Anonymous and others start leaking

[Guest Rambo]

why dont people understand that Assange isn't wikileaks? Wikileaks is a group of people with him as the public face isn't it? Is he in charge or something?

[Boxing Day]

Assange is like Jimmy Wales

[Hoodie]

why dont people understand that Assange isn't wikileaks? Wikileaks is a group of people with him as the public face isn't it? Is he in charge or something?

 

he's definitely just the public face. i think he referred to himself as the target for all the crap that gets flung at wikileaks.

[Hoodie]

also, the neocons need to shut up. they didn't give a shit about cheney leaking valerie plame's identity and endangering her contacts. wikileaks has done nothing as harmful as that.

[Guest Rambo]

why dont people understand that Assange isn't wikileaks? Wikileaks is a group of people with him as the public face isn't it? Is he in charge or something?

 

he's definitely just the public face. i think he referred to himself as the target for all the crap that gets flung at wikileaks.

 

this is what i thought, yet even when reading this thread it's amazing how people need a face to talk about. It's like 50% of the stuff you read is about Assange lol. Who gives a fuck about Julian Assange?

[Guest Drahken]

Sure a few bobble heads are embarrassed, but is this not the perfect setup for making a move on Iran? The cables pretty much makes the case that Iran is a threat to the middle east and demonstrates a pretty significant consensus by surrounding countries that they need to be dealt with. That is something the US government has been trying, and mostly failing, to make the case for over the course of the last decade if not longer. Pretty big win for the State Department there, and a loss for anyone against the US being involved in another war.

[Hoodie]

why dont people understand that Assange isn't wikileaks? Wikileaks is a group of people with him as the public face isn't it? Is he in charge or something?

 

he's definitely just the public face. i think he referred to himself as the target for all the crap that gets flung at wikileaks.

 

this is what i thought, yet even when reading this thread it's amazing how people need a face to talk about. It's like 50% of the stuff you read is about Assange lol. Who gives a fuck about Julian Assange?

 

he gets painted as a target by the media because it's much easier to criticize him as a person than to examine the organization and what they are doing.

[Hoodie]

Sure a few bobble heads are embarrassed, but is this not the perfect setup for making a move on Iran? The cables pretty much makes the case that Iran is a threat to the middle east and demonstrates a pretty significant consensus by surrounding countries that they need to be dealt with. That is something the US government has been trying, and mostly failing, to make the case for over the course of the last decade if not longer. Pretty big win for the State Department there, and a loss for anyone against the US being involved in another war.

 

it's funny to think that the usa wants to attack the regime they helped establish in the iranian revolution. not saying the king (?) they had before was much better, but at least he wasn't a fundamentalist muslim like ayatollah kohmeni (probably mispelled all of that but i'm on my phone and can't check, so give me a break :P)

[awepittance]

enjoy it

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/898848--sarah-palin-s-solution-to-the-wikileaks-problem?bn=1

 

Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly thinks whoever leaked the embassy memos should be executed. Wikileaks, he noted with a knowing nod, is “based in Sweden.”

 

LOL, i like how American citizens can call for someone's execution in another country, when a muslim in a foreign land does it (fatwa), he's a terrorist.

 

glenn mother fucking greenwald knocks it out of the park again

 

The WikiLeaks disclosure has revealed not only numerous government secrets, but also the driving mentality of major factions in our political and media class. Simply put, there are few countries in the world with citizenries and especially media outlets more devoted to serving, protecting and venerating government authorities than the U.S. Indeed, I don't quite recall any entity producing as much bipartisan contempt across the American political spectrum as WikiLeaks has: as usual, for authoritarian minds, those who expose secrets are far more hated than those in power who commit heinous acts using secrecy as their principal weapon.

 

First we have the group demanding that Julian Assange be murdered without any charges, trial or due process. There was Sarah Palin on on Twitter illiterately accusing WikiLeaks -- a stateless group run by an Australian citizen -- of "treason"; she thereafter took to her Facebook page to object that Julian Assange was "not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders" (she also lied by stating that he has "blood on his hands": a claim which even the Pentagon admits is untrue). Townhall's John Hawkins has a column this morning entitled "5 Reasons The CIA Should Have Already Killed Julian Assange." That Assange should be treated as a "traitor" and murdered with no due process has been strongly suggested if not outright urged by the likes of Marc Thiessen, Seth Lipsky (with Jeffrey Goldberg posting Lipsky's column and also illiterately accusing Assange of "treason"), Jonah Goldberg, Rep. Pete King, and, today, The Wall Street Journal.

 

The way in which so many political commentators so routinely and casually call for the eradication of human beings without a shred of due process is nothing short of demented. Recall Palin/McCain adviserMichael Goldfarb's recent complaintthat the CIA failed to kill Ahmed Ghailani when he was in custody, or Glenn Reynolds' morning demand -- in between sips of coffee -- that North Korea be destroyed with nuclear weapons ("I say nuke ‘em. And not with just a few bombs"). Without exception, all of these people cheered on the attack on Iraq, which resulted in the deaths of more than 100,000 innocent human beings, yet their thirst for slaughter is literally insatiable. After a decade's worth of American invasions, bombings, occupations, checkpoint shootings, drone attacks, assassinations and civilian slaughter, the notion that the U.S. Government can and should murder whomever it wants is more frequent and unrestrained than ever.

 

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/30/wikileaks/index.html Greenwald's articles, while mostly editorial are sourced up the ying yang, i tried to include most of that sourcing in the quote above

 

i went to one of the articles, written by an american journalist calling for the death of Assange because i simply couldn't believe it but it was actually exactly as he described here -

 

Julian Assange is not an American citizen and he has no constitutional rights. So, there's no reason that the CIA can't kill him. Moreover, ask yourself a simple question: If Julian Assange is shot in the head tomorrow or if his car is blown up when he turns the key, what message do you think that would send about releasing sensitive American data? Do you think there would be any more classified American information showing up on Wikileaks? That's very doubtful. Do you think the next cyber punk who thinks it is a game to put classified information on the web would think twice? Yes, you bet. Legally, we may not be able to do a lot to Assange since he's not an American, but killing him would do more to protect our classified data than any new security system

[awepittance]

Sure a few bobble heads are embarrassed, but is this not the perfect setup for making a move on Iran? The cables pretty much makes the case that Iran is a threat to the middle east and demonstrates a pretty significant consensus by surrounding countries that they need to be dealt with. That is something the US government has been trying, and mostly failing, to make the case for over the course of the last decade if not longer. Pretty big win for the State Department there, and a loss for anyone against the US being involved in another war.

 

i don't necessarily agree with this, this may be the way that the media is trying to spin it (ie more reasons why we should go after Iran) but in my mind it gives even less legitimacy to the USA's stated reasons for possible military intervention. Clearly every rich Arab nation that's in bed with the United States in the area wants Iran dealt with, i don't know what the impact of this will be if any except do more to reveal how much we ally ourselves with nations that harbor terrorism while going after nations that don't.

The only thing in this leak and it was also in the last leak, is the stuff about Iran aiding the insurgency in Iraq. The way i see this is internal US military people are paranoid and conspiratorial minded just like normal people are, they were told by their higher ups that Iran is involved so that's where they start looking. they find things to fit into this tunnel vision (much like a cop who has already identified a suspect he is sure based on a gut feeling is the culprit). Just because this is internal 'classified' chatter doesn't mean it's any more true

[vamos scorcho]

Regardless of what consequences occur because of the leaks (not including consequences doled out to Assange or the website itself - that is assassination to the former or censorship to the latter ((former = first, latter = second HERP))), Wikileaks is incredibly important. It seems to me that it represents some kind of true positive change in the world. It is a beacon of light in an otherwise dark void of nothingness.

 

That is why I think people who are even the tiniest bit interested or supportive of Wikileaks should be as conscious as possible regarding the state of the website.

 

I'll just leave this here.

 

Remember, even very small amounts count. If everyone reading this (that is, people reading this who are also interested and supportive) donated just a few dollars, there would be a larger sum. Pretty cool.

[vamos scorcho]

why dont people understand that Assange isn't wikileaks? Wikileaks is a group of people with him as the public face isn't it? Is he in charge or something?

 

Correct. If you think about it Assange isn't what anybody should be worried about. It's obvious they can do whatever they want to him but in the end there's a shit ton of people doing all the work. They've got insurance in place no doubt, so that if anything happens to Assange, someone else will step up.

 

With the upcoming leak on the banks/economy I think his life will be in even more danger.

[Guest Drahken]

Oh absolutely awe, absolutely. I'm not saying Iran IS a threat, but thats the way it will (and is) being covered. Its not like your average individual is going to take the time to sift through 250k documents for something to convince them their government is more evil than they might already suspect. Even if they do, they need to be intelligent enough to recognize the context of the cables or connect the dots regarding why those nations are so supportive of us giving Iran a kick in the pants. Personally I find it rather comical that WL turns to MSM, the same specter they accurately accuse of being incapable doing their job, so much so that they gets first dibs at full access and the luxury of controlling the initial flow. A bunch of MSM fear mongering over WL being a threat, and 'proof' that Iran and NK are still the bad guys we've been told they were (see, even china hates them - they must be bad!). Mission Accomplished?

[vamos scorcho]

What the fuck is Bill O Reilly talking about, executed? Have you seen V for Vendetta?

 

 

Anyway, my feeling is that regardless of consequences, the information should be open. Without fucking question. Political interests be damned. Shine a light on the problem and wash it with disinfectant.

[vamos scorcho]

Sure a few bobble heads are embarrassed, but is this not the perfect setup for making a move on Iran? The cables pretty much makes the case that Iran is a threat to the middle east and demonstrates a pretty significant consensus by surrounding countries that they need to be dealt with. That is something the US government has been trying, and mostly failing, to make the case for over the course of the last decade if not longer. Pretty big win for the State Department there, and a loss for anyone against the US being involved in another war.

 

i don't necessarily agree with this, this may be the way that the media is trying to spin it (ie more reasons why we should go after Iran) but in my mind it gives even less legitimacy to the USA's stated reasons for possible military intervention. Clearly every rich Arab nation that's in bed with the United States in the area wants Iran dealt with, i don't know what the impact of this will be if any except do more to reveal how much we ally ourselves with nations that harbor terrorism while going after nations that don't.

The only thing in this leak and it was also in the last leak, is the stuff about Iran aiding the insurgency in Iraq. The way i see this is internal US military people are paranoid and conspiratorial minded just like normal people are, they were told by their higher ups that Iran is involved so that's where they start looking. they find things to fit into this tunnel vision (much like a cop who has already identified a suspect he is sure based on a gut feeling is the culprit). Just because this is internal 'classified' chatter doesn't mean it's any more true

 

 

relevant

 

 

In a national broadcast exclusive interview, we speak with world-renowned political dissident and linguist Noam Chomsky about the release of more than 250,000 secret U.S. State Department cables by WikiLeaks. In 1971, Chomsky helped government whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg release the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret internal U.S. account of the Vietnam War. Commenting on the revelations that several Arab leaders are urging the United States to attack Iran, Chomsky says, "latest polls show] Arab opinion holds that the major threat in the region is Israel, that’s 80 percent; the second threat is the United States, that’s 77 percent. Iran is listed as a threat by 10 percent," Chomsky says. "This may not be reported in the newspapers, but it’s certainly familiar to the Israeli and U.S. governments and the ambassadors. What this reveals is the profound hatred for democracy on the part of our political leadership."

 

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/11/30/noam_chomsky_wikileaks_cables_reveal_profound

[awepittance]

Someone made an excellent point in an article i was reading (sorry forget which one)

The US western media is condemning for the most part Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it dominates most of the media coverage. Why are they so upset at Wikileaks? Could it be a feeling of inadequacy? inadequacy stemming from the fact that the mainstream media lead us into 2 wars and propped up 4-8 years of George W Bush propaganda? Now someone is coming in and the sweeping the rug from underneath them, making their 'investigative' abilities almost irrelevant. Being complicit in events like this probably starts to eat away at your soul, Wikileaks might tear that hole open too wide for them to contain their emotions (ie 'kill assange for treason')

[vamos scorcho]

Someone made an excellent point in an article i was reading (sorry forget which one)

The US western media is condemning for the most part Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it dominates most of the media coverage. Why are they so upset at Wikileaks? Could it be a feeling of inadequacy? inadequacy stemming from the fact that the mainstream media lead us into 2 wars and propped up 4-8 years of George W Bush propaganda? Now someone is coming in and the sweeping the rug from underneath them, making their 'investigative' abilities almost irrelevant. Being complicit in events like this probably starts to eat away at your soul, Wikileaks might tear that hole open too wide for them to contain their emotions (ie 'kill assange for treason')

 

That's a brilliantly eloquent way of putting it.

 

I must say, it does feel like something truly big is happening here, today, now. I'm not trying to get overly excited about it, but it feels like this Wikileaks business could change everything. I'll never claim to know what the documents themselves mean, I'm not knowledgeable when it comes to the law. I do know however that this is extremely important and that everyone I know should be behind Wikileaks during this moment in history.

[encey]

None of the NPR stories I heard on the leakz spent time condemning Asshanger.

[plstik]

So many people still seem to be upset, has anyone (the newspapers) actually realized how technology has outrun them? I´ve read in an article that around 1million people or more had access to this recent information, everyone could have done this in a few minutes. Only a few people need to hop on and its all over the place.

[Guest Drahken]

Someone made an excellent point in an article i was reading (sorry forget which one)

The US western media is condemning for the most part Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it dominates most of the media coverage. Why are they so upset at Wikileaks? Could it be a feeling of inadequacy? inadequacy stemming from the fact that the mainstream media lead us into 2 wars and propped up 4-8 years of George W Bush propaganda? Now someone is coming in and the sweeping the rug from underneath them, making their 'investigative' abilities almost irrelevant. Being complicit in events like this probably starts to eat away at your soul, Wikileaks might tear that hole open too wide for them to contain their emotions (ie 'kill assange for treason')

 

Feelings of inadequacy is probably a part of it, but I think the bigger factor motivating their behavior is that they can see their position as 'gatekeeper' for information is rapidly declining day by day and are panicking.

[Guest yikes]

yeah

the playing field has been officially leveled

but thats ok because the 5% that control everything will still be down for their's

[pcock]

can i just mention that cbrown in the last thread was fucking hilarious....

 

 

awepittance - talk talk

cbrown - do you actually have sources

awepittance - talk talk + sources

cbrown - well, ok, but still you present your sources in a horrible way

awepittance - riiight

cbrown - im cbrown and you are a nob

awepittance - talk talk leaks sources

cbrown - im gonna find you and punch you in real life because i dont like you're opinions on the wikileaks. internet genius.

[Guest dese manz hatin]

must have been even better on coke

[Guest Ranky Redlof]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/30/interpol-wanted-notice-julian-assange

wow

[Guest Franklin]

can someone explain how the US could even attempt to charge assange with anything as he's not a US citizen. Would they allege that he conducted come of these "espionage" activities while in the US?