seriously how long does it have left?

rape charges real?

do we care that our governments lie to us and on our behalf

anyone else boycotting amazon and paypal

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/just-because-we%27re-crushing-wikileaks%2c-it-doesn%27t-mean-you%27re-next%2c-say-governments-201012033317/

whether or not the charges against Assange stand is immaterial. Wikileaks must continue to exist. Unfortunately it needs to find a) a donation conduit and b) a hosting service that isnt lily-livered when it comes to the US senate.

Its quite possible Assange really did assault the women in Sweden – they interviewed credibly when Im sure I heard them on Radio 4 earlier this year. He’s probably the hubristic type who might well have unpleasant traits, but that doesnt take away from the vital function of the organisation…

well he may have upset russia with some of his leaks so if the yanks (or chinese, iranians, koreans etc) dont get him he may well find some pollonium in his tea
-or if ladies are his weakness russia seem to have lots of nice blondes on the books

I agree with Stoner. Wikileaks must continue. I too donated previously and will donate again. It’s impossible to speculate on the veracity of the assault charges. But if you’re going to smear someone, there’s no better way to do it. It’s the kind of dirt that doesn’t wash off very easily. I’m just confused as to how they’d have chosen Sweden.

I quite liked his response about free speech in the west.

The west has fiscalised its basic power relationships through a web of contracts, loans, shareholdings, bank holdings and so on. In such an environment it is easy for speech to be “free” because a change in political will rarely leads to any change in these basic instruments. Western speech, as something that rarely has any effect on power, is, like badgers and birds, free
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/dec/03/julian-assange-wikileaks

The rape charges were dropped earlier this year and have now been picked up again – by a different prosecutor. Given that Sweden was happy to help out the US with those “Rendition” flights, I’m sure they were easy to persuade.

there is something practical that can be done

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-internet-backlash-us-pressure

http://current.workingdirectory.net/posts/2010/wikileaks-offline/

will be looking into this on my own site, when i can work out what needs doing

I’m just confused as to how they’d have chosen Sweden.

home turf credibility.

a) a donation conduit

Online Transfer via Credit Card
Bank Transfer [option 1: everyone]
Bank Transfer [option 2: tax deductible in Germany]
Paypal via Wau Holland Foundation
Postal Mail

– Wikileaks.ch

true,

but the ability to paypal was what made it easy for me to donate, quickly and securely.

yeah id donated via paypal too coz its so easy

i bought something off ebay earlier and grudgingly had to use paypal as there wasnt really any other way

You probably have more protection via credit card…..admittedly the ease of doing it is not there, but hey how much do you want to help?

iDave,
I have just emailed my ISP about the dns entry. We shall see..

Media is a great tool

remember it’s the ‘I’ in IT that is most important

To be honest most of the latest wikileaks stuff was already out there in the broadsheets and it was more a ‘rubber stamp’ than anything else. It does sound like a lot of tittle tattle picked up be diplomats too.
The most interesting thing is that the US largely does not come out of it in a better or worse light – it will probably just reinforce your current views.
What it does do though is show lots of other countries in a bad light. And in comparison, makes the US seem not so bad after all.
Maybe its not the worse thing that could have happened for the US?

The other side of Assange’s rape case

I think the server issue is more or less sorted. Anyone with a Unix server is encouraged to donate a bit of space and bandwidth, and the site is mirrored using rsync and a 2048 bit RSA key for security.

+1 Lifer

I’d read an equivilent article previously (probably in the UK Independent).

You’ve only got to see how the nurse got ‘stuffed’ (by those who should’ve supported her), to see what happens –

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6106326.ece

Now multiply, as you’ve pi55ed off a nation that quite happily runs Guantanamo Bay.

Seems like he’s upsetting a few people in positions of power – bank accounts frozen

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034

so if you’ve contributed, the swiss bank has stolen your money

I’ve no issue at all when government cover-ups are exposed, but I’m failing to see how much of the public interest is involved in things like the list of high-value targets being published, or a lot of the diplomatic gossip.

I’m failing to see how much of the public interest is involved in things like the list of high-value targets being published, or a lot of the diplomatic gossip.

Well if you are genuinely interested in knowing why many people consider it to be very important to know what shenanigans might be going on, then you might find this article quite useful :

WikiLeaks is holding US global power to account

Quote :

Much has been made of the appalling damage supposedly done to the delicate business of diplomacy. No doubt the back channels will survive the shock of daylight. But in any case the United States is the centre of a global empire, a state with a military presence in most countries which arrogates to itself the role of world leader and policeman.

When genuine checks on how it exercises that entirely undemocratic power are so weak at home, let alone in the rest of the world it still dominates, it’s both inevitable and right that people everywhere will try to find ways to challenge and hold it to account.

whats wrong with amazon and paypal?

If lifers post is anything like the true story this will be why he has not been arrested and extradited from the UK as IIRC a UK court has to be satisfied that there is a case to be made against him. Should be able to fight extradition on that basis.

Paypal (and by association), Facebook: Peter Thiel.

Paypal took the decision to suspend the wikileaks account, on the thin premise that it was using the account for illegal means. But, remember where Paypal came from, and what its purpose is.

Amazon decided to stop hosting wikileaks (Amazon provides hosting, CDN and other web acceleration services as well as selling half of China’s industrial output).

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/just-because-we%27re-crushing-wikileaks%2c-it-doesn%27t-mean-you%27re-next%2c-say-governments-201012033317/

democracy really is a load of codswallop

epicsteve when its done in your name shouldnt you have a right to know?

The function of Wikileaks is crucial. But with rights come responsibilities. Just because it has the information does not mean that it has the moral right to release it. If people die as a result of the release of the information then Wikileaks will be part of the cause of that person being killed.

The main problem that I have with Wikileaks is that it has decided that its main role is to hold the US Government to account. I thought it was supposed to be a neutral organisation. Releasing millions of files with no review of the content may upset the US, it may also very much upset many other countries.

Whether we like it or not much of what Governments or organisations have to do will be confidential. Either for commercial reasons or to allow Governments to consider all alternatives before choosing a way forward.

Until Wikileaks is able to release confidential information extracted for terrorists, corrupt governments, etc then I will consider them no more that an anti-US, anti-West special interest group.

The ironic thing is that if Wikileaks is about open processes then why hasn’t Julian Assange returned to Sweden to clear his name, in open court in a proper judicial system. The longer he chooses not to return the more it seems that he is avoiding justice.

I am not losing any sleep over the “demise” of Wikileaks. It’s not often I agree with Brezezinski, but as this interview with PBS shows, he is basically saying that Wikileaks is either in cahoots with, or being manipulated by a foreign intelligence agency.

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: It’s not a question of worry. It’s, rather, a question of whether WikiLeaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governments, because some of these items that are being emphasized and have surfaced are very pointed.

And I wonder whether, in fact, there aren’t some operations internationally, intelligence services, that are feeding stuff to WikiLeaks, because it is a unique opportunity to embarrass us, to embarrass our position, but also to undermine our relations with particular governments.

For example, leaving aside the personal gossip about Sarkozy or Berlusconi or Putin, the business about the Turks is clearly calculated in terms of its potential impact on disrupting the American-Turkish relationship.

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Seeding — seeding it is very easy.

I have no doubt that WikiLeaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.

I’m not as up to date as others on this but one thing still does not compute to me.

These documents were allegedly downloaded by a lone individual. A 23 year old disgruntled soldier. How did he have so much access? From experience in the military information is need to know and specific access is required. I don’t understand how the US military had civilian diplomatic cables on its network. I’ve no doubt that he downloaded some stuff but all of it? I may have the wrong end of the stick, please enlighten me if I’ve got it wrong.

What, of the information released so far, does anything other than reinforce generally held, but previously unsubstantiated, opinions?

I don’t understand how the US military had civilian diplomatic cables on its network. I’ve no doubt that he downloaded some stuff but all of it? I may have the wrong end of the stick, please enlighten me if I’ve got it wrong.

As I understand it the US created a joint shared secure network as a reaction to previous times when crucial information had been available to different agencies but hadn’t been shared. This was an attempt to be more joined up but the downside was all eggs in one basket. This network had started out just being between a few embassies but had expanded significantly over the last few years

Here you go folks – ex employees of Wikileaks about to blow the whistle – ironic no?

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/12/07/18665978.php

According to the information you have pointed us to Simon, Julian Assange is both determined to expose American hypocrisy at the expense of more noble causes AND working for them.

Which is it? Or is it both?

The way I read the article, he has done the deal with Israel, not the US.

Finally, it might be worth pointing out that Assange might have done what he is alleged to have done in order protect himself and ensure that the leaked documents are published so as to expose the American hypocrisy, which he is said to be obsessed with “at the expense of more fundamental aims.”

And the only vaguely secret stuff from the US has seemed to support US hegemony in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan yeah? All other stuff was just low level tittle-tattle.

This now looking like the start of the first (visible) cyber war

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/08/mastercard_downed_by_hackers/

No, the previous articles you have linked to have suggested that he was working for the US, this one says he particularly has it in for them.

I am not sure of your position aside from a willingness to believe anything bad that is said about Assange.

The way I read the article, he has done the deal with Israel, not the US…..And the only vaguely secret stuff from the US has seemed to support US hegemony in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan yeah? All other stuff was just low level tittle-tattle.

yes so as he said the article states he will do anything to expose american now which is it? Supporting their hegemony or all out to expose it’s hypocrisy at any cost you cant claim both. Is he an unwitting stooge of the USA world view now? They seem to be going to a bit of trouble to get him though dont they – suppose they would have to or it would be obvious etc. Problem with all conspiracy theories is there is some evidence but never enough. Your view seems somewhat contradictory without piling on more cards to you house.

The function of Wikileaks is crucial. But with rights come responsibilities. Just because it has the information does not mean that it has the moral right to release it. If people die as a result of the release of the information then Wikileaks will be part of the cause of that person being killed.

It is quite probable that people may die as a result of these ‘leaks’ – I agree.

But since our ‘leaders’ are engaged in an illegal war where tens of thousands have already died, we have to understand and accept that this is a price worth paying if it stops them in the future.

Currently the US is throwing its weight around too much, pretty much like we did in the late 19th / early 20th century. Outspending anyone else (by a wide margin) on the Military – pretty much as we did. And putting down anyone who defies them – pretty much as we did.

Such as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War

Checks and balances need to be put in place, and currently Wikileaks are (one of many) performing this role. And OT, no real difference to why FIFA didn’t want the World Cup in the UK, and choose somewhere where business is ‘easier’.

This now looking like the start of the first (visible) cyber war

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/08/mastercard_downed_by_hackers/

DDOS by Anon (peace be upon them) is hardly ‘cyber war’.

Somebody writing a virus specifically targeting Iran’s infrastructure = cyber war.

Anon (peace be upon them) DDOSing a site = a bunch of bored people trolling for the lols. When caturday rolls around it’ll all be forgotten.

well going back to simons article, if assange really did make a deal with the israelis id very much like to see the video of this

im sure that there will however be plenty of anti-israeli stuff yet to be divulged

and as this info comes from a pro-arab website id just put it down as the ususal anti-israel conspiracy paranoia thats common in the middle east

assange may well be an arrogant he may even be guilty of rape but i believe his motivations for the leaks are pretty much unbiased in that he dislikes all governments