication. The conclusion was that it was valuable information that should be avaliable to the public, regardless of personal views. This story only upholds their claim to be impartial and to expose without regard to political or other agendas.
He was not trying to steal credit, he was merely using the question from the audience as an example of how they deal with leaked information.
@ur momisugly Ale Gorney
Project much?
Where in his comments does Ross once mention the left, leftists, the right, or any right vs. left paradigm? He calls them out on their behavior, their choices, and their actions.
It just may happen that their actions “against governments they dislike” may be indicative of leftist leanings, but the direct connection is in your head and not in Ross’s language.
BTW, I specifically avoided any allusions to the Swedish charges, although they are featured heavily in one of the linked articles. I read the details and it is a murky case of definitions of consent and I have no interest in taking a side.
Anyone saying “They didn’t claim to be first” needs to watch that video carefully and watch how they play to the audience.