Julian Assange always wanted that movie deal At one point, Assange apparently quotes someone else suggesting that a thriller be made all about WikiLeaks. Like that’ll ever happen… Assange: 2010-03-10 06:04:02 Wikileaks is looking for donations, but what its founders should do, is call upon script writers to make a, perhaps reality based, dramatized, thriller movie of one of the wikileaks cases, with corruption, infiltration, espionage, hitmen, sabotage, etc and call the movie “WikiLeaks!” I see great potential for such a movie, and massive money and advertising it would generate would establish them firmly. I’d then support by seeing the movie Hollywood would likely support. (via 'All the ships came in' – how Assange and Manning plotted WikiLeaks story | Technology | theguardian.com)
Stanley Kramer’s On the Beach stood apart from the vast array of other ‘nuclear-apocalyptic’ films of the era. The reaction it stirred among the Eisenhower administration in Washington D.C. during and after its production was much different than earlier Government dealings with filmmakers. “On the Beach,” says Joyce A. Evens in her work Celluloid Mushroom Clouds, “stands as one of the earliest confrontations with the Pentagon over film content.” The ‘confrontation’ by the U.S. Government during the production of On the Beach was a process of unsure vacillation between grudging support and disavowal.
This vacillation occurred because On the Beach existed between two distinct eras in American film-making: one that was formed during the ‘blacklist’ era of communist and ‘anti-American’ hysteria in Hollywood, where filmmakers made movies that reinforced U.S. Cold War national security policies and a largely independent post-‘blacklist’ Hollywood that questioned the U.S. Government, the military, and national security policies. The film was one of the first negative portrayals of nuclear weapons brought to bear on the popular imagination causing Americans, many for the first time, to think critically about government policies such as civil defense and nuclear deterrence. As Lawrence Suid remarks in his work Guts and Glory: the Making of the American Military Image on Film, “On the Beach, not the Vietnam War, marked the real beginning, albeit in a very limited way, of a greater scrutiny of the U.S. military establishment by the mass media and the cultural community.”
The film On the Beach was certainly not the only film made about nuclear war during the early Cold War. Previous films made during the height of the Cold War, from early 1950s to the mid 1960s, addressed ‘the bomb,’ but these films possessed very different views of it. As Tony Shaw has pointed out in his book Hollywood’s Cold War, earlier films concerning nuclear conflict, such as Above and Beyond (1952), Strategic Air Command (1955), and Bombers B-52 (1957), portrayed nuclear weapons as “benign protectors of democracy.” These films were given support from the U.S. Government during production as they reinforced the usefulness, and even the necessity, of nuclear weapons to both U.S. and global movie audiences. (‘Possible Questions and Suggested Answers’: On the Beach)
The notice then went on to explain why police officers believed that the terrorism act was appropriate. “We assess that Miranda is knowingly carrying material, the release of which would endanger people’s lives. Additionally the disclosure or threat of disclosure is designed to influence a government, and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism and as such we request that the subject is examined under schedule 7.” Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said the police assessment represented a “chilling” threat to democracy. “More and more we are shocked but not surprised,” she said. “Breathtakingly broad anti-terror powers passed under the last government continue to be abused under the coalition that once trumpeted civil liberties. (via Metropolitan police detained David Miranda for promoting ‘political’ causes | World news | The Observer)
The UK intelligence agency GCHQ has repeatedly warned it fears a “damaging public debate” on the scale of its activities because it could lead to legal challenges against its mass-surveillance programmes, classified internal documents reveal. Memos contained in the cache disclosed by the US whistleblower Edward Snowden detail the agency’s long fight against making intercept evidence admissible as evidence in criminal trials – a policy supported by all three major political parties, but ultimately defeated by the UK’s intelligence community. Foremost among the reasons was a desire to minimise the potential for challenges against the agency’s large-scale interception programmes, rather than any intrinsic threat to security, the documents show. (via Leaked memos reveal GCHQ efforts to keep mass surveillance secret | UK news | The Guardian)
Merging documentary and art photography, Wylie’s images reveal both the impact of surveillance architecture on the natural landscape and the importance of surveillance in modern conflict. At a time when we are all preoccupied with invisible online surveillance and its impact on our privacy and democracy, Vision as Power shows how military surveillance has primed us for a future that is already here: a place where we are all being watched all the time. Slowly, we are growing used to it. (via Spies like us: Donovan Wylie captures the impact of surveillance | Art and design | theguardian.com)
This must be the time and place of the Second Coming, it is avowed, because we see before us ruinous scenes that seem to capture our own sense of the world’s brokenness. The endless violence and precarity we lap up in entertainments and bemoan on streets is here underscored with a different valence of meaning, a clear direction. It tells us that this time is simultaneously not the real time, the meaningful time, but is nonetheless crucially on the brink of conversion into realness and importance. This is indexed not only on the pages of scripture but in our feelings themselves, now understood as an alternate reservoir of evidence or “proof.” The coexistence of this evidentiary mode of “religion” with those of other bodies of/in evidence seems to me to signal other means by which “religion” takes shape in the public imagination, and by which it both performs and flouts convention. Religion and the state co-emerge in discourses about American responsibility and Syrian chaos, together standing for the violence of ontological breakings into and breakings down of the “communal World” as it appears to custom, and figuring equally in the restoration or defense of such worlds.
FOR decades Hollywood has been making films about the end of the world and how, sometimes, plucky humans manage to avert it. Now some of the world’s finest minds have come together to draw up some real-life doomsday scenarios - and work out how mankind could avoid being wiped out. From killer computers to crippling cyber-attacks by terrorists using the internet to the release of engineered diseases, the members of the Cambridge Centre for the Study of Existential Risk warn that the future could be far from rosy. But once the threats have been identified the group - led by Astronomer Royal Martin Rees and including Stephen Hawking - intends to devise ways of “ensuring our own species has a long-term future”. (via Geniuses predict how the world will end, and how to avoid it | Space, Military and Medicine | News.com.au)
There were two blond heads sitting at opposite tables at the court martial of Pfc Bradley Manning. The lead prosecutor, Major Ashden Fein, is nine years older than the defendant and several inches taller, a former prep school drill team cadet with a wife and child. He has a rapid fire, abrasive way of speaking and a Northern accent despite his Texas upbringing. He couldn’t be more different than the queer computer geek on trial for transmitting classified information to WikiLeaks, but they look the same when you see them from behind the courtroom bar. It was the end of July, and the court was waiting for the judge to arrive with her verdict. The prosecutor appeared relaxed, slumped in his chair with his legs stretched out. Manning was sitting silently, poised and still. (via A Dispatch From Bradley Manning’s Conviction - Joanne McNeil - The Atlantic)
In April 2010, while serving as an army intelligence analyst in Baghdad, Manning sent an email to Master Sergeant Paul Adkins, his superior, to tell him he was suffering from a gender-identity disorder. Manning attached a photograph of himself wearing a blonde wig and make-up. “I have had signs of it for a very long time. It’s caused problems within my family,” Manning wrote in the email with the subject line “My Problem”, which was released on Tuesday for the first time. “I thought enlisting in the military would get rid of it … I’ve been trying very, very hard to get rid of it. It’s haunting me more and more as I get older. Now the consequences are getting harder.”….
Master Sergeant Adkins said he did not inform his superiors about the email until after Manning was arrested. “I really didn’t think at the time that having a picture floating around of one of my soldiers in drag was in the best interest of the intel mission,” Master Sergeant Adkins told the court.
The month after he sent the email, Manning was found in the foetal position in a storeroom with a knife at his feet. Master Sergeant Adkins testified on Tuesday that he found Manning unresponsive but was able to get him to talk about how he felt “fragmented”.
Within an hour, Master Sergeant Adkins said, he escorted Manning to his workstation so he could complete his shift. When he finished work, Manning got involved in an altercation with another person at the forward operating base, Master Sergeant Adkins testified. (via Bradley Manning says gender crisis led him to WikiLeaks)