United States diplomatic cables leak#Reactions

The first document, the so-called Reykjavik 13 cable, was released by WikiLeaks on 18 February 2010, and was followed by the release of State Department profiles of Icelandic politicians a month later.Myers, Steven Lee. [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/middleeast/07wikileaks.html "Charges for Soldier Accused of Leak"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100709173529/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/middleeast/07wikileaks.html |date=9 July 2010 }}, The New York Times, 6 July 2010.

• Also see Nicks, Denver. [http://thislandpress.com/09/23/2010/private-manning-and-the-making-of-wikileaks-2/ "Private Manning and the Making of Wikileaks"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110429142813/http://thislandpress.com/09/23/2010/private-manning-and-the-making-of-wikileaks-2/ |date=29 April 2011 }}, This Land, 23 September 2010. Later that year, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' editor-in-chief, reached an agreement with media partners in Europe and the United States to publish the rest of the cables in redacted form, removing the names of sources and others in vulnerable positions. On 28 November, the first 220 cables were published under this agreement by {{lang|es|El País}} (Spain), {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}} (Germany), {{lang|fr|Le Monde}} (France), The Guardian (United Kingdom), and The New York Times (United States).Shane, Scott and Lehren, Andrew W. [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=2&bl "Leaked Cables Offer Raw Look at U.S. Diplomacy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160723184323/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=2&bl |date=23 July 2016 }} The New York Times, 28 November 2010. WikiLeaks had planned to release the rest over several months, and as of 11 January 2011, 2,017 had been published.{{Citation needed|date=March 2023}}

The remaining cables were published in September 2011 after a series of events compromised the security of a WikiLeaks file containing the cables. This included WikiLeaks volunteers placing an encrypted file containing all WikiLeaks data online as "insurance" in July 2010, in case something happened to the organization.Domscheit-Berg, Daniel. Inside WikiLeaks. Doubleday 2011, pp. 192–195. In February 2011 David Leigh of The Guardian published the encryption passphrase in a book;{{Cite web|title=WikiLeaks password 'leaked by journalists' - 9News|url=https://www.9news.com.au/world/us-pondered-poisoning-assange-court-told/919d931e-f6cf-4974-aa8c-6bcfcf9a51a8|access-date=2022-02-22|website=www.9news.com.au|date=25 February 2020 |archive-date=22 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220222154156/https://www.9news.com.au/world/us-pondered-poisoning-assange-court-told/919d931e-f6cf-4974-aa8c-6bcfcf9a51a8|url-status=live}} he had received it from Assange so he could access a copy of the Cablegate file, and believed the passphrase was a temporary one, unique to that file. In August 2011, German weekly Der Freitag published some of these details, enabling others to piece the information together and decrypt the Cablegate files. The cables were then available online, fully unredacted. In response, WikiLeaks decided on 1 September 2011 to publish all 251,287 unedited documents.Greenwald, Glenn. [https://www.salon.com/2011/09/02/wikileaks_28/ "Facts and myths in the WikiLeaks/Guardian saga"], Salon, 2 September 2011. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120229014538/http://www.salon.com/2011/09/02/wikileaks_28/singleton/|date=29 February 2012}} from the original on 7 March 2012.

• Stöcker, Christian. [http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,783778,00.html "A Dispatch Disaster in Six Acts"], Der Spiegel, 1 September 2011. [https://web.archive.org/web/20120305104647/http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,783778,00.html Archived] from the original on 7 March 2012.
• Mackey, Robert et al. [http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/all-leaked-u-s-cables-were-made-available-online-as-wikileaks-splintered/?scp=9&sq=Julian+Assange&st=nyt "All Leaked U.S. Cables Were Made Available Online as WikiLeaks Splintered"], The New York Times, 1 September 2011. [https://web.archive.org/web/20121011002500/http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/all-leaked-u-s-cables-were-made-available-online-as-wikileaks-splintered/?scp=9&sq=Julian+Assange&st=nyt Archived] from the original on 7 March 2012.

The publication of the cables was the third in a series of U.S. classified document leaks distributed by WikiLeaks in 2010, following the Afghan War documents leak in July, and the Iraq War documents leak in October. Over 130,000 of the cables are unclassified, some 100,000 are labeled "confidential", around 15,000 have the higher classification "secret", and none are classified as "top secret" on the classification scale.

{{sister

|project=wikinews

|text={{hidden|headerstyle=text-align: left|Wikinews has news on this topic|*Wikileaks crashes under cyber attack, 31 August 2011

• ACLU, EFF challenging US 'secret' court orders seeking twitter data, 7 April 2011
• Wikileaks to release thousands of secret documents; 'international embarrassment' likely, 27 November 2010
• Files will risk 'countless' lives, Obama administration warns Wikileaks, 28 November 2010
• Wikileaks website attacked; millions of files to be released tonight, 28 November 2010
• Wikileaks cable disclosure shows Arab fears of Iranian ambitions, 30 November 2010
• Latest 'CableGate' disclosures hint at US diplomatic tactics in Spain and beyond, 1 December 2010
• Leaked cables cause Australian concern, 10 December 2010}}

}}

In June 2010, the magazine Wired reported that the U.S. State Department and embassy personnel were concerned that Chelsea Manning, a United States Army soldier charged with the unauthorized download of classified material while stationed in Iraq, had leaked diplomatic cables. WikiLeaks rejected the report as inaccurate: "Allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified U.S. embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect".{{cite magazine|author=Zetter, Kim; Poulsen, Kevin|url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/state-department-anxious/|title=State Department Anxious About Possible Leak of Cables to Wikileaks|magazine=Wired|date=8 June 2010|access-date=29 November 2010|archive-date=2 July 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120702174148/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/state-department-anxious/|url-status=live}}Staff writer (6 June 2010). [https://www.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/15612005016 "Allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified US embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304075412/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/15612005016 |date=4 March 2016 }}. WikiLeaks (via Twitter). Retrieved 4 December 2010.

However, during that same month (June 2010), The Guardian had been offered "half a million military dispatches from the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq. There might be more after that, including an immense bundle of confidential diplomatic cables", and Alan Rusbridger, the editor of The Guardian had contacted Bill Keller, editor of The New York Times, to see if he would be interested in sharing the dissemination of the information.{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.html?ref=world |work=The New York Times |first=Bill |last=Keller |title=The Times's Dealings With Julian Assange |date=26 January 2011 |access-date=25 February 2017 |archive-date=23 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160723184326/http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.html?ref=world |url-status=live }}

Manning was suspected to have uploaded all that was obtained to WikiLeaks, which chose to release the material in stages so as to have the greatest possible impact.{{cite web|url=http://wikileaks.dd19.de/static/html/faq.html |title=Cable Viewer |publisher=wikileaks.dd19.de |access-date=3 December 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207094056/http://wikileaks.dd19.de/static/html/faq.html |archive-date=7 December 2010}}

According to The Guardian, all the diplomatic cables were marked "Sipdis", denoting "secret internet protocol distribution", which means they had been distributed via the closed U.S. SIPRNet, the U.S. Department of Defense's classified version of the civilian internet.{{cite news|author=Tisdall, Simon|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea|title=Wikileaks Cables Reveal China 'Ready To Abandon North Korea' – Leaked Dispatches Show Beijing Is Frustrated with Military Actions of 'Spoiled Child' and Increasingly Favours Reunified Korea|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=29 November 2010|access-date=30 November 2010|archive-date=11 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130911175226/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea|url-status=live}} More than three million U.S. government personnel and soldiers have access to this network.Borger, Julian; Leigh, David. (28 November 2010). [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/siprnet-america-stores-secret-cables "Siprnet: Where America Stores Its Secret Cables – Defence Department's Hidden Internet Is Meant To Be Secure, But Millions of Officials and Soldiers Have Access"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170122035727/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/siprnet-america-stores-secret-cables |date=22 January 2017 }}. The Guardian. Accessed 12 December 2010.
"The US general accounting office identified 3,067,000 people cleared to "secret" and above in a 1993 study." Documents marked "top secret" are not included in the system. Such a large quantity of secret information was available to a wide audience because, as The Guardian alleged, after the 11 September attacks an increased focus had been placed on sharing information since gaps in intra-governmental information sharing had been exposed. More specifically, the diplomatic, military, law enforcement, and intelligence communities would be able to do their jobs better with this easy access to analytic and operative information. A spokesman said that in the previous weeks and months additional measures had been taken to improve the security of the system and prevent leaks.

File:Hillary Clinton speaking at Families USA.jpg Hillary Clinton discussed the leak with diplomats.]]

On 22 November, an announcement was made via WikiLeaks' Twitter feed that the next release would be "7× the size of the Iraq War Logs".{{cite web|url=https://www.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/6564225640042499|title=WikiLeaks Twitter Status|publisher=WikiLeaks (via Twitter)|date=22 November 2010|access-date=29 November 2010|archive-date=30 January 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160130122021/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/6564225640042499|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=WikiLeaks Promises Leak 'Seven Times Bigger than Iraq' – Coming Months Will See 'History Redefined'|first=Andrea|last=Petrou|work=TechEye|date=22 November 2010|url=http://www.techeye.net/internet/wikileaks-promises-leak-seven-times-bigger-than-iraq|access-date=12 December 2010|archive-date=21 December 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101221014307/http://www.techeye.net/internet/wikileaks-promises-leak-seven-times-bigger-than-iraq|url-status=dead}} U.S. authorities and the media had speculated, at the time, that they could contain diplomatic cables.{{cite news|author=Staff writer|title=Telegraph: WikiLeaks To Release Three Million Secret US Documents|work=Focus Information Agency|date=23 November 2010|url=http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n235797|access-date=12 December 2010|archive-date=2 January 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140102192248/http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n235797|url-status=dead}} Prior to the expected leak, the government of the United Kingdom (UK) sent a DA-Notice to UK newspapers, which requested advance notice from newspapers regarding the expected publication.{{cite web|author=Butselaar, Emily|title=Wikileaks: UK Issues DA-Notice as US Briefs Allies on Fresh Leak|work=Index on Censorship|date=26 November 2010|url=http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2010/11/us-uk-wikileaks-d-notice-leak/|access-date=12 December 2010|archive-date=2 August 2012|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120802/http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2010/11/us-uk-wikileaks-d-notice-leak/|url-status=live}} Index on Censorship pointed out that "there is no obligation on [the] media to comply". Under the terms of a DA-Notice, "[n]ewspaper editors would speak to [the] Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee prior to publication". The Guardian was revealed to have been the source of the copy of the documents given to The New York Times in order to prevent the British government from obtaining any injunction against its publication.Calderone, Michael (28 November 2010). [https://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20101129/ts_yblog_thecutline/guardian-editor-says-they-gave-cables-to-the-ny-times "The Guardian Gave State Dept. Cables to the NY Times"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113011848/http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20101129/ts_yblog_thecutline/guardian-editor-says-they-gave-cables-to-the-ny-times |date=13 January 2011 }} Yahoo! News. Retrieved 3 December 2010. The Pakistani newspaper Dawn stated that the U.S. newspapers The New York Times and The Washington Post were expected to publish parts of the diplomatic cables on 28 November, including 94 Pakistan-related documents.{{cite news|author=Iqbal, Anwar|title=WikiLeaks Plans To Release 94 Papers about Pakistan|date=27 November 2010|work=Dawn|url=http://www.dawn.com/2010/11/27/wikileaks-plans-to-release-94-papers-about-pakistan-2.html|access-date=27 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129044501/http://www.dawn.com/2010/11/27/wikileaks-plans-to-release-94-papers-about-pakistan-2.html|archive-date=29 November 2010|url-status=live}}

On 26 November, Assange sent a letter to the U.S. Department of State, via his lawyer Jennifer Robinson, inviting them to "privately nominate any specific instances (record numbers or names) where it considers the publication of information would put individual persons at significant risk of harm that has not already been addressed".{{cite news|title=US Rejects Talks with WikiLeaks|date=28 November 2010|agency=Agence France-Presse | work=The Sydney Morning Herald|url=http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/us-rejects-talks-with-wikileaks-20101128-18c57.html|access-date=28 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129222408/http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/us-rejects-talks-with-wikileaks-20101128-18c57.html|archive-date=29 November 2010|url-status=live}}{{cite news |title=Letters between Wikileaks and the U.S. Government |publisher=Documents.nytimes.com |url=http://documents.nytimes.com/letters-between-wikileaks-and-gov#text/p1 |url-status=live |access-date=29 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101201154134/http://documents.nytimes.com/letters-between-wikileaks-and-gov#text/p1 |archive-date=1 December 2010}} Harold Koh, the Legal Adviser of the Department of State, rejected the proposal, stating: "We will not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained U.S. Government classified materials". Koh added that the material was acquired illegally and "as long as WikiLeaks holds such material, the violation of the law is ongoing". Assange responded by writing back to the U.S. State Department that "you have chosen to respond in a manner which leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful and you are instead concerned to suppress evidence of human rights abuse and other criminal behaviour".{{cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article921240.ece|title=U.S. Tries To Suppress Evidence of Human Rights: Assange|agency=Press Trust of India|work=The Hindu|date=29 November 2010|access-date=3 December 2010|location=Chennai, India|archive-date=2 December 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101202025327/http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article921240.ece|url-status=live}} Ahead of the leak, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other American officials contacted governments in several countries about the impending release.{{cite news|author=Harnden, Toby|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8166421/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-could-face-grave-consequences.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8166421/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-could-face-grave-consequences.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title=WikiLeaks: Julian Assange Could Face 'Grave Consequences'|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=28 November 2010|location=London|author-link=Toby Harnden}}{{cbignore}}

The five newspapers that had obtained an advance copy of all leaked cables began releasing the cables on 28 November 2010, and WikiLeaks made the cables selected by these newspapers and redacted by their journalists available on its website. "They are releasing the documents we selected", {{lang|fr|Le Monde}}{{'}}s managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann, said in an interview.Staff writer (3 December 2010). [https://www.foxnews.com/world/respected-media-outlets-collaborate-with-wikileaks/ "Respected Media Outlets Collaborate with WikiLeaks"] . Associated Press (via Fox News). Retrieved 13 May 2018.

WikiLeaks aimed to release the cables in phases over several months due to their global scope and significance."The embassy cables will be released in stages over the next few months. The subject matter of these cables is of such importance, and the geographical spread so broad, that to do otherwise would not do this material justice". See: {{cite web|title=Secret US Embassy Cables |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=28 November 2010 |url=http://wikileaks.dd19.de/cablegate.html |access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101128231513/http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ |archive-date=28 November 2010 |url-status=live }} The first batch of leaks released comprised 220 cables. Further cables were subsequently made available on the WikiLeaks website. The full set of cables published by WikiLeaks can be browsed and searched by a variety of websites.The history of the release can be viewed at [http://www.cablegatesearch.net/history.php Cablegatesearch.net] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110320235116/http://www.cablegatesearch.net/history.php |date=20 March 2011 }} and [http://www.xs4all.nl/~aebr/wl/history.html Cablegate torrent release history] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110410055445/http://www.xs4all.nl/~aebr/wl/history.html |date=10 April 2011 }}.

• See Greenwald, Glenn (10 December 2010). [http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/10/wikileaks_media/index.html "The Media's Authoritarianism and WikiLeaks"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101212030838/http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/10/wikileaks_media/index.html |date=12 December 2010 }}. Salon.com. Retrieved 12 December 2010.
• {{cite web |author=WikiLeaks |title=Secret US Embassy Cables |date=30 November 2010 |url=http://wikileaks.dd19.de/cablegate.html |access-date=2 December 2010 |archive-date=28 November 2010 |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/5uaR3rg5U?url=http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ |url-status=dead }}
• {{cite web |url=http://www.privetbank.com.ua/cablegate/index.html |title=WikiLeaks Torrents |access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-date=6 August 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140806171823/http://www.privetbank.com.ua/cablegate/index.html |url-status=live }}
• {{cite web |url=http://cablesearch.org/ |title=Cable Search BETA |publisher=Cablesearch.org |access-date=20 December 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101225013607/http://cablesearch.org/ |archive-date=25 December 2010 }}
• {{cite web |url=http://cablesearch.org/?page_id=99 |title=FAQ « Cable Search BETA |publisher=Cablesearch.org |access-date=20 December 2010 |archive-date=26 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726215019/http://cablesearch.org/?page_id=99 |url-status=live }}
• {{cite web |url=http://www.xs4all.nl/~aebr/wl/index.html |title=900 more cables |access-date=2 February 2011 |archive-date=22 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230322130201/https://aebr.home.xs4all.nl/wl/index.html |url-status=live }}

{{main|Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak}}

The contents of the U.S. diplomatic cables leak describe in detail events and incidents surrounding international affairs from 274 embassies dating from 28 December 1966 to 28 February 2010. The diplomatic cables revealed numerous unguarded comments and revelations: US diplomats gathering personal information about Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, and other top UN officials; critiques and praises about the host countries of various U.S. embassies, discussion and resolutions towards ending ongoing tension in the Middle East, efforts for and resistance against nuclear disarmament, actions in the War on Terror, assessments of other threats around the world, dealings between various countries, U.S. intelligence and counterintelligence efforts, U.S. support of dictatorship and other diplomatic actions.

The leaked cables revealed that diplomats of the U.S. and Britain eavesdropped on Secretary General Kofi Annan in the weeks before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, in apparent violation of international treaties prohibiting spying at the UN.{{Registration required|date=January 2011}} [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29spy.html?_r=1&ref=global-home "U.S. Expands Role of Diplomats in Spying"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161201025516/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29spy.html?_r=1&ref=global-home |date=1 December 2016 }}. The New York Times. 28 November 2010.{{cite news |last1=Booth |first1=Robert |last2=Borger |first2=Julian |date=28 November 2010 |title=US Diplomats Spied on UN Leadership |newspaper=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un |access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-date=10 September 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130910075646/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un |url-status=live }} The intelligence information the diplomats were ordered to gather included biometric information, passwords, and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.{{cite news |author=MacAskill, Ewen |author2=Booth, Robert |date=2 December 2010 |title=WikiLeaks cables: CIA drew up UN spying wishlist for diplomats |newspaper=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/02/wikileaks-cables-cia-united-nations |access-date=13 December 2010 |archive-date=8 September 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130908100059/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/02/wikileaks-cables-cia-united-nations |url-status=live }} It also included Internet and intranet usernames, e-mail addresses, web site URLs useful for identification, credit card numbers, frequent flier account numbers, and work schedules.{{cite news |date=29 November 2010 |title=Cables show US sought personal info of foreign diplomats at UN |newspaper=The Times of India |agency=Press Trust of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Cables-show-US-sought-personal-info-of-foreign-diplomats-at-UN/articleshow/7007291.cms |url-status=live |access-date=30 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120911134337/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-11-29/us/28233885_1_unsc-national-humint-collection-directive-foreign-diplomats |archive-date=11 September 2012}}{{cite news |author=Mazzetti, Mark |date=28 November 2010 |title=U.S. Expands Role of Diplomats in Spying |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29spy.html |access-date=13 December 2010 |archive-date=29 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129222422/http://www.nytimes.com//2010//11//29//world//29spy.html |url-status=live }} The targeted human intelligence was requested in a process known as the National Humint Collection Directive, and was aimed at foreign diplomats of US allies as well. WikiLeaks released the cable on 28 November 2010.

The Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative was contained in a February 2009 diplomatic cable to the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, which was leaked, redacted and released by WikiLeaks in 2010. On 6 December 2010, the BBC called it "one of the most sensitive" leaks.{{Cite news |author=Kendall, Bridget |date=6 December 2010 |title=Wikileaks: site list reveals US sensitivities |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041 |url-status=dead |access-date=8 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101209015840/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041 |archive-date=9 December 2010}} WikiLeaks removed only a minority of the details of names and locations, and left the rest uncensored; details of the exact location of the assets were not included in the list.{{cite news |date=6 December 2010 |title=WikiLeaks publishes list of worldwide infrastructure 'critical' to security of U.S. |newspaper=MSNBC |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna40526224 |url-status=live |access-date=10 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101208035422/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40526224/ |archive-date=8 December 2010}} The list included critical facilities for the global supply chain, global communications, and economically important goods and services.

An investigation into two senior Zimbabwe army commanders who communicated with US Ambassador Charles A. Ray was launched, with the two facing a possible court martial.Ray Ndlovu, [http://mg.co.za/article/2011-09-23-wikileaks-puts-zim-generals-in-firing-line WikiLeaks puts Zim generals in firing line] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110924201537/http://mg.co.za/article/2011-09-23-wikileaks-puts-zim-generals-in-firing-line |date=24 September 2011 }} Mail & Guardian 23 September 2011 On 14 September the Committee to Protect Journalists said that an Ethiopian journalist named in the cables was forced to flee the country[http://www.cpj.org/2011/09/ethiopian-journalist-idd-in-wikileaks-cable-flees.php "Ethiopian journalist ID'd in WikiLeaks cable flees country"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927050449/http://www.cpj.org/2011/09/ethiopian-journalist-idd-in-wikileaks-cable-flees.php |date=27 September 2011 }} Committee to Protect Journalists 14 September 2011 but WikiLeaks accused the CPJ of distorting the situation "for marketing purposes".Rachel McAthy, [http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/wikileaks-and-cpj-in-dispute-after-journalist-flees-ethiopia/s2/a546038/ WikiLeaks and CPJ in dispute after journalist 'flees' Ethiopia] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111112014819/http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/wikileaks-and-cpj-in-dispute-after-journalist-flees-ethiopia/s2/a546038/ |date=12 November 2011 }}, Journalism.co.uk, 16 September 2011 Al Jazeera replaced its news director, Wadah Khanfar, on 20 September after he was identified in the cables.David D. Kirkpatrick, [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/world/middleeast/after-disclosures-by-wikileaks-al-jazeera-replaces-its-top-news-director.html After Disclosures by WikiLeaks, Al Jazeera Replaces Its Top News Director] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210418164433/https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/world/middleeast/after-disclosures-by-wikileaks-al-jazeera-replaces-its-top-news-director.html |date=18 April 2021 }} The New York Times 20 September 2011 The naming of mainland China residents reportedly "sparked an online witch-hunt by Chinese nationalist groups, with some advocating violence against those now known to have met with U.S. Embassy staff."Mark MacKinnon, [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/leaked-cables-spark-witch-hunt-for-chinese-rats/article2165339/ Leaked cables spark witch-hunt for Chinese 'rats'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304103918/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/leaked-cables-spark-witch-hunt-for-chinese-rats/article2165339/|date=4 March 2016}} The Globe and Mail, 24 September 2011 US officials said the damage caused was limited.{{cite news |last1=Pilkington |first1=Ed |date=31 July 2013 |title=Bradley Manning leak did not result in deaths by enemy forces, court hears |language=en |work=the Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/bradley-manning-sentencing-hearing-pentagon |access-date=29 January 2022 |archive-date=29 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220129005217/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/bradley-manning-sentencing-hearing-pentagon |url-status=live }}{{cite news |last1=Hosenball |first1=Mark |date=18 January 2011 |title=US officials privately say WikiLeaks damage limited |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/wikileaks-damage/us-officials-privately-say-wikileaks-damage-limited-idUSN1816319120110118 |access-date=29 January 2022 |archive-date=29 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220129005216/https://www.reuters.com/article/wikileaks-damage/us-officials-privately-say-wikileaks-damage-limited-idUSN1816319120110118 |url-status=live }}

One of the leaked documents included comments sent to the US State Department by Philip Alston, United Nations special rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions regarding the Ishaqi incident. Alston stated that US forces handcuffed and executed the residents of a house on 15 March 2006. The residents included five children under 5 years of age. Autopsies later confirmed that "all the corpses were shot in the head and handcuffed". The US said their troops had been fired on when they approached the house and the people were killed by a support air raid. A US inquiry three months later determined that the soldiers had acted according to the rules of engagement in taking down a safe house. The Iraqi government then said they would open an inquiry. In September 2011, the Iraqi government said they would reopen their investigation into the incident as a result of the publication of the cable. Iraqi officials said that the cable was sufficient cause to deny the Americans any bases and demand that all troops leave.{{cite news |last1=Gowen |first1=Annie |date=2 September 2011 |title=Iraq to reopen probe of deadly 2006 raid |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/iraq-to-reopen-probe-of-deadly-ishaqi-raid/2011/09/02/gIQAT0hSwJ_story.html |access-date=20 December 2021 |archive-date=12 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121112142606/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/iraq-to-reopen-probe-of-deadly-ishaqi-raid/2011/09/02/gIQAT0hSwJ_story.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news |last1=MacAskill |first1=Ewan |date=2 September 2011 |title=WikiLeaks disclosure reopens Iraqi inquiry into massacre of family |language=en |work=the Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-iraq-massacre-inquiry |access-date=30 January 2022 |archive-date=30 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220130171434/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-iraq-massacre-inquiry |url-status=live }}

In December 2010, {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}} reported that one of the cables showed that the US had placed pressure on Germany not to pursue the 13 suspected CIA agents involved in the 2003 abduction of Khalid El-Masri, a German citizen. The abduction was probably carried out through "extraordinary rendition". German prosecutors in Munich had issued arrest warrants for the 13 suspected CIA operatives involved in the abduction. The cables released by Wikileaks showed that after contact from the then-Deputy US Ambassador John M. Koenig and US diplomats the Munich public prosecutor's office and Germany's Justice Ministry and Foreign Ministry all cooperated with the US and the agents were not extradited to Germany.{{cite news |last1=Gebauer |first1=Matthias |last2=Goetz |first2=John |title=The CIA's El-Masri Abduction: Cables Show Germany Caved to Pressure from Washington |url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-cia-s-el-masri-abduction-cables-show-germany-caved-to-pressure-from-washington-a-733860.html |access-date=25 October 2019 |publisher=Spiegel Online |date=9 December 2019 |archive-date=24 October 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191024162550/https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-cia-s-el-masri-abduction-cables-show-germany-caved-to-pressure-from-washington-a-733860.html |url-status=live }}

The Guardian released its coverage of the leaked cables in numerous articles, including an interactive database, starting on 28 November.{{cite news|author=Staff writer (portal to database)|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks|title=US Embassy Cables: Browse the Database|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=28 November 2010|access-date=28 November 2010|archive-date=21 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130621093005/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks|url-status=live}} {{lang|es|El País}} released its report{{cite news |last1=Jiménez |first1=Vicente |last2=Caño |first2=Antonio |date=14 July 2010 |title=La Mayor Filtración de la Historia Deja al Descubierto los Secretos de la Política Exterior de EE UU |language=es |trans-title=The Biggest Infiltration in History Leaves U.S. Foreign Policy Secrets Out in the Open |work=El País |url=http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/mayor/filtracion/historia/deja/descubierto/secretos/politica/exterior/EE/UU/elpepuint/20101128elpepuint_25/Tes |url-status=live |access-date=28 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101130122158/http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/mayor/filtracion/historia/deja/descubierto/secretos/politica/exterior/EE/UU/elpepuint/20101128elpepuint_25/Tes |archive-date=30 November 2010}} saying there was an agreement between the newspapers for simultaneous publication of the "internationally relevant" documents, but that each newspaper was free to select and treat those documents that primarily relate to its own country.{{cite news |author=Staff writer |date=28 November 2010 |title=Preguntas y Respuestas Sobre los Papeles del Departamento de Estado |language=es |work=El País |url=http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Preguntas/respuestas/papeles/Departamento/Estado/elpepuint/20101128elpepuint_11/Tes |url-status=live |access-date=10 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130523084321/http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Preguntas/respuestas/papeles/Departamento/Estado/elpepuint/20101128elpepuint_11/Tes |archive-date=23 May 2013}} {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}} also released its preliminary report, with extended coverage promised for the next day.{{cite web|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731580,00.html|author=Staff writer|title=The US Diplomatic Leaks: A Superpower's View of the World|work=Der Spiegel|date=28 November 2010|access-date=3 December 2010|archive-date=3 December 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101203180547/http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731580,00.html|url-status=live}} Its cover for 29 November was also leaked with the initial report.[http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2010/11/spiegelgoodbig.jpg (Image of 29 November 2010 Der Spiegel cover)] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101128210244/http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2010/11/spiegelgoodbig.jpg |date=28 November 2010 }} (undated posting). Gawker (blog). Retrieved 29 November 2010.

The New York Times initially covered the story in a nine-part series spanning nine days, with the first story published simultaneously with the other outlets.{{Registration required}} {{cite news|title=Cables Obtained by WikiLeaks Shine Light Into Secret Diplomatic Channels|first1=Scott|last1=Shane|first2=Andrew W.|last2=Lehren|work=The New York Times|date=28 November 2010|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp|access-date=28 November 2010|archive-date=15 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615001359/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp|url-status=live}} The New York Times was not originally intended to receive the leak, allegedly due to its unflattering portrayal of the site's founder, but The Guardian decided to share coverage, citing earlier cooperation while covering the Afghan and Iraqi war logs. The Washington Post reported that it also requested permission to see the documents, but was rejected for undisclosed reasons.{{cite news|title=WikiLeaks Spurned New York Times, but Guardian Leaked State Department Cables|first1=Paul|last1=Farhi|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=29 November 2010|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112905421.html|access-date=30 November 2010|archive-date=3 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181003155107/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112905421.html|url-status=live}} CNN was originally supposed to receive an advance copy of the documents as well, but did not after it refused to sign a confidentiality agreement with WikiLeaks.{{cite news |author=Staff writer |date=29 November 2010 |title=U.S. Documents Obtained by WikiLeaks Posted Despite Site Problem |publisher=CNN |url=http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/28/wikileaks.attack/?hpt=T1 |url-status=live |access-date=8 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181005005754/http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/28/wikileaks.attack/?hpt=T1 |archive-date=5 October 2018}} The Wall Street Journal also refused advance access, apparently for similar reasons as CNN.{{cite news |author=Lindsay, James |date=29 November 2010 |title=Wikileaks Cables Expose World Leaders' Sensitive Diplomacy |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2010/11/29/DI2010112902197.html |url-status=live |access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181003155116/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2010/11/29/DI2010112902197.html |archive-date=3 October 2018}}

The Russian weekly newspaper Russky Reporter ({{lang|ru|Русский Репортёр}})[http://rusrep.ru/ rusrep.ru] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181004103943/http://www.rusrep.ru/|date=4 October 2018}}. Home URL of newspaper. Retrieved 13 January 2011. has published a large number of cables, both in English and in Russian translation.Staff writer (undated). [http://rusrep.ru/wikileaks "PP/WikiLeaks"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101212232951/http://rusrep.ru/wikileaks|date=12 December 2010}} (portal page to newspaper's coverage of the U.S. diplomatic cables leak; primarily in Russian – some links lead to pages with text of diplomatic cables in both Russian and English languages). Russky Reporter. retrieved 13 January 2011. Some of their reporting was criticised for being inaccurate and posting misleading translations of cables. Russky Reporter denied misleading readers, and said they had early access to WikiLeaks cables through Israel Shamir.{{Cite news |last=Bigg |first=Claire |date=2010-12-14 |title=Critics Allege Russian Magazine Is Misrepresenting WikiLeaks Cables |language=en |work=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |url=https://www.rferl.org/a/wikileaks_misinformation_critics_allege_russian_magazine_misrepresenting_cables/2247274.html |access-date=2023-05-02 |archive-date=2 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230502064441/https://www.rferl.org/a/wikileaks_misinformation_critics_allege_russian_magazine_misrepresenting_cables/2247274.html |url-status=live }}{{cite web |last=Moynihan |first=Michael C. |date=14 December 2010 |title=Assange's Extremist Employees |url=http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/14/the-assange-employees/ |publisher=Reason |access-date=2 May 2023 |archive-date=12 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412224026/https://reason.com/archives/2010/12/14/the-assange-employees |url-status=live }} Yulia Latynina, writing in The Moscow Times, alleged that Shamir concocted a cable which allegedly quoted European Union diplomats' plans to walk out of the Durban II speech by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, for publication in the pro-Putin Russky Reporter in December 2010.{{cite news |last=Tiku |first=Nitasha |date=14 December 2011 |title=WikiLeaks May Employ an Anti-Semitic Holocaust Denier |url=https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/12/wikileaks_may_employ_an_antise.html |access-date=10 January 2021 |work=New York |archive-date=12 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210112110124/https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/12/wikileaks_may_employ_an_antise.html |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Moynihan |first=Michael |date=2010-12-14 |title=Assange's Extremist Employees |url=https://reason.com/2010/12/14/the-assange-employees/ |access-date=2022-08-05 |website=Reason.com |language=en-US |archive-date=29 December 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171229080345/http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/14/the-assange-employees |url-status=live }}{{cite news |last=von Twickel |first=Nikolaus |date=10 December 2010 |title=Putin Bristles Over Leaked U.S. Cables |url=http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/putin-bristles-over-leaked-us-cables/426044.html |access-date=22 December 2010 |publisher=The Moscow Times |archive-date=22 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101222125007/http://themoscowtimes.com/news/article/putin-bristles-over-leaked-us-cables/426044.html |url-status=live }} Shamir has denied this accusation. The Lebanese daily newspaper Al-Akhbar published about 183 cables on 2 December 2010.{{cite news |title=Al Akhbar Newspaper publishes US cables not found on WikiLeaks |date=3 December 2010 |publisher=Ya Libnan |url=http://www.yalibnan.com/2010/12/03/al-akhbar-newspaper-publishes-u-s-cables-not-found-on-wikileaks |access-date=12 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101210192939/http://www.yalibnan.com/2010/12/03/al-akhbar-newspaper-publishes-u-s-cables-not-found-on-wikileaks/ |archive-date=10 December 2010 |url-status=live}}[http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/soc/wl/al-akhbar/al-akhbar.html] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111228131052/http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/soc/wl/al-akhbar/al-akhbar.html|date=28 December 2011}} (portal page in Arabic language; abstracts of diplomatic cables (in English language) behind various country-flag links on portal page; each abstract links to entire respective underlying diplomatic cable). These are copies rescued from Google cache. Australian-based Fairfax Media obtained access to the cables under a separate arrangement.Dorling, Philip (11 December 2010). [https://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/how-i-met-julian-assange-and-secured-the-american-embassy-cables-20101210-18sxj.html "How I Met Julian Assange and Secured the American Embassy Cables"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314110446/http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/how-i-met-julian-assange-and-secured-the-american-embassy-cables-20101210-18sxj.html|date=14 March 2017}}. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 13 December 2010. Fairfax newspapers began releasing their own stories based on the leaked cables on 7 December 2010.Holmes, Jonathan (14 December 2010). [http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/14/3093023.htm?site=thedrum "WikiLeaks, Journalists and That Elusive Public Interest"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101214072101/http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/14/3093023.htm?site=thedrum|date=14 December 2010}}. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 17 December 2010.Massola, James (16 December 2010). [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/fairfax-publishes-diplomatic-cables-in-wikileaks-row/story-e6frg6nf-1225971797889 "Fairfax Publishes Diplomatic Cables in WikiLeaks Row"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130613113519/http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/fairfax-publishes-diplomatic-cables-in-wikileaks-row/story-e6frg6nf-1225971797889|date=13 June 2013}}. The Australian. Retrieved 17 December 2010. The Cuban government-run website Razones de Cuba{{cite web |date=18 September 2012 |title=razonesdecuba.cubadebate.cu |url=http://razonesdecuba.cubadebate.cu/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121009112008/http://razonesdecuba.cubadebate.cu/ |archive-date=9 October 2012 |access-date=9 October 2012 |publisher=razonesdecuba.cubadebate.cu}} started publishing Spanish translations of WikiLeaks documents on 23 December 2010.{{cite news |last=Oppmann |first=Patrick |date=24 December 2010 |title=Cuba Begins To Publish Leaked U.S. Documents |publisher=CNN |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/12/24/wikileaks.cuba/index.html |url-status=live |access-date=11 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113061504/http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/12/24/wikileaks.cuba/index.html |archive-date=13 January 2011}}

The Swedish newspapers {{lang|sv|Svenska Dagbladet}} and {{lang|sv|Aftonbladet}} started reporting on the leaks in early December 2010.{{cite news |date=1 December 2010 |title=S bad USA om PR-hjälp | Inrikes | SvD |language=sv |newspaper=Svenska Dagbladet |publisher=Svd.se |url=http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/s-bad-usa-om-pr-hjalp_5760769.svd |url-status=live |access-date=3 September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111013181949/http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/s-bad-usa-om-pr-hjalp_5760769.svd |archive-date=13 October 2011}} In Norway {{lang|no|Verdens Gang}} (VG) brought the first leaks concerning the United States and the Norwegian government on 7 December.{{cite web |url=http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10012143 |title=USA slakter PSTs terrorberedskap – VG Nett om WikiLeaks |publisher=Vg.no |date=2 January 2010 |access-date=3 September 2011 |archive-date=10 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101210072332/http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10012143 |url-status=live }} {{lang|no|Aftenposten}}, a Norwegian daily newspaper, reported on 17 December 2010 that it had gained access to the full cable set of 251,287 documents.{{cite web|author=Staff writer|url=http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/wikileaks/article3953048.ece|title=250.000 Nye Wikileaks-Dokumenter til Aftenposten – Aftenposten Har Fått Tilgang til 250.000 Nye Wikileaks-Dokumenter. Nyhetsredaktør Ole Erik Almlid Sier Avisen Kan Bruke Dokumentene uten Betingelser|work=Aftenposten|language=no|date=17 December 2010|access-date=21 December 2010|archive-date=20 December 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101220105305/http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/wikileaks/article3953048.ece|url-status=live}} While it is unclear how it received the documents, they were apparently not obtained directly from WikiLeaks. {{lang|no|Aftenposten}} started releasing cables that were not available in the official WikiLeaks distribution.{{cite web|title=Ambassade-dokumente|work=Aftenposten|date=5 January 2011|url=http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/ |access-date=5 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110106083304/http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/ |archive-date=6 January 2011 |url-status=live}} {{as of|2011|01|05|url=http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/}}, it had released just over one hundred cables unpublished by WikiLeaks, with about a third of these related to Sri Lanka, and many related to Norway. Politiken, a Danish daily newspaper, announced on 8 January 2011 that it had obtained access to the full set of cables.Lindqvist, Andreas (8 January 2011). [http://politiken.dk/udland/ECE1161934/politiken-faar-adgang-til-alle-wikileaks-dokumenterne "Politiken Får Adgang til Alle WikiLeaks-Dokumenterne"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110211215935/http://politiken.dk/udland/ECE1161934/politiken-faar-adgang-til-alle-wikileaks-dokumenterne/ |date=11 February 2011 }}. (in Danish). Politiken. Retrieved 11 January 2011.

NRC, a Dutch daily newspaper, and RTL Nieuws, a Dutch television news service, announced on 14 January 2011 that they had gained access to the about 3,000 cables sent from The Hague, via {{lang|no|Aftenposten}}.{{cite news |author=door Ernst-Jan Pfauth |url=http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/01/14/rtl-nieuws-en-nrc-publiceren-om-1600-nederlandse-wikileaks-documenten/ |title=RTL Nieuws en NRC publiceren om 16:00 Nederlandse WikiLeaks documenten |newspaper=NRC |date=14 January 2011 |publisher=nrc.nl |access-date=3 September 2011 |archive-date=17 September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110917052510/http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/01/14/rtl-nieuws-en-nrc-publiceren-om-1600-nederlandse-wikileaks-documenten/ |url-status=live }} NOS announced on the same day that it had obtained these same cables from WikiLeaks.{{cite web |url=http://nos.nl/artikel/211651-nos-rtl-en-nrc--hebben-nederlandse-wikileakscables.html |title=NOS Nieuws – NOS, RTL en NRC hebben Nederlandse WikiLeaks-cables |date=15 January 2011 |publisher=Nos.nl |access-date=3 September 2011 |archive-date=27 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827090519/http://nos.nl/artikel/211651-nos-rtl-en-nrc--hebben-nederlandse-wikileakscables.html |url-status=live }} {{lang|de|Die Welt}}, a German daily newspaper, announced on 17 January 2011 that they had gained access to the full set of cables, via {{lang|no|Aftenposten}}.{{cite news |title="Welt Online" bricht das Wikileaks-Kartell |first=Per |last=Hinrichs |url=https://www.welt.de/politik/specials/wikileaks/article12192288/Welt-Online-bricht-das-Wikileaks-Kartell.html |newspaper=Die Welt |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110120143315/http://www.welt.de/politik/specials/wikileaks/article12192288/Welt-Online-bricht-das-Wikileaks-Kartell.html |archive-date=20 January 2011 |url-status=dead |date=17 January 2011 |access-date=20 January 2011}} The Costa Rican newspaper La Nación announced on 1 March 2011 it had received 827 cables from WikiLeaks which it started publishing the next day. 764 of these were sent from the U.S. Embassy in San José while 63 were sent from other embassies and deal with Costa Rican affairs.{{cite news|title='La Nación' publicará cables de WikiLeaks sobre Costa Rica|first=Giannina|last=Segnini|language=es|newspaper=La Nación|date=1 March 2011|url=http://www.nacion.com/2011-03-01/Investigacion/NotaPrincipal/Investigacion2697518.aspx|trans-title='La Nación' will publish cables from WikiLeaks about Costa Rica|access-date=1 March 2011|archive-date=3 March 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110303114512/http://www.nacion.com/2011-03-01/Investigacion/NotaPrincipal/Investigacion2697518.aspx|url-status=dead}}

The Ecuadorian newspaper {{lang|es|El Universo}} started releasing 343 cables related to the Ecuadorian government and institutions on 6 April 2011.{{cite news|author=Staff writer|url=http://www.eluniverso.com/2011/04/06/1/1355/wikileaks-dio-diario-343-cables-ecuador.html?p=1354&m=2766|title=Wikileaks dio a este Diario 343 cables de Ecuador|work=El Universo|date=6 April 2011|access-date=6 April 2011|archive-date=9 April 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110409205236/http://www.eluniverso.com/2011/04/06/1/1355/wikileaks-dio-diario-343-cables-ecuador.html?p=1354&m=2766|url-status=live}} The publication was done the day after the Spanish newspaper {{lang|es|El País}} published a cable in which the ambassador Heather Hodges showed concerns regarding corruption in the Ecuadorian National Police, especially of Gral. Jaime Hurtado Vaca, former Police commander. The ambassador was later declared persona non grata and was requested to leave the country as soon as possible.{{cite news|author=Staff writer|url=http://www.eluniverso.com/2011/04/05/1/1355/embajada-eeuu-pidio-retirar-visa-excomandante-policia.html?p=1355&m=861|title=La Embajada de EE.UU. pidió retirar la visa al excomandante de Policía|work=El Universo|date=5 April 2011|access-date=6 April 2011|archive-date=11 April 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110411153331/http://www.eluniverso.com/2011/04/05/1/1355/embajada-eeuu-pidio-retirar-visa-excomandante-policia.html?p=1355&m=861|url-status=live}}

Several of the newspapers coordinating with WikiLeaks have published some of the cables on their own websites.{{cite web |author=Staff writer |date=5 January 2011 |title=Todos Los Cables |url=http://www.elpais.com/documentossecretos/cables/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110127101714/http://www.elpais.com/documentossecretos/cables/ |archive-date=27 January 2011 |access-date=5 January 2011 |work=El País |language=es}}

In August 2010, Assange gave Guardian journalist David Leigh an encryption key and a URL where he could locate the full Cablegate file. In February 2011, shortly before Domscheit-Berg's book appeared, Leigh and Luke Harding, another Guardian journalist, published WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's War on Secrecy via Guardian Books. In it, Leigh revealed the encryption key Assange had given him.

The key to the document is: {{code|ACollectionOfDiplomaticHistorySince_1966_ToThe_PresentDay#}}.{{cite web |url=http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2011/09/unredacted_us_d.html#comments |title=Schneier on Security: Unredacted U.S. Diplomatic WikiLeaks Cables Published |publisher=Schneier.com |date=3 September 2011 |access-date=21 June 2012 |archive-date=19 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120719073539/http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2011/09/unredacted_us_d.html#comments |url-status=live }}{{cite news|title=Wikileaks Is Suing the Guardian Over a Security Breach |first=Connor |last=Simpson |url=http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/wikileaks-suing-guardian-over-security-breach/41979/ |newspaper=The Atlantic Wire |date=31 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111231180344/http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/wikileaks-suing-guardian-over-security-breach/41979/ |archive-date=31 December 2011 |url-status=live |access-date=9 April 2017 }}

The encrypted file was placed in a hidden sub-folder on the WikiLeaks web server on which it had been placed to aid in transferring the file from WikiLeaks to Leigh and not removed due to an oversight. When the WikiLeaks website experienced denial-of-service attacks, mirror sites were setup and supporters created and shared a compressed BitTorrent of the entire site, including the hidden sub-folder.{{Cite news |last=Stöcker |first=Christian |date=2011-09-01 |title=Leak at WikiLeaks: A Dispatch Disaster in Six Acts |language=en |work=Der Spiegel |url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/leak-at-wikileaks-a-dispatch-disaster-in-six-acts-a-783778.html |access-date=2022-11-23 |issn=2195-1349 |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123071759/https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/leak-at-wikileaks-a-dispatch-disaster-in-six-acts-a-783778.html |url-status=live }} On 25 August 2011, the German magazine Der Freitag published an article about it,{{cite news |last=Kraft |first=Steffen |date=25 August 2011 |title=Leck bei Wikileaks |language=de |trans-title=Leak at Wikileaks |newspaper=Der Freitag |url=http://www.freitag.de/politik/1134-nerds-ohne-nerven |url-status=live |access-date=7 March 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111015071705/http://www.freitag.de/politik/1134-nerds-ohne-nerven |archive-date=15 October 2011}} and while it left out the crucial details, there was enough to allow others to begin piecing the information together. The story was also published in the Danish newspaper Dagbladet Information and the US Embassy in London and the US State Department were notified the same day.{{cite news |last=Gjerding |first=Sebastian |date=25 August 2011 |title=Lækage skader Wikileaks' troværdighed |language=da |newspaper=Dagbladet Information |url=http://www.information.dk/277074 |url-status=live |access-date=21 March 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130522054656/http://www.information.dk/277074 |archive-date=22 May 2013}}

{{quote box |width=30em |border=1px |align=right |bgcolor= |fontsize=85% |salign=right |source=Steffen Kraft |quote=Denn der Freitag hat eine Datei, die auch unredigierte US-Botschaftsdepeschen enthält. ... Die Datei mit dem Namen "cables.csv" ist 1,73 Gigabyte groß. ... Das Passwort zu dieser Datei liegt offen zutage und ist für Kenner der Materie zu identifizieren.

Because der Freitag have discovered a file on the internet which includes the unredacted embassy files. ... The file is called "cables.csv" and is 1.73 gigabytes in size. ... The password for this file is plain to see and identifiable for someone familiar with the material.}}

On 29 August, WikiLeaks published over 130,000 unredacted cables.{{Cite magazine |last=Poulsen |first=Kim Zetter and Kevin |title=WikiLeaks Springs a Leak: Full Database of Diplomatic Cables Appears Online |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2011/08/wikileaks-leak/ |access-date=2022-11-23 |issn=1059-1028 |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123092621/https://www.wired.com/2011/08/wikileaks-leak/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |date=2011-08-30 |title=Australia condemns 'irresponsible' Wikileaks cable leak |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-14722030 |access-date=2022-11-23 |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123092629/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-14722030 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - Wikileaks Statement on the 9 Month Anniversary of Cablegate: Release of 133,887 Cables |url=https://wikileaks.org/Wikileaks-Statement-on-the-9-Month.html |access-date=2022-11-23 |website=wikileaks.org |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123151200/https://wikileaks.org/Wikileaks-Statement-on-the-9-Month.html |url-status=live }} On 31 August, WikiLeaks tweeted{{Cite web |last=WikiLeaks |date=August 31, 2011 |title=ANNOUNCE: Use a "magnet" compatible Bit Torrent client to download the following encrypted |url=https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/108952065325268992 |access-date=2022-11-23 |website=Twitter |language=en |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123071803/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/108952065325268992 |url-status=live }} a link to a torrent of the encrypted data. On 1 September 2011, WikiLeaks announced that an encrypted version of the un-redacted US State Department cables had been available for months. WikiLeaks said that it would publish the entire, unredacted archive in searchable form on its website the next day.{{cite news |last=Ball |first=James |date=1 September 2011 |title=WikiLeaks prepares to release unredacted US cables Media guardian.co.uk |work=The Guardian |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/01/wikileaks-prepares-unredacted-us-cables |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130212090525/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/01/wikileaks-prepares-unredacted-us-cables |archive-date=12 February 2013}}. Guardian. Retrieved 5 September 2011.

The unredacted cables were published by Cryptome a day before WikiLeaks.{{cite web |last1=Young |first1=John |title=Statement of Witness |url=https://cryptome.org/2020/09/20200716-Statement-of-John-Young.pdf |access-date=15 January 2022 |archive-date=27 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220127202206/https://cryptome.org/2020/09/20200716-Statement-of-John-Young.pdf |url-status=live }} Cryptome's owner, John Young, testified in 2020 that Cryptome has never been asked by US law enforcement to remove the unredacted cables and that they remain online.{{cite news |last1=Quinn |first1=Ben |date=24 September 2020 |title=US has never asked WikiLeaks rival to remove leaked cables, court told |language=en |work=the Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange |access-date=29 January 2022 |archive-date=15 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220115002541/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange |url-status=live }}{{cite web |last1=Young |first1=John |title=Statement of Witness |url=https://cryptome.org/2020/09/20200716-Statement-of-John-Young.pdf |access-date=30 January 2022 |website=cryptome.org |publisher=Cryptome |archive-date=27 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220127202206/https://cryptome.org/2020/09/20200716-Statement-of-John-Young.pdf |url-status=live }}

On 2 September, WikiLeaks published searchable, unredacted copies of all of the cables on their website.{{cite news |last1=Press Association |date=21 September 2020 |title=Wikileaks not 'primary publisher' of unredacted cables as they appeared elsewhere first, Assange trial hears |work=Press Gazette |url=https://pressgazette.co.uk/wikileaks-not-primary-publisher-of-unredacted-cables-as-they-appeared-elsewhere-first-assange-trial-hears/ |access-date=15 January 2022 |archive-date=16 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220116012201/https://pressgazette.co.uk/wikileaks-not-primary-publisher-of-unredacted-cables-as-they-appeared-elsewhere-first-assange-trial-hears/ |url-status=live }}{{cite news |last1=Quinn |first1=Ben |date=24 September 2020 |title=US has never asked WikiLeaks rival to remove leaked cables, court told |language=en |work=the Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange |url-status=live |access-date=29 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220115002541/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange |archive-date=15 January 2022}}

According to Glenn Greenwald, WikiLeaks decided that the "safest course was to release all the cables in full, so that not only the world's intelligence agencies but everyone had them, so that steps could be taken to protect the sources and so that the information in them was equally available." According to The Guardian, "the newly published archive" contained "more than 1,000 cables identifying individual activists; several thousand labelled with a tag used by the US to mark sources it believes could be placed in danger; and more than 150 specifically mentioning whistleblowers".{{Cite web |date=2 September 2011 |title=WikiLeaks publishes full cache of unredacted cables |url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-publishes-cache-unredacted-cables |access-date=30 January 2023 |website=The Guardian |language=en |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123150711/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-publishes-cache-unredacted-cables |url-status=live }}{{Cite news|author=Ball, James|title=Julian Assange faces arrest in Australia over unredacted WikiLeaks cables|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/julian-assange-arrest-australia-wikileaks|newspaper=The Guardian|date=2 September 2011|location=London|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=2 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161202000054/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/julian-assange-arrest-australia-wikileaks|url-status=live}}

On 2 September 2011, Australia's attorney general, Robert McClelland released a statement that the unredacted cables identified at least one ASIO officer, and that it was a crime in Australia to publish information which could identify an intelligence officer. McClelland said that "On occasions before this week, WikiLeaks redacted identifying features where the safety of individuals or national security could be put at risk. It appears this hasn't occurred with documents that have been distributed across the internet this week." According to The Guardian at the time, this meant "Julian Assange could face prosecution in Australia."{{Cite web |date=2011-09-02 |title=Julian Assange could face arrest in Australia over unredacted cables |url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/julian-assange-arrest-australia-wikileaks |access-date=2022-11-21 |website=the Guardian |language=en |archive-date=21 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221121054112/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/julian-assange-arrest-australia-wikileaks |url-status=live }}

After WikiLeaks published the unredacted cables, some journalists and contacts of the US government allegedly faced retaliation. For example according to media reports, Ethiopian journalist Argaw Ashine was interrogated several times about a reference to him in a cable talking to a government source. The source told him about plans to arrest the editors of the critical Ethiopian weekly Addis Neger. The editors for Addis Neger fled the country the next month. Ashine was subjected to government harassment and intimidation, and was forced to flee the country.{{Cite web |last=Simon |first=Joel |date=2011-09-19 |title=In Ethiopia case, a response to WikiLeaks |url=https://cpj.org/2011/09/in-ethiopia-case-a-response-to-wikileaks/ |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=Committee to Protect Journalists |language=en-US |archive-date=26 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226121055/https://cpj.org/2011/09/in-ethiopia-case-a-response-to-wikileaks/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |date=2011-09-15 |title=Wikileaks cable: Ethiopia reporter Argaw Ashine 'flees' |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14929307 |access-date=2023-02-26 |archive-date=26 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226121056/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14929307 |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |agency=Associated Press |date=2011-09-15 |title=WikiLeaks-named Ethiopian reporter in unredacted cable flees country in fear |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/15/wikileaks-named-ethiopian-reporter-flees |access-date=2023-02-26 |issn=0261-3077 |archive-date=26 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226121057/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/15/wikileaks-named-ethiopian-reporter-flees |url-status=live }} According to the former US Ambassador to Cameroon from 2004 to 2007, Niels Marquardt, Marafa Hamidou Yaya was arrested on "entirely unproven corruption charges", subjected to a "kangaroo court", and given a 25-year prison sentence. Marquardt said Marafa's only real crime was having told him that he "might be interested" in the presidency one day. When the cable was released, it became frontpage news in Cameroon and led directly to Marafa's arrest.{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks Damage Lives On: The Case of Marafa Hamidou Yaya |url=https://afsa.org/wikileaks-damage-lives-case-marafa-hamidou-yaya |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=afsa.org |archive-date=26 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226121105/https://afsa.org/wikileaks-damage-lives-case-marafa-hamidou-yaya |url-status=live }} The Ambassador at the time, Robert Jackson, said Marafa's trial did not specify the evidence against him.{{Cite web |title=Cameroon-Info.Net |url=https://www.cameroon-info.net/article/robert-p-jackson-ambassadeur-des-usa-au-cameroun-il-y-a-eu-des-manquements-dans-193323.html |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=www.cameroon-info.net |language=fr |archive-date=26 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226121057/https://www.cameroon-info.net/article/robert-p-jackson-ambassadeur-des-usa-au-cameroun-il-y-a-eu-des-manquements-dans-193323.html |url-status=live }}

The U.S. established an Information Review Task Force (IRTF) to investigate the impact of WikiLeaks' publications. In 2013, Brigadier general Robert Carr, who headed the IRTF, testified at Chelsea Manning's sentencing hearing that the task force had found no specific examples of anyone who had lost his or her life in reprisals due WikiLeaks' publication of material provided by Manning. Ed Pilkington wrote in The Guardian that Carr's testimony significantly undermined the argument that WikiLeaks' publications put lives at risk.{{cite web |last1=Pilkington |first1=Ed |title=Bradley Manning leak did not result in deaths by enemy forces, court hears |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/bradley-manning-sentencing-hearing-pentagon |website=The Guardian |access-date=1 April 2023 |date=31 July 2013 |archive-date=29 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220129005217/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/bradley-manning-sentencing-hearing-pentagon |url-status=live }} According to IRTF reports, "the lives of cooperating Afghans, Iraqis, and other foreign interlocutors have been placed at increased risk" because of the leaks. The reports said that the leaks could also cause "serious damage" to "intelligence sources, informants and the Afghan population". A damage assessment by the IRTF, 111,000 IED-related documents in the leaks "may lead to the compromise of Counter IED tactics, techniques and procedures used by Coalition Forces conducting exploitation of IED events".{{Cite web |last=Leopold |first=Jason |date=2019-04-11 |title=Here Are The Never-Before-Seen US Government Damage Reports Made In The WikiLeaks Aftermath |url=https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/here-are-the-never-before-seen-us-government-damage-reports |access-date=2023-10-22 |website=BuzzFeed News |language=en |archive-date=23 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231023193341/https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/here-are-the-never-before-seen-us-government-damage-reports |url-status=live }} In 2020, a lawyer for the US said that "sources, whose redacted names and other identifying information was contained in classified documents published by Wikileaks, who subsequently disappeared, although the US can't prove at this point that their disappearance was the result of being outed by Wikileaks."{{Cite news |date=2020-02-24 |title=Julian Assange 'put lives at risk' by sharing unredacted files |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51616077 |access-date=2023-10-22 |archive-date=23 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231023193340/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51616077 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Mediapoint |first=P. A. |date=2020-02-24 |title=Julian Assange extradition: Sources 'disappeared' after names exposed by Wikileaks, court hears |url=https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/julian-assange-extradition-sources-disappeared-after-names-exposed-by-wikileaks-court-hears/ |access-date=2023-10-22 |website=Press Gazette |language=en-US |archive-date=23 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231023193341/https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/julian-assange-extradition-sources-disappeared-after-names-exposed-by-wikileaks-court-hears/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |last=Johnson |first=Jamie |date=2020-02-24 |title=Julian Assange 'put lives at risk' by publishing classified documents, court hears |language=en-GB |work=The Telegraph |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/02/24/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-wikileaks-founder-us/ |access-date=2023-10-22 |issn=0307-1235 |archive-date=23 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231023193339/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/02/24/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-wikileaks-founder-us/ |url-status=live }}

{{main|Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak}}Reactions to the leak in 2010 varied. Western governments expressed strong disapproval, while the material generated intense interest from the public and journalists. Some political leaders referred to Assange as a criminal, while blaming the U.S. Department of Defense for security lapses. Supporters of Assange referred to him in November 2010 as a key defender of free speech and freedom of the press.Sanburn, Josh. [https://web.archive.org/web/20101113195601/http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2028734_2028733_2028727,00.html "Julian Assange—Who Will Be Time's 2010 Person of the Year?"], Time magazine, 10 November 2010.

• [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPbuGYwxQm8 "Julian Assange & WikiLeaks Are Doing The Right Thing! Carl Bernstein"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130727093645/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPbuGYwxQm8 |date=27 July 2013 }}, The Joy Behar Show, CNN, 1 December 2011; courtesy of YouTube, accessed 11 January 2011.
• [http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1012/01/joy.01.html "Joy Behar Show—WikiLeaks Founder Placed on Interpol's Most Wanted List for Alleged Sex Crimes; Scarborough Goes After Palin"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629140652/http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1012/01/joy.01.html |date=29 June 2011 }}. The Joy Behar Show, CNN, 1 December 2011.
• [https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/overseeing_state_secrecy "In Defence of WikiLeaks"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170701142235/http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/overseeing_state_secrecy |date=1 July 2017 }}, The Economist, 29 November 2010.
• Jenkins, Simon. [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks "US embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161128153139/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks |date=28 November 2016 }}, The Guardian, 28 November 2010.
• Naureckas, Jim. [http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/12/01/wikileaks-hasnt-leaked-anything "WikiLeaks Hasn't 'Leaked' Anything"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101206200210/http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/12/01/wikileaks-hasnt-leaked-anything/ |date=6 December 2010 }}. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, 1 December 2010. Reaction to the release in September 2011 of the unredacted cables attracted stronger criticism, and was condemned by the five newspapers that had first published the cables in redacted form in November 2010.[https://vancouversun.com/news/Release+full+archive+draws+fury/5350078/story.html "Release of full archive draws fury"], Vancouver Sun, 3 September 2011.
• Also see [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/02/leader-wikileaks-unredacted-release "No case, no need"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160308001329/http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/02/leader-wikileaks-unredacted-release |date=8 March 2016 }}, The Guardian, 2 September 2011.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded to the leaks saying, "This disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy; it is an attack on the international community, the alliances and partnerships, the conventions and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity." Julian Assange is quoted as saying, "Of course, abusive, Titanic organizations, when exposed, grasp at all sorts of ridiculous straws to try and distract the public from the true nature of the abuse."{{cite news |date=29 November 2010 |title=Clinton condemns leak as 'attack on international community' |publisher=CNN |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/wikileaks/index.html |url-status=live |access-date=9 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101202144211/http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/wikileaks/index.html |archive-date=2 December 2010}} John Perry Barlow, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote a tweet saying: "The first serious infowar is now engaged. The field of battle is WikiLeaks. You are the troops."{{cite web |last1=Satter |first1=Raphael G. |last2=Svensson |first2=Peter |date=3 December 2010 |title=WikiLeaks fights to stay online amid attacks |url=https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-wikileaks-fights-to-stay-online-amid-attacks-2010dec03-story.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220711003358/https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-wikileaks-fights-to-stay-online-amid-attacks-2010dec03-story.html |archive-date=11 July 2022 |access-date=July 10, 2022 |website=The San Diego Union-Tribune}}

About an hour prior to the planned release of the initial documents, WikiLeaks announced it was experiencing a massive distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS),{{Cite news|title=Wikileaks 'Hacked Ahead of Secret US Document Release'|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637|publisher=BBC News|date=28 November 2010|access-date=28 November 2010|archive-date=26 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171226000854/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637|url-status=live}} but vowed to still release the cables and documents via pre-agreed prominent media outlets {{lang|es|El País}}, {{lang|fr|Le Monde}}, {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}}, The Guardian, and The New York Times.{{cite web|url=https://www.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8924979961798657|title=Twitter / WikiLeaks: El País, Le Monde, Speigel|publisher=WikiLeaks (via Twitter)|access-date=28 November 2010|archive-date=29 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129222442/http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8924979961798657|url-status=live}}

According to Arbor Networks, an Internet-analyst group, the DDoS attack accounted for between two and four gigabits per second (Gbit/s) of additional traffic to the WikiLeaks host network, compared to an average traffic of between twelve and fifteen Gbit/s under ordinary conditions.{{cite magazine |author=Poulsen, Kevin |author-link=Kevin Poulsen |date=29 November 2010 |title=Cyber Attack Against WikiLeaks Was Weak |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/wikileaks-attack/ |magazine=Wired |access-date=29 November 2010 |archive-date=29 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129222349/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/wikileaks-attack/ |url-status=live }} The attack was slightly more powerful than ordinary DDoS attacks, though well below the maximum of 60 to 100 Gbit/s of other major attacks during 2010.

On 2 December 2010, EveryDNS, who provide a free DNS hosting service, dropped WikiLeaks from its entries, citing DDoS attacks that "threatened the stability of its infrastructure",{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks fights to stay online amid attacks |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article929713.ece |newspaper=The Hindu |agency=Associated Press |date=3 December 2010 |access-date=6 September 2011 |location=Chennai, India |archive-date=7 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207055917/http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article929713.ece |url-status=live }} but the site was copied and made available at many other addresses, an example of the Streisand effect.{{cite web|url=http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/infotech/view/20101205-307140/How-the-Barbra-Streisand-Effect-keeps-WikiLeaks-online|title=How the Barbra Streisand Effect keeps WikiLeaks online|publisher=INQUIRER.net|author=Agence France-Presse|date=5 December 2010|access-date=11 November 2013|archive-date=22 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622235520/http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/infotech/view/20101205-307140/How-the-Barbra-Streisand-Effect-keeps-WikiLeaks-online|url-status=live}}

Amazon.com removed WikiLeaks from its servers on 1 December 2010 at 19:30 GMT, and the latter website was unreachable until 20:17 GMT when the site had defaulted to its Swedish servers, hosted by Bahnhof.

U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman, among the members of the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee who had questioned Amazon in private communication on the company's hosting of WikiLeaks and the illegally obtained documents, commended Amazon for the action;{{cite web|url=http://lieberman.senate.gov/index.cfm/news-events/news/2010/12/amazon-severs-ties-with-wikileaks |title=Internet Company Had Hosted Wikileaks Website |author=Staff writer |date=1 December 2010 |publisher=Office of U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman |access-date=4 December 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101204094146/http://lieberman.senate.gov/index.cfm/news-events/news/2010/12/amazon-severs-ties-with-wikileaks |archive-date=4 December 2010 }} WikiLeaks, however, responded by stating on its official Twitter page that "WikiLeaks servers at Amazon ousted. Free speech the land of the free—fine our $ are now spent to employ people in Europe", and later that "If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books".{{Cite news |last=O’Connor |first=Anahad |date=2010-12-02 |title=Amazon Removes WikiLeaks From Servers |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/world/02amazon.html |access-date=2023-03-22 |issn=0362-4331 |archive-date=22 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230322133859/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/world/02amazon.html |url-status=live }}

On 2 December 2010, Tableau Software withdrew its visualizations from the contents of the leak, stating that it was directly due to political pressure from Joe Lieberman.{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-tableau-visualisation-joe-lieberman|title=WikiLeaks cables visualisation pulled after pressure from Joe Lieberman|location=London|work=The Guardian|first1=Charles|last1=Arthur|first2=Josh|last2=Halliday|date=3 December 2010|access-date=26 November 2016|archive-date=17 September 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190917211208/https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-tableau-visualisation-joe-lieberman|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=http://www.tableau.com/blog/why-we-removed-wikileaks-visualizations|title=Why we removed the WikiLeaks visualizations|author=Fink, Elissa|date=2 December 2010|publisher=Tableau Software|access-date=26 November 2016|archive-date=14 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191214155857/https://www.tableau.com/about/blog/2010/12/why-we-removed-wikileaks-visualizations|url-status=live}}

On 4 December, PayPal cut off the account used by WikiLeaks to collect donations.Staff writer (4 December 2010). [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/04/world/main7117213.shtml PayPal Turns Off Tap for WikiLeaks Donations – Online Payment Service Cuts Whistleblower Site From Money Flow, Making Donations More Difficult"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130715161431/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/04/world/main7117213.shtml |date=15 July 2013 }}. Associated Press (via CBS News). Retrieved 10 December 2010.

On 6 December, the Swiss bank PostFinance announced that it had frozen the assets of Assange;Staff writer (6 December 2010). [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034 "Wikileaks: Swiss Bank Shuts Julian Assange's Account"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827011248/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034 |date=27 August 2011 }}. BBC News. Retrieved 10 December 2010. on the same day, MasterCard stopped payments to WikiLeaks,McCullagh, Declan (6 December 2010). [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mastercard-pulls-plug-on-wikileaks-payments/ "MasterCard Pulls Plug on WikiLeaks Payments"] . CBS News. Retrieved 10 December 2010. with Visa following them on 7 December.Staff writer (7 December 2010). [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11938320 "Wikileaks' Visa Payments Suspended"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810172014/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11938320 |date=10 August 2017 }}. BBC News. Retrieved 10 December 2010.

Official efforts by the U.S. government to limit access to, conversation about, and general spread of the cables leaked by WikiLeaks were revealed by leading media organizations. A 4 December 2010 article by MSNBCStaff writer (4 December 2010). [https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna40512200 "Fed Workers Told: Stay Away from Those Leaked Cables – Directive Notes the Content 'Remains Classified'; Columbia U. Also Warns Future Diplomats"] . NBC News. Retrieved 5 December 2010. reported that the Obama administration had warned federal government employees and students in educational institutions studying towards careers in public service that they must refrain from downloading or linking to any WikiLeaks documents. However, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley denied ordering students, stating, "We do not control private networks. We have issued no authoritative instructions to people who are not employees of the Department of State." He said the warning was from an "overzealous employee."{{cite news|author=Staff writer|url=https://online.wsj.com/article/AP66175f65a14645a98bbe7b99c7a2dc7f.html|title=State Dept Denies Warning Students about WikiLeaks|access-date=9 December 2010|date=7 December 2010|agency=Associated Press |work=The Wall Street Journal |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110124011425/http://online.wsj.com/article/AP66175f65a14645a98bbe7b99c7a2dc7f.html|archive-date=24 January 2011 |url-status=dead}} According to a December 2010 article in The Guardian, access to WikiLeaks was blocked on government computers because the information was still classified.{{Cite news |last=MacAskill |first=Ewen |date=2010-12-03 |title=US blocks access to WikiLeaks for federal workers |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-cables-blocks-access-federal |access-date=2023-03-22 |issn=0261-3077 |archive-date=27 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130627071723/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-cables-blocks-access-federal |url-status=live }}

A spokesman for Columbia University confirmed on 4 December that its Office of Career Services sent an e-mail warning students at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs to refrain from accessing WikiLeaks cables and discussing this subject on the grounds that "discourse about the documents would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information".{{cite news|author=Staff writer|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna40512200|title=Fed Workers Told: Stay Away from Those Leaked Cables|publisher=NBC News|date=4 December 2010|access-date=6 December 2010|archive-date=22 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230322130200/https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna40512200|url-status=live}} However, this was quickly retracted on the following day. SIPA Dean John Henry Coatsworth wrote that "Freedom of information and expression is a core value of our institution, ... thus, SIPA's position is that students have a right to discuss and debate any information in the public arena that they deem relevant to their studies or to their roles as global citizens, and to do so without fear of adverse consequences."Gustin, Sam (6 December 2010). [https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/columbia-wikileaks-policy/ "Columbia University Reverses Anti-WikiLeaks Guidance"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131205194040/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/columbia-wikileaks-policy/ |date=5 December 2013 }}. Wired. Retrieved 10 December 2010.

The New York Times reported on 14 December{{Registration required|date=December 2010}} [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/us/15wiki.html?partner=rss&emc=rss Air Force Blocks Sites That Posted Secret Cables – NYTimes.com] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170209100842/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/us/15wiki.html?partner=rss&emc=rss |date=9 February 2017 }}. The New York Times. that the U.S. Air Force bars its personnel from access to news sites (such as those of The New York Times and The Guardian) that publish leaked cables.

On 18 December, the Bank of America stopped handling payments for WikiLeaks.{{cite news|author=Staff writer|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12028084|title=Bank of America Stops Handling Wikileaks Payments|publisher=BBC News|date=18 December 2010|access-date=20 December 2010|archive-date=18 December 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101218192353/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12028084|url-status=live}}

{{main|Operation Payback|Timeline of events associated with Anonymous#Arab Spring activities}}

In response to perceived federal and corporate censorship of the cable leaks, internet group Anonymous launched DDoS attacks on several websites. So far, the websites of the Swedish prosecutor, PostFinance (the Swiss post-office banking company), MasterCard and Visa have all been targeted.{{cite news|agency=Associated Press |publisher=Yahoo! News |title=Protests, Cyber-Skirmishes Rage over WikiLeaks |author=Satter, Raphael G. |author2=Lawless, Jill |url=https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/wikileaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101024131349/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/wikileaks |url-status=dead |archive-date=24 October 2010 |date=10 December 2010 |access-date=10 December 2010 }}

The websites of the government of Zimbabwe were targeted by Anonymous with DDoS attacks due to censorship of the WikiLeaks documents.{{cite news|author=Staff writer|title=Anonymous Activists Target Tunisian Government Sites|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12110892|work=BBC News|date=4 January 2011|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=12 January 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110112041511/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12110892|url-status=live}} The websites of the government of Tunisia were targeted by Anonymous due to censorship of the WikiLeaks documents and the Tunisian revolution. Tunisians were reported to be assisting in these denial-of-service attacks launched by Anonymous.{{cite news|title=Hackers Hit Tunisian Websites – Amid Anti-Government Protests, Attack Blocks Access to Stock Exchange and Ministry of Foreign Relations|author=Hill, Evan|url=http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/01/201113111059792596.html|publisher=Al Jazeera English|date=3 January 2011|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=2 September 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110902084251/http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/01/201113111059792596.html|url-status=live}} Anonymous's role in the DDoS attacks on the Tunisian government's websites has led to an upsurge of internet activism among Tunisians against the government.{{cite news|title=Violent Clashes Continue in Tunisia – Protests over Unemployment Continue To Spread across the Country as the Government Forces Try To Curb Growing Unrest|author=Randeree, Bilal|url=http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/01/201114101752467578.html|publisher=Al Jazeera English|date=4 January 2011|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=13 May 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110513123755/http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/01/201114101752467578.html|url-status=live}} Anonymous released an online message denouncing the government clampdown on recent protests and posted it on the Tunisian government website.{{cite web |url=http://www.pm.gov.tn/ |title=Screenshot of the message |publisher=Pm.gov.tn |date=28 September 2012 |access-date=9 October 2012 |archive-date=3 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170303183445/http://www.pm.gov.tn/ |url-status=live }} Anonymous has named their attacks "Operation Tunisia".{{cite news|title=Timeline: Tunisia's Civil Unrest – Chronicle of Nationwide Demonstrations over the Country's Unemployment Crisis|author=Rifai, Ryan|url=http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/tunisia/2011/01/201114142223827361.html|publisher=Al Jazeera English|date=4 January 2011|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=17 January 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110117082347/http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/tunisia/2011/01/201114142223827361.html|url-status=live}} Anonymous successfully DDoSsed eight Tunisian government websites. They plan attacks in Internet Relay Chat networks. Someone attacked Anonymous's website with a DDoS on 5 January.{{cite news|title=Tunisia's Bitter Cyberwar – Anonymous Has Joined Tunisian Activists To Call for End to the Government's Stifling of Online Dissent|author=Ryan, Yasmine|url=http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/01/20111614145839362.html|publisher=Al Jazeera|date=6 January 2011|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=31 October 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111031214738/http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/01/20111614145839362.html|url-status=live}}

On 9 December 2010, major Pakistani newspapers (such as The News International, The Express Tribune and the Daily Jang) and television channels carried stories that claimed to detail U.S. diplomats' assessments of senior Indian generals as "vain, egotistical and genocidal", also saying "India's government is secretly allied with Hindu fundamentalists", and that "Indian spies are covertly supporting Islamist militants in Pakistan's tribal belt and Balochistan."{{cite news|last=Walsh|first=Declan|title=Pakistani Media Publish Fake WikiLeaks Cables Attacking India – Comments Alleged To Be from WikiLeaks US Embassy Cables Say Indian Generals Are Genocidal and New Delhi Backs Militants|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/09/pakistani-newspaper-fake-leaks-india|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=9 December 2010|access-date=11 December 2010|archive-date=8 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130908204658/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/09/pakistani-newspaper-fake-leaks-india|url-status=live}} However, none of the cables revealed any such assessments. The claims were credited to an Islamabad-based news service agency that frequently ran pro-Pakistan Army stories.

Later, The News International admitted the story "was dubious and may have been planted", and The Express Tribune offered "profuse" apologies to readers.{{cite news|last=Walsh|first=Declan|title=WikiLeaks Fake Cables – Pakistani Newspapers Admit They Were Hoaxed – Papers Apologise to Readers for Publishing Anti-Indian Comments Alleged To Have Been Said by US Officials|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-fake-cables-pakistan-apologies|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=10 December 2010|access-date=11 December 2010|archive-date=5 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130905044527/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-fake-cables-pakistan-apologies|url-status=live}} Urdu-language papers such as the Daily Jang, however, declined to retract the story.

{{Main|Twitter subpoena}}

On 14 December 2010, a U.S. federal court subpoenaed Twitter for extensive information regarding WikiLeaks, but also put on a gagging order. The order was said to be part of an "ongoing criminal investigation", and required information regarding the Twitter accounts of WikiLeaks, Assange, Manning, Rop Gonggrijp, Jacob Appelbaum, and Birgitta Jonsdottir. According to Glenn Greenwald, the court "gave Twitter three days to respond and barred the company from notifying anyone, including the users, of the existence of the Order."{{cite news |author=Greenwald, Glenn |title=DOJ Subpoenas Twitter Records of Several WikiLeaks Volunteers |url=http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/index.html |date=7 January 2011 |work=Salon.com |access-date=11 January 2011 |author-link=Glenn Greenwald |archive-date=11 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110111083833/http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/index.html |url-status=live }} Twitter requested that it be allowed to notify the users, giving them ten days to object. The court order was unsealed on 5 January 2011, and Jonsdottir decided to publicly fight the order.{{cite news |author=Rushe, Dominic |title=Icelandic MP Fights US Demand for Her Twitter Account Details – Birgitta Jonsdottir Brands Efforts by US Justice Department To Access Her Private Information 'Completely Unacceptable' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/08/us-twitter-hand-icelandic-wikileaks-messages |date=8 January 2011 |work=The Guardian |location=London |access-date=11 January 2011 |archive-date=25 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725200602/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/08/us-twitter-hand-icelandic-wikileaks-messages |url-status=live }}

Elected representatives of Iceland have declared such actions by the U.S. government "serious", "peculiar", "outlandish", and akin to heavy breathing on the telephone.{{cite web|author=Connor, Richard|date=9 January 2011|url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,14758284,00.html|title=Iceland Blasts US Demand for Lawmaker's Details in WikiLeaks Probe|work=Deutsche Welle|access-date=11 January 2011|archive-date=11 January 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110111072533/http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,14758284,00.html|url-status=live}} The published subpoena text demands "you are to provide ... subscriber names, user names ... mailing addresses, residential addresses, business addresses ... telephone number[s] ... credit card or bank account number[s] ... billing records", "as well as 'destination email addresses and IP addresses".{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/subpoena.pdf |title=Twitter Subpoena |work=Salon.com |access-date=10 January 2011 |archive-date=12 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110112061516/http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/subpoena.pdf |url-status=dead }} As of 10 January 2011, there were 636,759 followers of the WikiLeaks Twitter feed with destination email addresses and IP addresses.{{cite web |url=https://www.twitter.com/wikileaks |title=WikiLeaks on Twitter |publisher=Twitter |access-date=10 January 2011 |archive-date=14 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110114091042/http://twitter.com/wikileaks |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/u-s-twitter-subpoena-on-wikileaks-is-harassment-lawyer-says.html |title=US Twitter Subpoena on WikiLeaks Is 'Harassment,' Lawyer Says |publisher=Bloomberg |author=Larson, Erik |date=10 January 2011 |access-date=11 January 2011 |archive-date=10 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110110194208/http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/u-s-twitter-subpoena-on-wikileaks-is-harassment-lawyer-says.html |url-status=live }}

The cable leaks have been pointed to as a catalyst for the 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution and government overthrow. Foreign Policy magazine said, "We might also count Tunisia as the first time that WikiLeaks pushed people over the brink."{{cite news |title=The First WikiLeaks Revolution? |first=Elizabeth |last=Dickinson |url=http://wikileaks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/13/wikileaks_and_the_tunisia_protests |newspaper=Foreign Policy |date=13 January 2011 |access-date=5 March 2011 |archive-date=27 June 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110627123123/http://wikileaks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/13/wikileaks_and_the_tunisia_protests |url-status=dead }} Additionally, The New York Times said, "The protesters ... found grist for the complaints in leaked cables from the United States Embassy in Tunisia, released by WikiLeaks, that detailed the self-dealing and excess of the president's family."{{cite news |title=Tunisia Leader Flees and Prime Minister Claims Power |first=David A. |last=Kirkpatrick |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/world/africa/15tunis.html?_r=2&hp |newspaper=The New York Times |date=14 January 2011 |access-date=5 March 2011 |archive-date=24 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130524185730/http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/world/africa/15tunis.html?_r=2&hp |url-status=live }}{{cite news |title=Wikileaks Real Impact in Tunisia |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/01/wikileaks-real-impact-in-tunisia/70339/ |newspaper=The Atlantic |date=27 January 2011 |access-date=5 March 2011 |archive-date=31 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110131201903/http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/01/wikileaks-real-impact-in-tunisia/70339/ |url-status=live }}{{cite news |title=Tunisia: The WikiLeaks connection |first=Ian |last=Black |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/15/tunisia-wikileaks-ghannouchi |newspaper=The Guardian |date=15 January 2011 |access-date=5 March 2011 |location=London |archive-date=21 September 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130921012326/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/15/tunisia-wikileaks-ghannouchi |url-status=live }}

It is widely believed that the Tunisian revolution then spread to other parts of the Middle East, turning into the Arab Spring.[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/13/amnesty-international-wikileaks-arab-spring Amnesty International hails WikiLeaks and Guardian as Arab spring 'catalysts' | World news] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202094838/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/13/amnesty-international-wikileaks-arab-spring |date=2 February 2017 }}. The Guardian. Retrieved on 22 August 2013.

After the unredacted cables became available online, WikiLeaks added them to their searchable database. The release was condemned by WikiLeaks' media partners, the Guardian, New York Times, El Pais, {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}} and {{lang|fr|Le Monde}}, who said it put sources at risk of dismissal, detention and physical harm.{{Cite web |date=2011-09-02 |title=WikiLeaks publishes full cache of unredacted cables |url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-publishes-cache-unredacted-cables |access-date=2022-11-23 |website=the Guardian |language=en |archive-date=23 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221123150711/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-publishes-cache-unredacted-cables |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |date=2 September 2011 |title=Anger as Wikileaks releases all US cables unredacted |newspaper=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14765837 |access-date=20 June 2018 |archive-date=19 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181119215643/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14765837 |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |last=Flock |first=Elizabeth |date=2011-09-02 |title=WikiLeaks posts all cables unredacted |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/wikileaks-publishes-full-cache-of-unredacted-cables-online/2011/09/02/gIQAHAhWwJ_blog.html |access-date=2022-11-23 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |archive-date=14 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200714000210/https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/wikileaks-publishes-full-cache-of-unredacted-cables-online/2011/09/02/gIQAHAhWwJ_blog.html |url-status=live }} The organisations published a joint statement that WikiLeaks disputed.

We deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted state department cables, which may put sources at risk. Our previous dealings with WikiLeaks were on the clear basis that we would only publish cables which had been subjected to a thorough joint editing and clearance process. We will continue to defend our previous collaborative publishing endeavour. We cannot defend the needless publication of the complete data – indeed, we are united in condemning it. The decision to publish by Julian Assange was his, and his alone.

{{Portal|Internet|United States|Politics|Freedom of speech}}

• List of public disclosures of classified information
• Pentagon Papers
• Classified information in the United States
• Chagossians
• Foreign policy of the United States
• Israeli retaliation leak
• New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)

{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

{{Wiktionary|Cablegate}}

• [https://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html Secret US Embassy Cables] by WikiLeaks
• [https://www.theguardian.com/world/the-us-embassy-cables The US embassy cables] by The Guardian
• [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/statessecrets.html State's Secrets] by The New York Times
• [https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/wikileaks-faq-what-do-the-diplomatic-cables-really-tell-us-a-731441.html WikiLeaks Diplomatic Cables FAQ] by {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}}
• [https://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/7/glenn_greenwald_julian_assange_arrest_and The Arrest of Julian Assange and the U.S. "War on WikiLeaks"] – video report by Democracy Now!
• [https://archive.org/details/wikileaks-cables-csv cables.csv] at the Internet Archive, everything unredacted
• [https://foreignpolicy.com/tag/wikileaks/ "Wikileaked – Inside the State Department's Secret Cables"]. A journal run by Foreign Policy devoted to contents of WikiLeaks' U.S. diplomatic cables release (retrieved 10 December 2010)
• (German) [https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/wikileaks-enthuellungen-codename-projekt-8-a-741992.html WikiLeaks-Enthüllungen: Codename Projekt 8] – {{lang|de|Der Spiegel}}'s background on the strained negotiations between Wikileaks and the newspapers it chose to publish the cables

{{WikiLeaks}}

Category:2010 in international relations

Category:2011 in international relations

Category:2010 scandals

Category:2011 scandals

Category:November 2010 in the United States

Category:September 2011 in the United States

Category:Classified documents

Diplomatic cables leak

Category:Diplomatic incidents

Category:News leaks

Category:Information published by WikiLeaks

Diplomatic cables leak

Diplomatic cables leak

Category:The Guardian

Category:Controversies based on The New York Times coverage