The virtual hunt of Wikileaks

[Dave A]

Interesting story http://blog.al.com/wire/2010/12/auth...leaks_fou.html

Just what are the limits on freedom of speech?

[adrianh]

Every dog has its day...

Its good to see the great policeman of the universe with egg all over its face - they get what they deserve!

[AndyD]

You know, a couple of weeks ago I was torn over the Wikileaks revelations of the government internal communiques, if it was a good thing or not and do the public really need this knida freedom of information to the n'th degree.

After the little performance of the US authorities over the last few days, any sympathy I had for them has evaporated. I read on some of the grayer IRC channels about unofficial recruitment and distributed web attacks in order to take servers down. I see the very suspicious timing of a rape charge and a suspiciously fast and near worldwide detention warrant and manhunt for a charge that hasn't even been finalised.

I'm now at the stage where I'm firmly in the corner of the underdog. I'm going to enjoy watching the authorities reaping what they sow. This saga isn't over by a long shot. ;-)

[tec0]

Well freedom of speech will no longer be a problem because of this. See this scenario gave them every reason to remove freedom of speech from the constitution. All they needed was a reason and it was practically handed to them.

The truth is we have a right to know but there are people that think we don’t need to know so let’s make it illegal then they can lock people up for knowing.

See this is why prisons cruelty and prison rape goes unchecked. If prison is the closest thing to hell then people will fear it thus fear the laws. So we will lose our freedom of speech because we don’t want to end up in prison.

The true worry is who gave them the power to rewrite the constitution in the first place? The people???

[Dave A]

I haven't been following the story that closely up to now. Scandal doesn't float my boat much and I'm certainly not surprised that internal correspondence of this sort is less than diplomatic. Big deal. It's the ugly truth - get over it. Up until now, my thought on the US response was they were fools - their reaction just confirmed the releases as valid.

But this campaign to shut Wikileaks down in rather questionable fashion suddenly makes the subject interesting.

Can someone get me up to speed:

What I don't get is how Wkileaks got the info in the first place. I see mention of theft. Or was it hacking? And was it Wikileaks, or was it a case of the information was passed onto them?

[adrianh]

Take a look at this:

http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/12/01/bradley-manning-alleged-wikileaks-source-set-up-an-early-facebook-really/

[wynn]

Asange has promised a wiki leak dump of documents from a large bank in the next few weeks, that is going to be interesting.

[AndyD]

What I don't get is how Wkileaks got the info in the first place. I see mention of theft. Or was it hacking? And was it Wikileaks, or was it a case of the information was passed onto them?

Wikileaks gets given the information by concerned whistle-blowers who had access to the info. It wasn't by unauthorised intrusion as far as I know. The US govt is enlisting the help of all and sundry to use DDoS techniques against the wikileaks servers. Touch wood it appears wikileaks was prepared for this type of action and already had their ducks in a row.

[tec0]

There is game at play here and the game is rigged. It is incredible how things normally turn out. What starts a leak in any organisation?

A leak starts when human morality is in question. A leak stars when someone was wronged. A leak stars when a truth was turned into a lie. Lastly a leak stars because of greed.

So, people can arrest people for trying to tell the public what is really happening hoping that the public will protect them. This never happens, so leaks are punishable by law.

See the reason behind the secrecy is not important, people simply accept that yes a bank has big managers and they are all allowed to change accounts and has access to all your information. But you and I are not allowed to go to board meetings.

The truth is, secrecy is the result of vanity, greed and envy. Secrecy keeps the powerful, powerful the rich, rich and blinds us all to the fact that we are free.

See they control us because we accept their systems and if we protest against them we go to those bad prisons that justify suicide.

So right now it just looks like another conspiracy but it is hidden history in the making.

[desA]

I prefer to side with the underdog. Lovely to see the Seppo-Merkin spin machines working overtime.

[Dave A]

The US govt is enlisting the help of all and sundry to use DDoS techniques against the wikileaks servers.

That's why I'm suddenly interested. Ordinarily it's those people that I would expect to find on Interpol "wanted" lists.

Wikileaks gets given the information by concerned whistle-blowers who had access to the info. It wasn't by unauthorised intrusion as far as I know.

I haven't seen any reports that suggest otherwise either.

I appreciate that the internet is the virtual equivalent of the wild west of yore. Maintaining law and order is certainly not easy.
It looks like Bradley Manning could well have a really serious charge to answer in the USA.
I could understand the USA declaring Assange persona non grata for entry into the USA.

But the events of the past couple of days begs the questions:

• What is the USA's legal grounds for having Assange put on an international most-wanted list?
• Is the USA guilty of orchestrating and/or encouraging cyber-terrorism?

[AndyD]

That's why I'm suddenly interested. Ordinarily it's those people that I would expect to find on Interpol "wanted" lists.

The US has a long history of double standards. They're happy to justify using methods they have condemned up to that point as long as it's for their ends, not someone elses. Torture at Guantanamo is one that springs immediately to mind. More recently they've been using homeland security to close down websites for copyright infringement then seizing the domain without any legal proceedings or recourse for the registered owner. Maybe copyright infringement is now classed as terrorism.....who knows?

I haven't seen any reports that suggest otherwise either.

You can be assured that if the info wikileaks obtained was gained through illegal channels we would never hear the last of it. The US authorities would be spoon feeding the media with horror stories about those nasty hackers and pentagon security breaches.

I appreciate that the internet is the virtual equivalent of the wild west of yore. Maintaining law and order is certainly not easy.

He hee heee, yeah, great innit?
I foresee some radical changes in the core structure of the internet in the next few years. Between dotcom domain seizures for purely capitalist reasons and the coming COICA legislation being steamrollered through as we speak, people are running to places like China to register domains and host nameservers. Kinda ironic that you're less likely to be censored in China than in the USA. Alas it's true, China only censors for political reasons whereas the US censors for economic ones. The laughable thing is that both countries are equally extreme, just for different reasons.

But the events of the past couple of days begs the questions:

• What is the USA's legal grounds for having Assange put on an international most-wanted list?
• Is the USA guilty of orchestrating and/or encouraging cyber-terrorism?

I'm sure they'll let us know their grounds once they've found something they can spin.
The US isn't necessarily guilty of encouraging cyber-terrorism but they're guilty of using it for their own ends and glaring double standards as I mentioned above.

[Dave A]

I'm not as convinced as you are that the internet should be a total free-for-all. For example there are certain activities (scams, phishing, DDoS attacks) where I'm inclined to think the perpetrators should be pursuable across national borders.

I'm not married to the idea - I'm not sure if that would be the thin end of the wedge opening the door to more draconian regulation. And of course there's the problem of wherever you have regulators, who regulates them? I certainly wouldn't want to have the politicians in charge.

Maybe it's best leaving things the way they are in the end? After all, the USA is catching some serious stick about the way they've gone about this.

I suspect just how this case finally shakes out is going to give some telling clues.

[tec0]

I remember I wrote something about UK internet being monitored for downloading uploading and e-mail along with searches. If a person is guilty of any transgression it is a slam-dunk.

Freedom... no...
Law... no...

Control... Bingo!

Control ensures that government remain unchallenged and in control. See freedom as it is, is an allusion. The only privacy you will have left is in your mind and that is it. Street cameras will watch you officers, security personal will intimidate you and the law will force you to do everything as they see fit.

See once you realise that none of this so called leaks have any real importance other than giving powerful people an excuse to destroy another constitutional right, you see the bigger picture.

[Chatmaster]

Personally I think Wikileaks can be compared to a bunch of kids misbehaving with things far greater than they can remotely comprehend. There is very good reasons why diplomacy and government secrets needs to exist. But I certainly do not have ANY sympathy for the US government, who is probably the most ignorant, immoral and undiplomatic country in the world. Imagine a few leaks on the 911 incident, I can imagine a few exhausts nipping atm.

I see MasterCard has been hacked by Russians in retaliation for them freezing Wikileaks funds. This is steering into the direction of the 3rd world war... I am afraid that Internet regulating is not far off and that makes me angry with the idiots of Wikileaks!