Wikileaks

[Jim]

This whole thing could have been avoided by "wormimg" the site. All of us know good and well that the technology to do so, undetected, is readily available. It amazes me that the gov't, knowing this was coming, stood by and did nothing. Now, all our dirty laundry and secrets are in the street for the whole world to see.
Gov't. intelligence, go figure. And that scewball that owns the site could be put on a missing persons list.

[Taggure]

All part of the Apology tour that our fearless leader wants to put out to the world. He knew since August and yet he is only NOW showing any concern.

I heard this morning on the radio that the PFC that stole the documents and leaked them out is being held in Quantico and you know his backside is in for a rude awakining.

[OakRidgeStars]

There were a few half-hearted DoS attacks, but they weren't very effective.

You would think that the U.S. Attorney General would be all over this, right?.

http://nation.foxnews.com/wikileaks/201 ... ome-soccer

[VBshooter]

Ol nutless Holder ????? Never happen!! He;s to busy doing ,,,,Uh ! something else I guess!

[wylde007]

I thought he was in Australia and had even been offered asylum in Ecuador?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/a ... 71775.html
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

[Taggure]

The documents appear to have come from one source: U.S. Army Private First Class Bradley Manning, who was arrested in May and is currently being held at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia, and faces a long prison sentence.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/29/top-g ... z16nNynZUP

[VBshooter]

KIng does come up with a good one every now and then!! I agree that Wiki should be handled in some form of convincing manner to knock this S%%% off..

[gunderwood]

This whole thing could have been avoided by "wormimg" the site. All of us know good and well that the technology to do so, undetected, is readily available. It amazes me that the gov't, knowing this was coming, stood by and did nothing. Now, all our dirty laundry and secrets are in the street for the whole world to see.
Gov't. intelligence, go figure. And that scewball that owns the site could be put on a missing persons list.

Wouldn't do much good. Wikileaks would simple adopt one of the distributed file system alternatives for storage (and hosting, etc.). Those are much harder to crack as they were designed to keep the Chinese or Iranian governments from DOSing or destroying dissident data and communications. Impossible? No, but very hard.

[Jim]

That jerk could be found if "somebody" really wanted to.

[gunderwood]

I'm going to go out on a limb and for the sake of argument ask the following questions...

1. Is wikileaks the real threat?
2. What allegiance does wikileaks have or loyalty owed to the USA?
3. What powers are we giving to our government if we allow them to shutdown wikileaks?

Wikileaks is nothing but a website that hosts information. Granted it is information the US and other governments don't want posted (and it is damaging to us as a nation), but there is a lot of information governments don't want posted. It exists all over the Internet...if it is wikileaks we are shutting down today, who is next? Isn't the real threat the insider(s) who do this? If you have ever gone to wikileaks does that make you an accessory to the crime? After all, wikileaks is pointless unless you go there and you did just view classified information, assist in its dissemination, etc. With the way the government is proposing to read the law, doesn't that make you a spy?

Haven't our own politicians been leaking stuff about classified programs for decades? Particularly when they don't wan to fund or have a disagreement about the management of said black program? Yes they have and continue to do so, but they aren't giving away "secret" information. They have divulged, unlawfully I might add, "top secret" and other programs which officially don't exist...yet why are you not asking for their neck on a guillotine? Does it really matter that this guy was a private and went to wikileaks, while elected members of Congress have gone to the Washington Post and other newspapers?

If you were given some information the Chinese or Iranian or North Korea governments didn't want posted (lets say it was given to you by dissidents in those countries), perhaps it is even restricted or classified according to their laws, what obligation do you have to those governments to not distribute it? To be very specific, the Iranian government didn't want youtube and other video sites hosting videos of them beating and killing their citizens...yet we distributed them anyways. Should anyone be under serious threat to be extradited, tried and likely convicted for hosting those dissident videos?

Would it change (and if so how would it) if the information in question was an Iranian email which confirmed the destruction of the Stuxnet worm? Such an email would certainly be classified by the Iranian government...do you care? Do you owe Iran any loyalty or respect their governments wishes to not publish the information?

Speaking of the various software projects aimed at preventing governments from disrupting communications or destroying it or locating dissidents in their country, what responsibility do they have for creating that software? Should they face extradition to China because some dissidents over there gained access to the software and used it to bypass the "great firewall of China?" The Chinese government considers such software as illegal. Again, do you care?

[OakRidgeStars]

Someone is claiming responsibility for attacks on the Wikileaks site. is this just a patriotic hacker, or is it a "state-sponsored" attack?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/patriotic-hack ... d=12272776

Let's all pull out our and put them on now

[gunderwood]

No one is interested in discussing wikileaks anymore?

[allingeneral]

This is a hard one. I hate government intervention, but clearly, there are federal laws being broken here. I, as a webmaster/server administrator/whatever else, go to great lengths to ensure that the content on my websites (over 15 of them) are on the "up-and-up". If I find content that I think will cause a problem for me or anyone else, I will remove it.

Now, we have this guy - the owner of the wikileaks.org domain - who seems to have an utter disregard for the security of our nation, or any other for that matter. He is allowing classified information to be posted, which makes him an accessory ... receiving stolen goods...eh...wel, the line is definitely blurred as to what he could be charged with, but he definitely has no business allowing classified information to be disseminated on the internet, and anyone who provides him with classified information deserves what they get.

Read this article for an interesting angle on the situation.

http://www.quora.com/WikiLeaks/Could-Ju ... d-Davisson

[OakRidgeStars]

Amazon said buh-bye to the wikileak weasel today. No biggie, but at least Amazon is out of the line of fire.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 74246.html

[gunderwood]

This is a hard one. I hate government intervention, but clearly, there are federal laws being broken here. I, as a webmaster/server administrator/whatever else, go to great lengths to ensure that the content on my websites (over 15 of them) are on the "up-and-up". If I find content that I think will cause a problem for me or anyone else, I will remove it.

Now, we have this guy - the owner of the wikileaks.org domain - who seems to have an utter disregard for the security of our nation, or any other for that matter. He is allowing classified information to be posted, which makes him an accessory ... receiving stolen goods...eh...wel, the line is definitely blurred as to what he could be charged with, but he definitely has no business allowing classified information to be disseminated on the internet, and anyone who provides him with classified information deserves what they get.

Read this article for an interesting angle on the situation.

http://www.quora.com/WikiLeaks/Could-Ju ... d-Davisson

What is legal and what is responsible are sometimes two different things.

You care about US laws because you are a US citizen living in the US. I would guess a lot of your websites are gun related, what If those Europeans decided to push their gun laws further so that much of the information on even this forum was illegal. Would you care? I know that sounds extreme, but our own government considers it conspiracy to violate the NFA just for discussing how to modify a semi-auto firearm into a fully automatic one (usually it isn't a trivial task to make it work properly).

While Wikileaks is hosting damaging information, the article you linked to sums it up well. Unless we give our government more powers than it historically has had, there is nothing legal we can do to stop Wikileaks. Giving US law global jurisdiction is a dangerous precedent.

[gunderwood]

Amazon said buh-bye to the wikileak weasel today. No biggie, but at least Amazon is out of the line of fire.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 74246.html

I suspect this has a lot to do with what some politicians are doing with their wild attempts to rationalize/legalize their grandstanding. If you listen to the propaganda, Amazon would be guilty of violating the espionage act simply for providing hosting services.

[OakRidgeStars]

The Daily Beast is reporting that Wikileaks' next target maybe the Kremlin. Who wants to take a guess at how long Julian Assange will stay breathing if he's stupid enough to screw with Putin?.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... ent-rules/


Does the name Alexander Litvinenko ring a bell?. Assange might want to start shopping around for a food taster.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ondon.html

[Mindflayer]

I hope he does target Russia and Red China next. Sick of the US being the Media's whipping dog, as if we're the most evil nation on earth. Let's see how long he lives....

[GS78]

This is a good thing. It is a way we can expose our "friends" true feelings on things and get the bullseye on them. Standard Operating Procedure.

[wylde007]

He's just sharing with the rest of the world what many of my kind of people have been saying for generations:

Your government is full of backstabbing, traitorous and treacherous scumbags who have only their own interests in mind.

They are not to be trusted and, truly, the only acceptable conclusion to this "fiasco" (I call it a windfall) is for the government to fold their little three-card-monty table, move to some other country and maybe fleece someone else for a while. See how that works out for them.

They are entrenched in a system originally designed to protect the people from exactly this kind of despotism. Their lack of faithfulness to their oaths, to the duty of their stations, is fully evident now.

And it shows that it is not just the present membership but that this deceit and deception has been ongoing for an untold number of iterations. "This is how government works" is not acceptable, Madam Klinton.