[amphibian]

Morgoth, on 04 December 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

If I was from Yemen I'd be pretty angry to learn that my elected president allowed American drones to drop bombs on my country, especially as this same president denied having done so in a parliamentary hearing.

If I was Pakistani I certainly would want to know about my elected representatives' dealings with the US, and the abysmal state of my country's nuclear weapons and power plants.

The average Pakistani citizen does not give a crap about the abysmal state of their nuclear weapons program and power stations. They want them and to use them as a bully stick to get concessions out of the more prosperous nations/scare India. Until something goes catastrophically wrong, they will continue to not give a damn. The general mindset of the populace and large chunks of the government there is so screwed up that I'm surprised they haven't gotten into a full scale war with India yet. Zardari is a crook too.

The Yemenis, I'm not so sure about, but the U.S. and other nations (as I'll point out in a quote below) have been conducting missile strikes and bombing raids in the Maghreb and down the Eastern coast of Africa since at least the Clinton years (when my memory of this stuff begins). Yemen is a tough place to be in employment-wise, wracked by a civil war and several significant connections between locals and terrorist groups in other parts of the Middle East (and Somalia) have been brought to light. It's basically a hotbed of strife and the government there has little to no incentive to say "No" to the Americans because they get so little from the other, richer Middle Eastern countries and the strikes are sometimes directed at their enemies (see how the Pakistanis allow and direct strikes in their own country).

From Information Dissemination, a naval blog I follow:

Quote

• The Ethiopia invasion of Somalia in 2006. I suspect we will learn a lot of things we did not know, like who was flying the Ethiopian air force MiGs that were able to make precision bomb drops on the fighters for the Islamic Courts. US pilots don't fly MiGs, and I have serious doubts they were Ethiopian pilots.
  
• The Song class submarine surfacing near Kitty Hawk in October 2006. It wasn't until almost a year later that Bill Gertz of the Washington Times revealed that incident even happened. We may learn a lot more details about the incident in the Wikileaks cables that suggests how that event actually happened.
  
• Diplomatic cables as a result of Global Fleet Station and Medical Diplomacy missions including the first African Partnership Station. This seems like as good a time as any to learn how to improve coordination between the Navy and the State Department for these soft power deployments by getting insight to the way the State Department viewed them, and how the host nations discussed these activities at the diplomatic level.
  
• The harassment of the USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23) and other ocean surveillance ships by China in 2009. I suspect there might be a few interesting conversations that took place behind the scenes.
  
• The ballistic missile launch by North Korea over Japan. I'm thinking this will be an insiders look at how the ballistic missile defense partnership between the US and Japan came to be, which is important as that model is now being used for BMD in Europe.
  
• There have been several quiet shooting incidents in the Gulf over the last few years between the US Navy and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps that will likely come to light in the Wikileaks story.
  
• I am looking forward to perhaps learning more regarding the history of the Somalia piracy courts in Kenya. This will prove particularly important as we approach potential UN discussions about a world court for dealing with maritime piracy.
  
• We may learn of some interesting discussions regarding F-22 sales to Japan or other nations. FMS in various forms, including potential submarines for Taiwan, might pop up as interesting topics.
  
• The great tsunami in Southeast Asia in 2004 might pop up as an interesting topic with inside details not previously disclosed.

[Adjutant Stormy~]

Wikileaks now has over 1000 mirrors in operation for the current leak-cycle.

Interwebs to the rescue.

[Aptorian]

And Assange has been arrested, perhaps pending extradition to Sweden.

What a world, what a world.

[amphibian]

Jenisapt Rul, on 07 December 2010 - 09:53 PM, said:

And Assange has been arrested, perhaps pending extradition to Sweden.

What a world, what a world.

I have absolutely no idea if this is true, but there's a rumor going around that the reason why the Swedes are going after Assange is because he's HIV positive. That'd make the very strange lack of a condom deal less crazy.

As usual, hang on to your horses, wait till the facts sloooowly reveal themselves and then make what you may of them.

[MTS]

I read that the allegations are based on a Swedish law called 'sex by surprise' where it's illegal to not wear a condom in consensual sex if the woman requests it, and apparently these two did request it. The maximum fine is like $700 though apparently, so I'm curious as to how that necessitates an Interpol manhunt. The HIV deal would make more sense, but even still.

I'm frankly quite disgusted at our Government at the moment, who is bending over backwards to help the US throw an Australian citizen to the wolves.

[Adjutant Stormy~]

I think it's hilarious. But, then again, I'm a cynical bastard.

[Aptorian]

amphibian, on 07 December 2010 - 10:31 PM, said:

Jenisapt Rul, on 07 December 2010 - 09:53 PM, said:

And Assange has been arrested, perhaps pending extradition to Sweden.

What a world, what a world.

I have absolutely no idea if this is true, but there's a rumor going around that the reason why the Swedes are going after Assange is because he's HIV positive. That'd make the very strange lack of a condom deal less crazy.

As usual, hang on to your horses, wait till the facts sloooowly reveal themselves and then make what you may of them.

Oh it is true, sex by surprise. He turned himself in.

Sounds like a lot of he said she said. Which does not mean that the women do not deserve justice if he really is a creep, but it is so very convenient, isn't it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11937110

Quote

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange refused bail
The founder of whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has been refused bail by a court in London but vowed to fight extradition to Sweden.

Mr Assange denies sexually assaulting two women in Sweden. He was remanded in custody pending a hearing next week.

A judge at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court refused bail because of the risk of the 39-year-old fleeing.

A Wikileaks spokesman said the arrest was an attack on media freedom and pledged to continue publishing.

After the court appearance Mr Assange's lawyer Mark Stephens said he would be applying again for bail.

He claimed the charges were "politically motivated" and said the judge was keen to see the evidence against Mr Assange, an Australian citizen.

Mr Stephens said Wikileaks would continue to publish material and added: "We are on cable 301 and there are 250,000 secret cables."

A Downing Street spokesman said Mr Assange's arrest was "a matter for the police" and there had been no ministerial involvement.


Prosecutors in Sweden have insisted the extradition request is a matter of criminal law and they "have not been put under any kind of pressure, political or otherwise".

Five people, including journalist John Pilger, film director Ken Loach and Jemima Khan, the sister of Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith, offered to put up sureties.

But district judge Howard Riddle refused bail for Mr Assange and he was remanded in custody until 14 December.

Judge Riddle said he believed Mr Assange might flee and he also feared he "may be at risk from unstable persons".

Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, gave details of the allegations against Mr Assange.

Continue reading the main story
The charges

• Used his body weight to hold down Miss A in a sexual manner.
• Had unprotected sex with Miss A when she had insisted on him using a condom.
• Molested Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• Had unprotected sex with Miss W while she was asleep.

• Profile: Julian Assange

One of the charges is that he had unprotected sex with a woman, identified only as Miss A, when she insisted he use a condom.

Another is that he had unprotected sex with another woman, Miss W, while she was asleep.

Mr Assange, who was accompanied by Australian consular officials, initially refused to say where he lived but eventually gave an address in Australia.

Afterwards Ms Khan explained why she was willing to put up a surety: "I offered my support as I believe that this is about the universal right of freedom of information and our right to be told the truth."


Wikileaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson said it would not stop the release of more secret files and told Reuters on Tuesday: "Wikileaks is operational. We are continuing on the same track as laid out before.

"Any development with regards to Julian Assange will not change the plans we have with regards to the releases today and in the coming days."

He said Wikileaks was being operated by a group in London and other secret locations.

Secret locations

US State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said it was possible the US would make an extradition request for Mr Assange but he said it was premature as the criminal investigation into Wikileaks was still ongoing.

Mr Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station at 0930 GMT.

Police contacted Mr Stephens on Monday night after receiving a European arrest warrant from the Swedish authorities.

An earlier warrant, issued last month, had not been filled in correctly.

Mr Assange has come in for criticism in the past week for the revelations made on Wikileaks.

Foreign Secretary William Hague has criticised the website for publishing details of sensitive sites, including some in the UK, saying they could be targeted by terrorists.

But, in an article for The Australian newspaper, Mr Assange denied he had put lives at risk and said Wikileaks deserved to be protected.

Mr Crowley said: "The (US) constitution enshrines the freedom of the press and we respect that, even if we have concerns about how that is exercised".

Gerard Batten, a UKIP MEP, said the Assange case highlighted the dangers of the European arrest warrant.

He said: "I don't know of the quality of the evidence in Mr Assange's case but it does seem that he is involved in political turmoil and intrigue and there are a lot of people keen to shut him up and there is nothing a court in the UK can do to look at the evidence before they extradite him."

Mr Assange's supporters have written an open letter to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, asking her to protect him.

Mr Pilger, who appeared in court to support Mr Assange, said Ms Gillard's threat to remove his passport smacked of "totalitarianism".

This post has been edited by Jenisapt Rul: 08 December 2010 - 04:36 AM

[Adjutant Stormy~]

I'd sign it, though obviously my opinion holds little water that far across the pond.

[Gothos]

I don't personally think that Wikileaks in itself is a problem. The problem is government officials turning over classified documents, which is treason, and rightfully so. 'Classified' isn't there just to look cool. I despise mr Kukliński (who turned over Warsaw Pact documents to NATO during the Cold War for money), and I despise these guys who leaked information to Wikileaks.

I do also think that some information should never reach the public (the public being mostly dimwitted mostly everywhere).

As for the founder, I think he's something of an attention whore maybe. This kind of website should remain anonymous.

[Primateus]

I just don't get why the media is focussing more on Assange and the fact that the documents have been leaked instead of keeping focus on the documents themselves.

In relation to the case against Assange, I don't know if he really did what they claim he did. As someone mentioned earlier, this looks very much like a "he said she said" case. And if this is some sort of attempt to discredit Assange and make him, and by extension; Wikileaks, look untrustworthy...Well, then it's quite a pathetic attempt if you ask me.

As for whether or not these documents should have been released in the first place? Well, I very much favour total transparancy in governments and diplomacy. And if this can force them to clean up their act, then so be it!
I can, however, understand the various governments wish to keep somethings secret, especially in regards to military matters. But if such a release of classified documents exposes the use of, eg. torture by governments who should know better, then I say again, so be it.

Yes, as Gothos said, people in general are stupid and some can't handle being exposed to these documents. But many can. Besides, I'd rather see people going apeshit crazy because they don't understand leaked documents than I want to see governments keeping secrets from the public.

Or something like that.

[Gothos]

The main issue I have with people being dim is that there's some really smart people with an agenda that will use and abuse such 'leaked' information to actually create a situation where things are actually less clear than before a leak. And bend events to their favour. Say what you want about governments, there are people out there that make them look like angels. And these vipers know perfectly how to shape public oppinion.

[Primateus]

Now that I understand Gothos, and I agree with you to a certain extent. But I can't help but feel that, on some level, keeping secrets from people because they're too stupid to understand it feels a bit like trying to shut down speech you don't like. In the sense that some nations have made it illegal to print racial hatred. I don't want people to hate others on reasons for "racial" differences, it's stupid and makes little sense to me. But neither do I want such ideas to be banned. I want them out in the open where I, and others, can challenge such ideas and expose them for the stupidity they are.

The same goes for these leaks. I don't want the leaks to be used by people who are "up to no good" But neither do I want my government to keep secrets from me because they think I can't "handle the truth". I will decide what I can or cannot handle. It's like my computer telling me that I need to update a driver or whatever, No silly computer, I own you! I know what's best!

Granted, I don't "own" the government, but as I said, I prefer that I am the judge of what truths and secrets I can or cannot handle.

But I understand your point

[Gothos]

Let me describe what I mean in more detail.
The common folk don't get it that undermining this or this government of some country, cooperating with people of debatable morality, promoting certain viewpoints etc, may be neccesary, and is done for the betterment of their life, if not just maintaining the status quo. Think what would happen to prices if economies in the 3rd world were to shoot up considerably, along with labor costs. And people would still blame the government.

Yes, the big players do a lot of nasty stuff behind closed doors. But that's what they're there for: so you don't have to worry your minds with it and have a claim at being a good person.

[Aptorian]

[Nicodimas]

The cyberware rages on.

http://www.guardian....kileaks-revenge
http://blog.securetr...tro-3-d-secure/


Now the question is how the goverments clamp down on internet in a big way. Expect it.

[worry]

http://www.guardian....-nigeria-spying

The oil giant Shell claimed it had inserted staff into all the main ministries of the Nigerian government, giving it access to politicians' every move in the oil-rich Niger Delta, according to a leaked US diplomatic cable. The company's top executive in Nigeria told US diplomats that Shell had seconded employees to every relevant department and so knew "everything that was being done in those ministries". She boasted that the Nigerian government had "forgotten" about the extent of Shell's infiltration and was unaware of how much the company knew about its deliberations.

[amphibian]

Nicodimas, on 09 December 2010 - 12:24 AM, said:

The cyberware rages on.

http://www.guardian....kileaks-revenge
http://blog.securetr...tro-3-d-secure/


Now the question is how the goverments clamp down on internet in a big way. Expect it.

You, as always, are an alarmist.

Anonymous has zero relevant power and nothing much will change because of their idiotic DDOS attempts.

[Adjutant Stormy~]

@Gothos:

There's no reason that governments, companies, and everyone involved shouldn't have done any of the misdeeds or sneakiness documented by wikileaks. The real problem is how well documented the paper trails are.
For the love of god people, if you're doing bad things, COVER YOUR TRACKS.

@amphibian:

DDoS attacks have been tossed around for years. There's no real danger, just temporary incovenience, unless the Russians start in on it. A disproportionate number of the botnets' (you need a few thousand zombie computers to be able to consistently down robust servers) virus writers (and control servers) are in Russia.

[frookenhauer]

I smell a setup...Assange is a bastion of moralitude. Never met the guy, but seriously what he's put together is frikkin awesome.

Nicodemus - Dude, You should really spend half your day in a sandwich board. "The Gov'ment is out to get ya!" (BTW love your work) That way, when you post, you've got it out yer system. I kid.

Aint going to happen, how long has 4chan and a plethora of other edgy sites been running?

If you are right however, there's always the freenent to play in.

[Aptorian]

What is a sandwich board?