Ouch, am very surprised that PostFinance have closed their account. I could understand PayPal doing it since PP are a pretty useless company (http://www.google.com/search?q=paypal+sucks) * But there must have been some heavy pressure from the West (et al?) on the 'neutral' Swiss to have this happen. Genuinely surprised at that. Surely (what is essentially) persecuting Wikileaks will just lead to them getting more popular? (Assuming they can get around this latest hurdle) * Just as I can understand EasyDNS dumping Wikileaks for the reasons I mentioned on page 5, and Amazon were always going to dump Wikileaks since they were a new customer and Amazon are USA based. Hence I understand all that, but I'm very surprised at this latest development.
Probably some ill conceived, badly written piece of legislation equivalent to Ripa or the Patriot act.
The best predictor of future behaviour tends to be past behaviour. So what have we got? Flying planes into iconic skyscrapers and the Pentagon --9 years ago. Blowing up some public transport --5 years ago. Driving a car into Glasgow airport (bomb did not go off) --3 years ago. This was after a failed attempt to blow up a night club. Lord Mountbatten? OK, the IRA blew up a boat with a retired admiral who had not seen service for 20 years and who did not have body guards because frankly he did not consider himself that important anymore. There was also the bombing of Harrods and the Brighton Grand hotel where the Conservatives were staying (the most targeted attack in the whole of IRA's history), and numberous public venues. Nope, not seeing any attacks on all those helpfully signposted, instantly recognisable nuclear powerplants, BAE systems or military facilities, or on Goonhilly satellite communications station, or all those big-ass oil refineries that you can spot from 10 miles away and are easily found on Google Maps (with satellite view offering you a nice birdseye view of the layout of all those places). Not seeing them attack, say, Merial Animal Health laboratory, located at Pirbright scientific research centre in Surrey, so Google tells me , that managed to make the news in 2007 after accidentally leaking a strain of foot-and-mouth disease. You know, targets where they could do some real damage. And there is a reason for that. Most terrorists are not supervillains stroking their white persian in their underground lair of evil (conveniently located in a dormant volcano). Most are small time inadequates with a chip on their shoulder. They think rigidly within the box (fundamenalist, remember?) and they crave public attention, and they make their bombs from fertiliser (and half of the time they fail to detonate). So they go for mediapathic, easy to hit public targets, not indirect, complicated, secured-to-the-hilt ones. Then again it shows up how vulnerable our "classified" information is. Valuable object lesson right there. If Wikileaks can get their hands on it, why not those sophisticated terrorist organisations you mention? Don't they have their sympathisers? The US had ample intelligence warning that something was afoot --I mean, Saudi foreigners learning how to fly a plane, but not land it? How peculiar-- but the Bush administration was too preoccupied with preparations for the invasion of Iraq at the time to pay attention. Of course it does not help that we make it easy on them. I mean, not encrypting military communications between aircraft so an insurgent with a laptop and $26,-- of software can listen in (next stop: highjacking drones)? (the software is called SkyGrabber; download it here) The MoD losing 700 laptops? With security like this, who needs Wikileaks?
Speaking of oil refineries. SS Richard Montgomery. That'd sure cause some disruption for the oil refinery nearby, and all the explosives are there already.
No one actually knows how any terrorists will behave with the installations cable release. We could take the US and other governments words that it is damaging, but on the other hand they aren't exactly going to say anything else other than that it is because they all want this to stop. Like someone mentioned previously, if terrorists are clever enough to learn to fly passenger planes, ballsy enough to board those planes and overpower the cabin crew and passengers and then fly the planes 100% perfectly into two of the most important structures in the US and bring them down to the ground perfectly ... maybe they already know all this stuff?
"Real power is to have the will to do what other people won't" --Verbal Kimt, The Usual Suspects Learning to fly a plane is easy. You start with Microsoft Flight Simulator (which is extremely authentic) and finish up with some lessons. Remember: they only wanted to point the plane in the right direction. The pilots were going to do the hard stuff like taking off. Landing was not an issue. Hitting the WTC is not hard --big, tall objects. Can't miss them, really. Nobody expected a hijack. Hence the cockpit could be taken over with a few Stanley knives. The promise of a remote-triggered bomb on board is all it takes to keep the passengers and crew subdued. All you need is something that looks like it could be a remote detonator. Even a mobile phone will do: "If I dial this number... BOOM!" Of course it does not always work --as the terrorists on board United Air flight 93 found out.
I really didn't have a problem with Wikileaks, until I saw this: The leaks previous to this weren't such a big deal in my opinion, although I was a big fan of the War logs. Everyone overreacted to the recent cable leaks. However, when looking at the article above, even if their goal is to promote this stuff by releasing it, they crossed the line by promoting a 'U.S. diplomatic cable listing places the United States considers vital to its national security.' It seems as though they've lost a ton of credibility with this and you can't really argue that this information needed to be released and promoted. They've given the media and officials more reason to claim that they are 'sponsoring terrorism' and such. It now looks like Assange is just trying to be a gigantic asshole to the United States instead of leading the march to transparency.
I wish they would hurry it up a bit. So far they have only released 934 of the 250k+ cables. I'm sure the hangup is in that each cable is being reviewed for sources and methods information which is being removed...by the wikileaks people. Some of them come out so heavily redacted that they don't still have an intelligible meaning. Consider also the "critical facilities" hubalahoo. The State Department sent out a request to embassies and consulates all over the world saying "what facilities in your country are critical to US national security?" Not what facilities in the US, but in foreign countries are critical to OUR security. A lot of the answers the recieved seem to indicate that the embassy staffs were just pulling stuff out of their arses to look like they were doing something and wishing Washington would get off their back with dumb requests. I've posted the text of the original request below. The cables that have pissed me off so far have detailed how the US government lobbied hard to get foreign countries to buy US military hardware, especially in Brazil and Norway. I DO NOT APPROVE of my tax dollars being used to lobby other governments to steer business to American companies. The US Department of State should take no position on whether the government of Norway purchases fighters from Lockheed Martin or not. One of the reasons given in the cables for pushing the Norwegians to buy the F-35 is because no one else has and they really need a foreign sale to give the program legitimacy.
I find this laughable. They've done a pretty fantastic job of wrecking health, safety and the economy without any "critical infrastructure" being trashed by 'terrorists'.
256 bit key- get the fermi's fired up in china! this will be a all nighter! heheh yeah agree with the security pros though- there's no way they are cracking that unless there's a way they can match up information in the archive with known data probably be a good idea to raid his place and his buddies al qesidea style for a shot at destroying the key before it gets fired off.. sure there's a lot of people high up who don't want to see that file like bank of america and bp my personal guess- nothing in the archive.. asshat is too much of a fame whore to let anything juicy sit.. it affects his allure with the chicks before he rapes them with his piccalo haircut and flees I wonder if there's any suspicion by our government that he paid off the leaker too? what was in it for him other than soap games and upgraded suite to hungryjacks
Can wiki leaks just hurry up and release everything its getting pretty old now- if they have got something thats extremely bad for the us just release it so it can be blown over etc.
I think that I have already demonstrated that: Most of the facilities listed are already known to the public Their importance to 'security' can be deduced by anyone with half a brain It is not the kind of targets terrorists have ever gone for, because they are too difficult and lack the element of, well, terror. Meanwhile data that is of strategic importance is an open book to anyone who wants to know without Wikileaks needing to get involved. Colour me unimpressed (it's a bit like mauve, but edging towards puce). I don't care if it is known that the US considers my fish-and-chippy down the road "important to security". What I mind I'd that even their basic, obvious security is crap and instead of resolving that they are wasting time with inane lists of the obvious. So let's focus on the relevant question: why does the US ask the question, and moreover, why didn't it want the countries concerned to know it was asking the question? Perhaps someone just had to justify his salary that month. Or perhaps the US does not like to be "dependent" as it calls it, on foreign services and installations. We all know how it felt about being dependent on Iraq oil. We all know how it has a time-honoured tradition of meddling (either through the CIA or through military intervention) in the internal affairs of other countries which it considers to affect its own welfare. So I'm more worried about what the US may do next as a result of this list, than any terrorists. It is kind of ironic that a promiscuous narcissist has done more for democracy and openness than the Hutton enquiry, or the Chilcot enquiry, or any investigation into two illegal wars. But let's just dismiss him as a fame whore with dodgy personal lifestyle practices. Not much different from Bush and Blair, then.
Just on the news, Assange has been arrested by appointment in London, due in a Magistrates court later today.
I hate to be the one to play devil's advocate, but you guys should take into consideration that he might actually have sexually assaulted someone. The diplomatic cables aside, the guy is proven to be a arrogant *****. He's just the sort not to stop at 'No' and think he can get away with it. I say, let the Swedes put him in a court and make their case. I'm willing to bet that the 2 are independent events and he's guilty as sin.
I agree. Everyone is quick to play the conspiricy card, but there could be a real case for Assange to answer to. Just because he is high profile, and off the US government's Xmas card list, doesn't mean that he is automatically not guilty. If there is evidence of wrong doing, especially for such a henious crime as rape, then he should face questioning, it's the right thing to do. Would you guys be so supportive, and sure of his innocence if it was a football player etc? Or the other popular alternative is to raise his status to some sort of saviour, who is a modern day hero of the people. I think I will be happy taking Assange with a large dose of salt, as he is very much so the fame whore you think he isn't. We are all entitled to our opinions, and this is mine.
I'm not exactly a fan of Wikileaks (am fairly ambivalent about the whole thing I guess), although I do find it very suspicious that the Swedes issued an arrest warrant a while back and then said "Woops, there's zero evidence". And then the moment the news of the impending leaks started to - well, leak - the arrest warrant got issued again (and then again since they 'filled it out' incorrectly the first time) All-in-all I do find it suspicious, especially with even neutral companies (e.g. the Swiss bank) freezing Assange's assets. Hence part of me does think that it won't be a fair trial. But at the same time, you are right that he could have done what he's accused of in which case this arrest is fair enough, naturally.
Having read the evidence from the leaked swedish police reports, and just about everything else I can find out about the whole period Assange was in Stockholm that time, the rape allegations are pretty damn thin on the ground. He had sex with Woman 1, and the condom broke. Then he had sex with Woman 2 the next night, with a condom, and then in the morning after without a condom. She requested he wear one, he didn't, she didn't then remove consent for sex. That's it. That's not rape, that's doing something stupid which you regret. The fact that he had sex with Woman 2 (at her home) while staying at Woman 1's apartment makes him sleazy at worst, not a rapist. Don't get me wrong JJ, the two whole things are and should be treated separately - but the charges are a joke. He pretty much has become a modern day hero to many people, because he's choosing to show people the truth and tell them what their government doesn't want them to know. It's a pretty good reason for becoming one if you ask me. Him enjoying fame is no bad thing, no-one complains if a good footballer, movie star, or politician is in the news, why should we be bothered by a journalist being in the news?
First, neither Sweden nor Switzerland is exactly are US compliant countries, unlike the UK and AU. Second, you have to look at the details of the inquiry to see why they dropped the first arrest request. As for the Swiss account, it was an account that had the requirement the you be either a resident or have a business in the country, he didn't have either. I know everyone wants to believe that the US is out to get him (and they are, just not like this). But if I open an account and don't meet the requirements and they close my account, it is what it is. If I'm accused of rape, and the judge orders the charges held on procedural matters and has the charges issued later when the evidence is more clear, it is what it is. It's not like that is a rare thing, or unusual.
No longer true, Sweden is (according to Swedish opinion I've heard here) becoming the US's bitch. They're far more compliant with the US than many (probably most) other nations in the EU are, and many swedes are apparently quite unhappy about this. Furthermore, while I agree the Swiss bank account was shut down on legitimate grounds, the timing points to likely attempts to make his life difficult in a short period of time. Legitimate nonetheless. Paypal's freezing of the wikileaks accounts on the otherhands seems far less legitimate, and I suspect is purely due to political pressure. Similarly, the Australian government suddenly deciding that the post office in which Assange has his Aussie PO box needs to be shut down seems a little too unlikely in it's timing to be coincidence. There's bad luck, and there's losing 100k, half your bank accounts, your PO box, and being arrested on ******** rape charges in 1 week. This seems like more than just bad luck to me.
