WikiLeaks

[Agent X]

Re: WikiLeaks

Well consider the kind of data WikiLeaks is involved in, I'm surprised that the US folks haven't gotten more attention. While I don't always agree with the classification system or much else regarding "state secrets", I fully expect those that do to try and protect them virility Anything less would be stupid.

Rolling Stone just did a story on one of the members of WikiLeaks, dubbing him "The Most Dangerous Man In Cyberspace":

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/17389/192242

Bottom line, he decided to fly to the United States, was grilled for 3 hours, and released.

It's interesting times we live in where the distribution of information isn't considered a crime, but by distributing sensitive information you're inviting yourself to be treated like a criminal.

[streaker69]

Re: WikiLeaks

Rolling Stone just did a story on one of the members of WikiLeaks, dubbing him "The Most Dangerous Man In Cyberspace":

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/17389/192242

Bottom line, he decided to fly to the United States, was grilled for 3 hours, and released.

It's interesting times we live in where the distribution of information isn't considered a crime, but by distributing sensitive information you're inviting yourself to be treated like a criminal.

I thought Chris was the most dangerous man in Cyberspace.

Should distribution of certain kinds of information be considered a crime?

[bascule]

Re: WikiLeaks

Rolling Stone just did a story on one of the members of WikiLeaks, dubbing him "The Most Dangerous Man In Cyberspace":

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/17389/192242

Bottom line, he decided to fly to the United States, was grilled for 3 hours, and released.

It's interesting times we live in where the distribution of information isn't considered a crime, but by distributing sensitive information you're inviting yourself to be treated like a criminal.

[Agent X]

Re: WikiLeaks

I've been pondering the Wikileaks situation for a while. Some points I think are of note:

1. Drama Lama: It's my impression that the personality's operating and surrounding WikiLeaks are a bunch of drama lamas. Which is one of the reason's they get so much play in the media. This has always been a red flag for me when looking for things that are sketchy.
2. Transparency: In a lot of ways Wikileaks is less transparent then the newsroom/big media it seeks to counteract. Almost everything about Wikileaks is questionable. Who's involved and by how much? Are they paid? Where does the money come from? What leaked data do they have and what is its status? Who handles the money? Wikileaks as an organization doesn't publish it's editorial process. As far as I can tell the editor is Assange and he "publishes" what he wants, when he wants.
   At least in a modern news rooms there are so few security safe guards it's possible for leaks about improper behavior to leak out. (Leaking on the leaking of leaked information)
3. Technical Infrastructure: There has been much puffery about Wikileaks technical infrastructure. It technical measures to protect sources & it's ability to stay operation under attack. But again because the information about it is largely incomplete how do we know we can trust it? In the past Wikileaks as reached out to the community for funding to keep it's servers operational. Where does the money go?
4. Board Oversight: I've heard that there is a governance board for Wikileaks. If so who's on it? The best I can find is that "Wikileaks is project of the sunshine press", who's the Sunshine Press?
5. Impact: Finally, what's the impact of Wikileaks work? Does it change anything? I've viewed the "Collateral Murder" Footage, and I've clawed through the Afghan War Diary. I've come to the conclusion that war still is awful, that we posses far more potential to destroy then to build, that the current war in Afghanistan is mired in a variety of problems. But I knew this before WikiLeak's leaks so what's the impact?
   As far as I've seen nothing that Wikileaks has leaked has actually changed anything. There have been no investigations, or has the populace has not been incited to change policy direction.

Basically the whole thing about Wikileaks is sketch and amorphous, which from a fun cloak & dagger point of view is great. But from building up a trust relationship it hard.
Also finally. Why does the world need Wikileaks? Does it do a better or worse job then the main stream media? Does it do a better job then say, Cryptome, or rapidshare, or bittorrent etc?

[Thorn]

Re: WikiLeaks

From what I read, there were charges of both rape and molestation. The rape charges were dropped, but the molestation charges are still being investigated. The kicker is that, in Sweden, molestation (at least whatever sort he was accused of) is not a jail-able offense.

The Swedish legal system is a weird, at least if you view it from the standpoint of our system of US/English Common Law. Molestation -as you noted- isn't a jail-able offense, but libel, which is civil only here, is something apparently a charge that you can serve prison time for in Sweden. I'd sure there are other offenses that completely different under the two systems.

[theprez98]

Re: WikiLeaks

The founder of WikiLeaks was accused of rape today, and a little bit later, the charges were mysteriously dropped:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316

From what I read, there were charges of both rape and molestation. The rape charges were dropped, but the molestation charges are still being investigated. The kicker is that, in Sweden, molestation (at least whatever sort he was accused of) is not a jail-able offense.

[bascule]

Re: WikiLeaks

The founder of WikiLeaks was accused of rape today, and a little bit later, the charges were mysteriously dropped:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316

[theprez98]

Re: WikiLeaks

New Yorkers Demand Manning’s Release
by Debra Sweet, World Can’t Wait

About 80 people converged on Times Square Monday August 16, 2010 to demand that the US military drop charges against Army private Bradley Manning. He’s being held in Quantico VA. The Army alleges Manning is the source who leaked the Collateral Murder footage of the 2007 incident where U.S. Apache helicopters gunners killed 12 Iraqi civilians.

World Can’t Wait, Code Pink, Veterans for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Pakistan-USA Freedom Forum, and others gathered on short notice to speak to tourists and others outside the Times Square Military Recruiting Center.

The action was completely stopped by a very hard rain...

You would think, in Times Square, that you could flash mob more than 80 people...

Looks like they brought out all the big guns

[streaker69]

Re: WikiLeaks

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe...pt=T1&iref=BN1

Stockholm, Sweden (CNN) -- The founder and editor of the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, is wanted in Sweden after accusations of rape and molestation, a spokeswoman for the Swedish prosecutor's office told CNN Saturday.

[Conspiracy Theory]
I'm sure this is a plot by the CIA so they can shut him up and shut wikileaks down.
[/Conspiracy Theory]

[Thorn]

Re: WikiLeaks

When Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders are against you, there's not many people left to support you.

Yeah, that's my thought, too. Both groups support cop killers without reservation, so when they reject you, you're pretty much at the end of the road for people who will stick up for you.

[theprez98]

Re: WikiLeaks

The Reporters Without Borders letter also claimed:

you have unintentionally provided supposedly democratic governments with good grounds for putting the Internet under closer surveillance.

Of course, I suspect Julian Assange doesn't feel this way, but it does suggest that they strategy may in fact be counter-productive.

When Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders are against you, there's not many people left to support you.

[Thorn]

Re: WikiLeaks

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders have all come down against Wikileaks for the manner in which they are releasing the stolen files, and for not censoring the names of people used as sources of the information in the files. Reporters Without Boarders in particular has harshly criticized Wikileaks in an open letter for setting "A bad precedent for the Internet’s future."

http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open...010,38130.html

As far as the discussion that information is often classified to protect sources, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission has seen "a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators" apparently in connection with the files' release, according to the Boston Herald.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/us..._leaked_files/

Also, according to the NY Post's OpEd column, The Taliban "has targeted at least 100 Afghans identified in the documents as informants for the US-led counterinsurgency".

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...#ixzz0wb8n3Hcv

[theprez98]

Re: WikiLeaks

Thanks, but I know the truth. I saw you speak at Defcon (2 or 3 years ago) to a packed room or people. They were quite interested in what you had to say, and I am pretty sure you could have done better than me up above if you so desired.

Well, thank you for the compliment.

I find that I often write my comments with certain assumptions in mind, but I sometimes fail to actually lay them out in print. When I read your post, it spelled out your assumptions, and gave me pause to consider that I had not done the same.

When people take the time to clearly write what they're thinking, it rewards the readers by making them better critical thinkers.

And I'm pretty sure that made no sense.

[TheCotMan]

Re: WikiLeaks

...but you lay it out in a much better way that I ever could have.

Thanks, but I know the truth. I saw you speak at Defcon (2 or 3 years ago) to a packed room or people. They were quite interested in what you had to say, and I am pretty sure you could have done better than me up above if you so desired.

[theprez98]

Re: WikiLeaks

If you specify which items are of risk to cause harm to people, you leak additional information by acting as a proxy to confirming some part of a bit of intel to be censored is factual. While in civilian hands, a person that has knowledge of the sensitive content and less sensitive content becomes a target for "the enemy" to interrogate for both halves of this information.

Precisely. In the same way you can infer things based on what people don't talk about.

Cooperation from the DoD is a losing offer for the DoD and a win for wikileaks. Wikileaks can now claim they tried to do their part to protect people but were not able to because, "the DoD doesn't believe in protecting people or else they would have helped us minimize harm." Now, when something bad does happen, they can say, "well... we tried," and wikileak supporters against violence will agree without really understanding how they were socially engineered to obey and follow.

Controlling and influencing people through media is an interesting topic. When done well, it is not obvious to most people and even when a small percentage of people recognize it for what it is, it is not newsworthy enough for wide public discussion.

Wikileaks gets bonus points for excellent strategy for this offer to the DoD. It is like a lesson from The Art of War.

Agree 100% with all of this. I probably should have specifically said that it seems obvious to me that this was all part of their media strategy, but you lay it out in a much better way that I ever could have.