White House Denies Banning SF Gate Reporter

According to WL Central, the White House is now denying it ever said it would ban SF Gate reporter Carla Marinucci, as reported by San Francisco Chronicle's SF Gate last week:

The White House is denying, contrary to reports, that it was seeking to blacklist the San Francisco Chronicle reporter, Carla Marinucci.

WL Central reported yesterday how the White House was seeking to punish the San Francisco news organization for reporting on a protest against the inhumane pretrial incarceration of alleged military whistleblower Bradley Manning, during a fundraiser for President Obama on the 21st of April. [See Marinucci's coverage of this event here.]

It had been reported that the journalist Carla Marinucci's use of video from the event was being viewed as a transgression against the regulations covering "print-pool" invitations to White House events, and that this was to be used as the pretext for her exclusion from future events.

Now, the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has issued a statement denying that any such punishments were being issued to the press for reporting on an issue of legitimate public interest:

The San Francisco Chronicle violated the coverage rules that they -– and every other media outlet –- agreed to as part of joining the press pool for that event. If they thought the rules were too restrictive they should have raised that at the beginning. However, no reporters have been banned from covering future presidential events and the White House of course would have no problem including any reporter who follows the rules in pool-only events.

This puts the White House's version of events in direct conflict with that of the San Francisco Chronicle, which reported yesterday in three separate articles on the issue.

There was more to SF Chronicle Editor Ward Bushee's statement. He insisted on the accuracy of the SF Chronicle's coverage of the White House threats against it, and dared the White House to give "an on-the-record notice that she [Manucci] will remain the San Francisco print pool reporter."

It's good to see someone in the press corps stand up against the bullying of the White House. The video of the protesters singing about freeing Bradley Manning in front of Obama -- at a $5,000 dollar a plate dinner no less, meaning the protest cost the demonstrators probably $20,000 to $30,000 -- must have stung the President, and caused aides to go scurrying, as the tape was widely played on the news.

As Chronicle Editor-at-Large, Phil Bronstein, pointed out, making rules that exclude video from press pool, when every cell phone has a video, is an attempt to control the news: "Video is every bit a part of any journalist's tool kit these days as a functioning pen that doesn't leak through your pocket."

The White House and Congress had better get used to sharper and more critical political protest, as people are getting fed up with their austerity measures, gifts to oil and big business, and their policy of endless wars. Although a few days back I called Obama's actions against Manucci "positively Nixonian," another president comes to mind at this point, as the strong criticism of a Democratic Party incumbent president prosecuting a stalemated war begins to reminds one redolently of the fate of Lyndon Johnson.

Obama muzzles reporter who dares report protests against his Administration

At SF Gate (H/T Emptywheel):

White House officials have banished one of the best political reporters in the country from the approved pool of journalists covering presidential visits to the Bay Area for using now-standard multimedia tools to gather the news.

The Chronicle's Carla Marinucci - who, like many contemporary reporters, has a phone with video capabilities on her at all times -shot some protesters interrupting an Obama fundraiser at the St. Regis Hotel.

She was part of a "print pool" - a limited number of journalists at an event who represent their bigger hoard colleagues - which White House press officials still refer to quaintly as "pen and pad" reporting....

What's worse: more than a few journalists familiar with this story are aware of some implied threats from the White House of additional and wider punishment if Carla's spanking became public.

This is positively Nixonian behavior from the usually slick, but thin-skinned Barack Obama, who not that long ago was lashing out at his opponents on the left, as he continued his pro-war, Pentagon-friendly policies. Now he has his own war in Libya.

But then, the Democrats have been pro-war and diddling with CIA assassination policies since Operation Mongoose aimed at assassinating Fidel Castro, and their Vietnam adventure, which killed conservatively over a million Indochinese.

Protect Press Freedom! List of Wikileaks Mirror Sites

Lisa Derrick at FDL has it up (and thanks Vern and a host of anonymous technicians and bloggers). We're going to need this, as the ruling elite tempest against Wikileaks and public spokesperson Julian Assange is going into overdrive. Their aim reaches far beyond Assange and Wikileaks, to control over information.

Hey kids, I bet it’d be fun to print out a few cables as holiday cards, wrapping paper and decoupage! Make silkscreens for tee shirts and posters! Or use them for logomancy and Burroughs-esque cut up.  Just get ‘em while you can at any of the these of sites:

http://wikileaksmirrorlist.blogspot.com/:

wikileaks.ch – Official Wikileaks Page [173.227.66.20, 208.65.130.26 and others]

wikileaks.fi – Mirror Finland [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.nl – Mirror Netherlands [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.de – Mirror Germany [88.80.13.160]

wikileaks.eu – Mirror Europe [88.80.13.160]

wikileaks.pl – Mirror Poland [88.80.13.160]

wikileaks.at – Mirror Austria [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.lu – Mirror Luxembourg [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.se – Mirror Sweden [88.80.6.179]

wikileaks.no – Mirror Norway [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.is – Mirror Iceland [46.59.1.2]

nyud.net – Mirror United States [129.170.214.192]

wikileaks.ca – Mirror Canada [46.59.1.2]

wikileaks.info – Mirror of previous leaks [62.2.16.94]

For a list of all 729 mirror sites for Wikileaks now up around the world, see this page from http://wikileaks.ch/mirrors.html. You might want to bookmark that page, but if it’s down, you’ll need another reference to find a proper mirror site, and you can try the ones above, or going to wikileaksmirrorsite.

Free Speech Victory: Judge Reverses Self on Wikileaks Injunction

Last month, a federal judge in Northern California ordered the Internet Service Provider Dynadot to shut down the important whistleblowing site, Wikileaks. Now, thanks to the work of Wikileaks supporters and groups like the ACLU and The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the judge has reversed his decision.

From a press release from the Reporter's Committee (and thanks to Night Owl at Docudharma for bringing this to my attention):

The whistleblower site Wikileaks.org may resume its U.S. operation following a hearing in California federal court today, where Judge Jeffrey S. White dissolved a previous order that required the site to be taken offline and indicated he would not approve a second order prohibiting the site's publication.

The Feb. 15 orders had required domain name service provider Dynadot to cut off access to the Wikileaks site, disabling the Web address. A Swiss bank had asked the court to require the site to be taken down, arguing it disclosed private banking records.

Acting as a friend of the court, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and several other media organizations asked the judge earlier this week to take notice of the prior restraint that occurred as a result of those orders. Wikileaks had not appeared in court to defend against charges by the bank that it had improperly posted private information and no First Amendment concerns were raised before the Court.

White's order of today dissolved the injunction that had prohibited Dynadot from allowing Wikileaks.org to be accessible. It also "tentatively" denied the bank's request for an order that would keep Wikileaks from independently publishing itself online.

"It's not very often a federal judge does a 180 degree turn in a case and dissolves an order," said Reporters Committee Executive Director Lucy A. Dalglish. "But we're very pleased the judge recognized the constitutional implications in this prior restraint."

White is expected to issue a full opinion on the matter in the near future. The media coalition's brief in the case can be found at: www.rcfp.org/news/documents/20080229-amicusbrie.pdf

I've just checked, and wikileaks.org is definitely back up and online at its old address. Anyone who still wants to contribute to Wikileaks defense fund can probably still do so by by emailing supporters@sunshinepress.org with their pledge.

Congratulations to all involved! Let the leaks continue!

Gov't Censorship Alert: U.S. Judge Shuts Down Wikileaks.org

Also posted at Docudharma

U.S. Federal District Judge (Northern District of California, San Francisco Division) Jeffrey White, a Bush appointee, has ordered the Internet Service Provider Dynadot to shut down the important whistleblowing site, Wikileaks. In recent months, Wikileaks has published important documents related to Guantanamo's Standard Operating Procedures, the heretofore secret Rules of Engagement of the U.S. in the Iraq War, as well as bank fraud in Kenya.

Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or any other website or server other than a blank park page, until further order of this Court.

The good folks at Wikileaks have anticipated something of this sort sooner or later, and have a number of mirror sites hosted outside the U.S., so they can still be accessed here and here. But this attempt at outright censorship must be overturned. This is not China censoring government critics, or some small corrupt country trying to hide its dirty laundry. This is a U.S. judge, at an ex parte hearing (no one from Wikileaks was even present or represented), acting like a totalitarian factotum.

A Wikileaks press release explains:

The order was written by Cayman Island's Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion. The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island's operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the 'Wikileaks.org' name through -- California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for 'Wikileaks.org'. The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents....

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney's in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice "by email" prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank's lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

In a diary at the top of the Recommended List right now over at Daily Kos, Stephen Soldz makes the important point that there have been other attempts in U.S. history to

... block publication of particular documents, most famously in 1971 when the Nixon administration attempted to stop publication by the New York Times of excerpts from the Pentagon Papers, leaked by Daniel Ellsberg. But trying to close down an entire site in this way is truly unprecedented. Not even the Nixon administration, when they sought to block publication of the Pentagon Papers, considered closing down the New York Times in response.

It's hard to believe that this judge's ruling will be left to stand. But in today's political environment, nothing must be taken for granted. It's not clear how to support Wikileaks in this instance, as they haven't released a call for any specific action. Of course, this has just happened. It is our job to spread the news far and wide and put the heat on the powers that be that this blatant unconstitutional prior restraint of the press will not stand.

For Presidents Day, remember the freedom that the founding fathers fought for, and let everyone know that U.S. courts are trying to shut down whistleblowers, and the internet sites that publish what they find. I don't think I need to belabor the importance of this, as any site could be affected this way, and all reasonable discussion shut down.