Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Moscow Has Eyes On WikiLeaks, Too

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the now-that's-a-sweet-little-tacit-endorsement dept.

Canada 579

mark72005 writes "National-security officials say that the National Security Agency, the US government's eavesdropping agency, has already picked up tell-tale electronic evidence that WikiLeaks is under close surveillance by the Russian FSB, that country's domestic spy network, out of fear in Moscow that WikiLeaks is prepared to release damaging personal information about Kremlin leaders. 'We may not have been able to stop WikiLeaks so far, and it's been frustrating,' a US law-enforcement official tells The Daily Beast. 'The Russians play by different rules.'" Something tells me those rules might be in line with professor Tom Flanagan (an adviser to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper), who openly advocates assassinating Assange. Update: 12/03 00:56 GMT by S : Reader Red Flayer points out that Flanagan later recanted, saying, "It was a thoughtless, glib remark about a serious subject."

cancel ×

579 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

In Soviet Russia... (4, Insightful)

bigspring (1791856) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423150)

... Wiki leaks you. I guess?

Re:In Soviet Russia... (-1, Flamebait)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423238)

...Julian Assange isn't a grandstanding self-promotion whore.

Re:In Soviet Russia... (-1, Troll)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423790)

Heh. "flamebait/troll" - yeah, just dangling raw meat in front of all those legions of "Julian Assange is teh Mother Theresa" types.

Hey Julian! (0)

TrisexualPuppy (976893) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423294)

Since the Russians are all over you already, would you care to leak info on something [wikipedia.org] that has us very curious?

By now, he probably has people all over throwing stuff at him. Would be interesting to see some real secrets leaked!

Re:In Soviet Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423456)

... Wiki leaks you. I guess?

Leak, liquidate, really, it's all water under the bridge :)

Re:In Soviet Russia... (4, Insightful)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423900)

No. In Soviet Russia those who offend us ingest toxic radioactive metals

Re:In Soviet Russia... (5, Insightful)

rainmouse (1784278) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423910)

'The Russianvs play by different rules'

All this outcry has done little except prove the exceedingly dubious moral fibre of very powerful elected political figures the world over. People who brag openly about transparency one day and murder to prevent it another day. I'm no longer convinced the Russian rules are really that different from our own.

So? (5, Insightful)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423156)

If you want to play James Bond, you better expect to get your hair mussed.

Re:So? (5, Funny)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423732)

Assange just needs to remember to only become shaken by their assassination attempts, not stirred.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423868)

So people are advocating assassinating journalists now are they? Scary times we live in. Sorry, but those governments need to be exposed for the lying warmongers they are. I couldn't give a toss about politicians embarrassment. Screw them.

Assange (2, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423162)

I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche. Assassinate him and you turn him into a hero/martyr. Given that his organization is still fairly secret, it could continue to run without him.

Re:Assange (1, Interesting)

Peach Rings (1782482) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423326)

Given that his organization is still fairly secret, it could continue to run without him.

Maybe, but I wouldn't count on it. I wish he would just release everything he has already. Apparently the next big release will cause scandal and humiliation in major banks, and it's killing me that the release of such information could depend on Assange's life.

Probably his best shot is to send the decryption key for the insurance file [wired.com] as a threat to someone like the state department and let them shut these idiots up about assassinating foreign nationals.

Re:Assange (5, Insightful)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423346)

Assange is a distraction and knows it. Chasing him wastes law enforcement resources and he knows that too. Wikileaks, the organization goes on while idiots chase their tails by chasing him. Moreover, if Wikileaks goes away, 10 more Wikileak clones will arise.

Governments, apparently, never learned the lesson of Napster. When Napster went, other free music sites were created. When those went, distributed torrent sites were created. When torrent sites go, another as yet unknown solution will occur.

With cameras, computers and the internet, almost nothing can be hidden anymore. Information leaks in the USA can't be stopped, except by regaining the respect and trust of the American people. In a wired world, the only way to do that is to play it straight, not lie and do what you say you'll do. As of yet, no political organization or movement in the USA is up to that task. When they appear, I'm sure they will be regarded as dangerous radicals by the mainstream media.

Re:Assange (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423524)

Jullian is a replaceable figurehead. He is a known subversive, an arrogant target. He's also attempted suicide in the past. This may be attempted suicide by foreign intelligence services. Maybe he wants to be a martyr.

Re:Assange (2)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423710)

While that is an interesting way to commit suicide, still need a citation there.

Re:Assange (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423880)

Very much so. This would be taking "death by cop" to a whole new level.

Re:Assange (5, Interesting)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423768)

When torrent sites go

Hahahahaha, everything you say is true. These clowns cannot even shut down http://thepiratebay.org/ [thepiratebay.org] after years and years of litigation and actually throwing individual people in jail. The media shitstorm around Wikileaks is getting more amusing every hour. Say what you want about Assange, but if his goal was to draw attention to factual info leaked into the wild by US government employees, then he succeeded beyond even his own wildest dreams.

Re:Assange (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423390)

I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche.

He's not though. From the interviews I've seen he seems reasonable enough and even made sure to remove names from the Iraq docs. People always say he's an ass but I've never seen anyone actually justify it.

Re:Assange (-1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423652)

People always say he's an ass but I've never seen anyone actually justify it.

If it's true what his lawyer has said about the rape allegations he IS an ass, although simply of the two-timing variety.

Re:Assange (5, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423940)

Fucking two women during overlapping periods doesn't make you an ass, unless you promised them something more than a fuck.

Re:Assange (0, Troll)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423954)

He calls for attention to himself specifically. He has snapped at people who have questioned him. He refuses to disclose details on his finances, where donations go, or how his operation works. For a foundation based on transparency, no one knows why certain leaks are disclosed, and why he refuses to disclose other leaks.

The reports out of Sweden suggest he was angry, confrontational, and intimidated his sexual partners who pleaded with him to wear a condom. When you're sleeping with multiple strangers in a short period and you refuse someone's pleas to ues a condom, you're being willfully irresponsible when it comes to STDs. That alone makes you a douche in my book.

Re:Assange (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423392)

I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche. Assassinate him and you turn him into a hero/martyr. Given that his organization is still fairly secret, it could continue to run without him.

Could, but probably won't, at least not in the form it is now (and with Assange burning bridges with any place on earth that can host them, maybe not even that). Unless they've got another charismatic grandstanding ego tripper waiting in the wings, I get the feeling Wikileaks would either collapse into infighting as everyone tries to take over at once or would fade back to a lower-key website that behaved the way it used to. Right now, Wikileaks is Assange because Assange wanted it that way.

Think of it this way: If Steve Jobs were to die or retire tomorrow, how long would Apple survive? How's Microsoft been doing since Gates left? The guy who took over didn't have the same flair he did, after all.

Re:Assange (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423488)

But are they secret enough to stop Russia from planting say uranium flakes the company pickinic basket

Re:Assange (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423680)

In truch the Russians probably are pissed because he got his hands on some documents without greasing the usual government officials' hands like the rest has to do. A bit like the MAFIAA, but on a whole new level.

Re:Assange (0)

bigspring (1791856) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423532)

I'm not sure why you got down-voted for trolling. You bring up an excellent point.

Re:Assange (1)

jythie (914043) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423760)

I think it would run better without him.. the guy is a douche... though with the figurehead gone various companies and governments would just start going after the other people... Assange DOES make a good lightning rod if nothing else... .so maybe he does have a use.

yes (3, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423822)

you get that impression from where ? fox news ?

dont get any impressions.

the only way he is alive, and there is wikileaks still, because he had done everything to put himself on the spotlight and keep people remembering him and wikileaks, so that assassinating him would be hard.

get a clue. really. get a clue.

Re:Assange (5, Informative)

grcumb (781340) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423842)

I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche.

He may be a douche, but he is emphatically not a hypocrite. He's written several essays [wordpress.com] about what motivates him and why he's chosen the tactics that he has. You may not agree with his reasoning, but to his credit, he has been nothing if not consistent in his behaviour.

It's not secret. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423944)

The FSB and NSA both know everyone associated with WIkileaks. If you've communicated directly with Julian Assange they know who and where you are.

Opportunity Knocks (4, Funny)

Ensign_Expendable (1045224) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423180)

Any Slashdoters out there who sell Polonium detectors could make a fast sale.

Re:Opportunity Knocks (2)

Trent Hawkins (1093109) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423818)

nah, Russia never uses the same trick twice. So, let's make a spin on the wheel of assassination:

*click**click**click**click* Concentrated Neutron Deathray

*click**click*...*click*.....*click* hidden in a shoe

Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423208)

Prof Tom Flanagan said Barack Obama should "put out a contract and maybe use a drone or something" to rid the world of Mr Assange.

"Put out a contract?" Yeah, then maybe he should chew on a cigar while hanging out of a suicide door on a car as he fires two tommy guns from either arm? And then maybe he should cut off a horse's head and put it in Manning's jail bed? I'm sure after that contract is transmitted out to Kessel, Boba Fett will freeze Assange and deliver him to Sarah Palin. "Put out a contract?" He's the leader of the United States, not a gangster -- although I'm sure there'll be comments asking for the difference of the two.

Yeah put out a contract for drones. Obama should offer one billion dollars to the first drone to kill Assange. Well, you'd have to offer it to the drone before it detonates itself while targeting Assange ... or at least to the drone's family so the widow drone can send their little Predator to a nice drone school.

And this guy's an adviser to the Canadian PM? What kind of advice does he provide? "Well, sir, I think you should grow wings and save the internet or at least threaten to break its kneecaps if it doesn't shape up."

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (0, Flamebait)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423276)

Well, given that our glorious leader has generously given himself the power to order assassinations of US citizens at will I should think he may consider extending that power to non-citizens as well. But we'll have to ask nicely.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07/assassinations [salon.com]

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423396)

"Put out a contract?" Yeah, then maybe he should chew on a cigar while hanging out of a suicide door on a car as he fires two tommy guns from either arm? And then maybe he should cut off a horse's head and put it in Manning's jail bed? I'm sure after that contract is transmitted out to Kessel, Boba Fett will freeze Assange and deliver him to Sarah Palin.

Actually, that sounds freaking awsome. I *wish* the world worked that way.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423424)

And this guy's an adviser to the Canadian PM? What kind of advice does he provide? "Well, sir, I think you should grow wings and save the internet or at least threaten to break its kneecaps if it doesn't shape up, eh."

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (5, Informative)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423428)

It got buried down below, but I already made a post explaining that Flanagan recanted. The recantment was reported in lots of places yesterday, I saw it on the late news here in the NY metro area.

Flanagan explained it away as a "glib" response that doesn't actually represent what he feels to be the best course of action.

But, of course, you fed the troll editorialization. Don't worry, we all do it sometimes.

I just wish that Timothy and the other editors would fact-check their editorializations before they get into hot water.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423782)

I just wish that Timothy and the other editors would fact-check their editorializations before they get all those page views.

FTFY

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

AioKits (1235070) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423476)

Yeah, then maybe he should chew on a cigar while hanging out of a suicide door on a car as he fires two tommy guns from either arm?

If you'll excuse me, I need to make a call to an artsy type friend with this idea... I owe ya one!

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423548)

It's a poor joke in poor taste. He's already retracted all that [www.cbc.ca] , and even critics of the current Canadian government on the opposite side of the house have said that Flanagan was probably joking. He was stupid for putting it that way, of course, but he wasn't serious.

The thing is, some other people have suggested targeting him "like the Taliban" and are apparently serious.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423614)

Given Canada's previous history of what happens to Prime Ministers who make silly decisions, I'd say that Mister Flanagan must have advised him on how to avoid getting a pie to the face.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (4, Interesting)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423656)

And this guy's an adviser to the Canadian PM? What kind of advice does he provide? "Well, sir, I think you should grow wings and save the internet or at least threaten to break its kneecaps if it doesn't shape up."

Former adviser. Media outside of Canada likes to leave that part out, I guess because it makes it seem like our government is reacting to WikiLeaks.

No one in Canada takes him seriously, he just goes on CBC and says outrageous things. It's pretty amusing that he was taken seriously internationally.

Re:Tom Flanagan, Hilarious Idiot (1)

eyenot (102141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423794)

The way you put it is so hilarious. Total LOL. "Here's some hope and change for yeah Nyeaaahhhh RATATATATAT"

"Mistah Obomber, yeeaaahhh the drones is here yous solemnly requested audience with."

Former advisor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423250)

That should read "a former adviser to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper", which is clearly stated in the linked article.

Motive? (2)

Shoten (260439) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423254)

out of fear in Moscow that WikiLeaks is prepared to release damaging personal information about Kremlin leaders

I wonder what the basis for that assessment is. My assumption would be that they're more interested in seeing what gets disclosed to them, instead of having to wait for the information to be released like everyone else. If you take that a step farther, they can potentially figure out who is talking to them in the hopes of recruiting them (nicely or otherwise) as assets for their own "wiki", so to say. I'd actually have been surprised if the FSB hadn't been observing WikiLeaks far before now.

Re:Motive? (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423858)

This. I'm not an intel guy but from what I've read about russian warfare and intelligence they're basically the ultimate pragmatists - if they somehow can use the wikileaks situation to their favour they will. And the FSB has apparently expanded a lot under Putin.

Re:Motive? (1)

Oriumpor (446718) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423894)

I think foreign intelligence services are using, or will be using Wikileaks as a counter-intelligence tool. Leak the right, almost accurate, information and you have a scenario for counter-intel. For instance, people were claiming that an Iranian source was compromised. But think about it, if you flip a couple bits (their source to our source) . When you think about it, it sounds like a great way for the CIA to get the Iranian government to do their dirty work for them.

Perhaps (1)

thewils (463314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423256)

That is why they have Insurance [wired.com] ?

Re:Perhaps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423820)

That is why they have Insurance [wired.com] ?

"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine." - Obi-Wan Assange

Assassination (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423258)

Yeah. Blame Canada.
Let them be the new world's policeman
now that the US is broke (~$140,000 per home).

Martyrdom is the answer? (1)

get quad (917331) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423270)

Yeah, just make the guy a martyr and piss off the entire hacking community into taking up his cause. Best thing all governments could do is just be ALOT more transparent, duh. Too much grief going on between us earthlings with our alien overlords on the way.

Re:Martyrdom is the answer? (1, Funny)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423560)

Oh no, the hacking community... Behold the power of snide slogans and questionable hygiene.

Flanagan has recanted (5, Informative)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423274)

Summary is false. Flanagan does NOT currently openly advocate assassination of Assange. Flanagan recanted [www.cbc.ca] .

C'mon guys... I know it's too much to ask to have you guys fact-check the actual submissions... but you should seriously consider fact-checking your editorializations that succede them. Not only would it help ensure a better project, but would also help prevent getting your asses sued.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423464)

well, the fact that he does not currently openly advocate it does not mean he never did, or might never do again. The fact that you realize you've spoken enough to make everyone realize you're an idiot does not absolve you, nor does it relive you of responsibility. Sue? You've got to be kidding. He'd be laughed out of the court if he tried some "but I changed my mind!" argument.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (5, Insightful)

compro01 (777531) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423502)

"Recanted" in this case most likely means "Harper threw a fit when he heard what I said, so I'm taking it back before I get blackballed". There's a reason why he's a former head of staff and a former adviser, i.e. he's a political loose cannon if let near a camera or microphone and not the type of person Harper wants anywhere near him, lest his chances of ever getting a majority be destroyed.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423618)

Yep sounds like Canada. You step over a line the party puts in the sand, they do everything to make you not part of their "image".

Re:Flanagan has recanted (3, Insightful)

ultranova (717540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423750)

Yep sounds like Canada. You step over a line the party puts in the sand, they do everything to make you not part of their "image".

That is how political parties work in most of the world: the party is found on some core ideas, recruits people who share those ideas, and rejects those who don't. The US-style two-headed single party system is an aberration, to put it kindly.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423692)

But in the first paragraph he admits he did make the statement. If he didn't want it reported he shouldn't have said it. Making "glib" comments gets you into the news.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (1)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423774)

He made the comment on a news broadcast, so that makes no sense. It was a glib comment. He's a regular commentator on CBC News Network, and making glib comments is WHAT HE DOES.

Re:Flanagan has recanted (1, Insightful)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423844)

If he didn't feel that way, he wouldn't have said it in the first place. He clearly is just doing damage control and saying the "right thing".

Re:Flanagan has recanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423850)

So he retracted the statement he made on TV, twice?

While Slashdot editors make their fair share of mistakes, how can they know that every fool has had to go back on his words?

And the truth shall set you free...? (2)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423284)

Clearly that doesn't fit the situation. But you know, we are told since childhood that being honest to others in your dealings and relations is the best policy. Meanwhile, our world leaders are constantly playing dirty, lying, cheating games at every turn.

Re:And the truth shall set you free...? (1)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423754)

Which is why we can easily identify the good politicians from the bad now. The good politicians will support Wikileaks and others who are exposing corruption. The bad ones will condemn Wikileaks and label them terrorists.

Re:And the truth shall set you free...? (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423924)

It is to your benefit to be honest if there's a good chance others also play by the rules. There's also the fact that international diplomacy probably isn't so much one "game" as a lot of complicated games wrapped into one (not sure about how game theory works, but I think you get it.)

Disinformation Age (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423286)

Assange is hiding in Brazil.

subject goes here (4, Insightful)

gTsiros (205624) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423306)

if assange does anything that irritates russian intelligence (kgb fsb or whatever) the very next day he'll be an unfortunate victim of a very peculiar, uncommon and comically spectacular accident. russians aren't the half-assed weak-sauce fascists that the americans are.

Re:subject goes here (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423762)

the very next day he'll be an unfortunate victim of a very peculiar, uncommon and comically spectacular accident.

I am sure the woman will be spectacular but the "accident" fairly mundane. Lets do it on the balcony daaaahling. Such a lovely night.

Julian: thats a hint. If is a woman you want drop in at the Daily Planet [dailyplanet.com.au] next time you are in Melbourne. I am sure you can afford it and they do proper QA.

Easy Answer (3, Insightful)

RazzleFrog (537054) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423308)

Perhaps if governments stopped doing and saying such embarrassing things in written or recorded form this wouldn't be such an issue?

Re:Easy Answer (5, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423438)

But that would mean less power and money for them, and we can't have that. What gets me is how much the heads of other states are drooling over the prospect of the Russians assassinating people that work for Wikileaks. It's almost like they're too cowardly to take the next step into corruption that they so wish for, so are waiting for an already wholly corrupt government to do their dirty work for them.

Well getting rid of wikileaks is easy then (5, Funny)

gilbert644 (1515625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423318)

US has to have some sensitive embarrassing Russian intel so getting rid of wikileaks should be easy. Just upload it to wikileaks and have them publish and then just wait for wikileaks members to get sick from radiation poisoning.

The Irony of Wikileaks (3, Interesting)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423362)

I'm still processing this but I think Rubin makes some good points here [tnr.com] .

Re:The Irony of Wikileaks (2)

nomadic (141991) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423430)

Good editorial; I especially like this paragraph:"There’s another irony here, too. The Wikileaks document dump, unlike the Pentagon Papers in the 1970s, shows that American private communication with foreign leaders by and large reflects the same sentiments offered by U.S. officials in public. There is no grand conspiracy, no grand hypocrisy to uncover and expose. The big hypocrisies here are not being perpetrated by Americans; they are being perpetrated by foreign governments, namely non-democratic ones."

MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (1)

coolmanxx (150620) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423552)

Huh? The US military spends twice as much as their nearest rival.

The majority of your elected leaders are MILLIONAIRES who derive much of their support from the largest corporations in the world.

Iraq was based on a lie, and Afghanistan is quagmire.

The conspiracy is simply that powerful people in powerful positions (in turn supported by powerful corporations) are acting in their own self interest, and not that of the common citizen.

Do you want to die for that? Perpetuating a lie?

Re:MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423816)

Wow...
Okay we all know the truth about Iraq but very few people want to admit it.
Here is what happened in Iraq.
Saddam Husain made an error. He faked a weapons of mass production program. He feared Iran more than the US. The facts are that Iraq had a chemical and a nuclear weapons program before the first Iraq war. That is an absolute fact.
Iraq didn't cooperate with the UN inspectors fully.
The US and other countries believed the lie that they where told. This is all documented but not very sexy. It is so much more fun to make the US into a great villan instead of saying that they and other nations messed up.

What I find so funny is that so many people will not place the blame of their own governments choices on their own government.
I bet right now a lot of people are saying that the US is making Sweden go after Assage. Or some other silliness.

Re:MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423892)

He doesn't want to die, he just wants to continue hiding under his blanket with his eyes shut very very tight.

Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (1, Insightful)

coolmanxx (150620) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423406)

Assange, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for the Constitution, and you curse the World Superpowers. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That the lies upon lies, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like terrorist, rendition, homeland security. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

Assange: Did you order the cover-up?

The Man: I did the job I...

Assange: *Did you order the cover-up?*

The Man: *You're Goddamn right I did!*

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423780)

"Lets all stick our heads in the sand!" Have you seen that South Park episode? I think it does not help anyone to keep this information locked up. Sure, everybody is allowed to have personal secrets, but the batman and robin stuff that everybody with clearance has access too? Come on... That is not a secret, that is just plain disrespect.

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (5, Insightful)

copponex (13876) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423806)

This is the dumbest propaganda since Bristol crashed Dancing With The Stars.

The Constitution is founded upon the ideal that all men, regardless of rank or wealth, are equal in front of the eyes of the Law. That's what made it special. The fact that we expanded that to include all US Citizens, regardless of gender, land ownership, race, and religion is also special. The fact that we didn't resort to torture and extra-judicial murder in WWII was also special. That's why we were the Good Guys.

If you want some sort of yellow bellied compromise, that's okay too. Just realize the justification of murdering innocent people to preserve the State has been used by Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and every other corrupt government dating back to the beginning of time. This includes the country we fought to gain our independence.

Power for it's own sake is nothing new.

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423810)

Are you telling me that when the movie comes out Assange is going to be played by Tom Cruise? Noooooooooo!

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (1)

milkasing (857326) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423826)

Nice.. I wish I had mod points...

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (2)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423846)

What a crock of shit. This is the sort of pretentious pseudo-patriotic rubbish that has supported dictatorial regimes since time immemorial. You either watched far too many hollywood action movies, believed the drivel you were fed at boot camp, or both.

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (5, Interesting)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423886)

I'm going to assume from your comments that you're in the military. If so, then I have a cold, sad truth for you - you haven't done one goddamn thing to defend our freedom or the Constitution. In fact, you provide the muscle to the very people who take away our freedoms and piss on the Constitution. Despite the bullshit you're told in boot camp, you are NOT defending America or "serving your country". You are blindly serving the whims of corrupt politicians, without ever questioning to see if what they're telling you is the right thing to do or not. You are the very enemy you were told you were fighting against, because YOU are the threat the government uses to keep citizens cowed and following orders. Congratulations, you are a terrorist and you never had the good sense to realize it.

I'm well aware I'll probably get modded down since military worship is everywhere, but it doesn't matter. I'm not going to pretend like the armed thugs doing the ill will of corrupt politicians are somehow protecting us. The US Constitution specifically bans a standing army in a time of peace - makes you wonder why ever since WWII the US government has always found some bogus reason to perpetually be at war.

Re:Truth? Let me tell you about TRUTH (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423948)

1. Quote "A Few Good Men"
2. Get Modded Up Insightful
3. ???
4.PROFIT

Odds on Assange's Lifespan (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423412)

Las Vegas probably already is taking bets.

Wonder how long they give him?

Certain people with a lot to lose are certainly quietly planning, and not necessarily on damage control.

Don't be fooled, US plays by those same rules... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423440)

...it just likes to use Russia as a convenient distraction from its own CIA activities.

time to buy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423444)

..a polonium-210 detector

Kill the messenger - problem solved. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423446)

Kill the messenger - problem solved.

Re:Kill the messenger - problem solved. (1)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423528)

Yes, lets BURN the internets. That will solve everything!

So if Assange created a new country... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423478)

Assange is an egotistical narcissist, blah blah - Russians will pull a Litvinenko on him - blah blah blah - and any other self-aggrandizing attention from US commentators can go here for the moment.

Point is that everyone should remember that Wikileaks will release documents on any government, corporation, or other entity of significant political, social and historical significance. The US is merely the brunt of the latest...oh yeah, and Flanagan retracted that which you didn't bother to point out.

No freedom of the Press? (5, Insightful)

SirAstral (1349985) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423554)

I notice that a lot of people seems to conveniently forget their "Morals" when it's their neck on the chopping block. Julian has not mass murdered anyone yet he appears to be more hated than Saddam, Hitler, or Chavez right now.

Unless Julian himself did the work of taking these documents from officials by hacking or circumventing some security he should not be considered guilty of anything. The person's at fault are those that handed these documents over to him. They are the one's at fault.

I notice that our government officials are very good at making laws that "appear" to kosher with the constitution when they actually are NOT. Lets make it simple. If you don't like the first Amendment and its freedom of the press then you just make a law that says possession of "classified/government/secrect" information is illegal as heck. This way, you can maintain your image of supporting the Constitution while not having to fear it. You can classify the fact that they take a crap each morning as a security precaution and make it a capital offense if that information is given to the press!

Everyone has gone mad and we are feverishly giving our leaders far too much power!

Re:No freedom of the Press? (1)

drakonandor (937885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423796)

Uh, and he's an American citizen governed by the US Constitution since when? Oh wait, he's not.

Where Is The Trust Metric On The Leaks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423616)

see subject line.

Yours In Moscow,
Kilgore Trout

If Assange isn't prepared... (1)

Marthis (1949724) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423638)

...to take whatever consequences that might come of his actions, well then, that's his perogative.

Is it just me or have the leaks been underwhelming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423678)

Will it really change anything?
Another day and the the US is busy with "extraordinary rendition" and the FSB just shoot people in public, the Taliban hack their heads off and Pakistan sells out everybody just to annoy India.

Putin's pedophilic predilections? (1)

ShaunC (203807) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423708)

It's long been rumored that Putin has, shall we say, a taste for the younger set. I wonder if perhaps some of the as-yet-unleaked cables corroborate that?

Re:Putin's pedophilic predilections? (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423934)

Precisely what I was thinking. If Assange ends up dead, there's your answer.

Yeah its that easy. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423764)

Someone, or something, is protecting wikileaks and all their team. you think they would come so far, if it wasnt so ? look at the previous shit they released :

http://mirror.infoboj.eu/ [infoboj.eu]

random corporation A somewhere would have taken them out, had they not been guarded in some way. look how many megacorps and countries they ticked off.

sorry moscow. there wont be any plane crashes this time.

Saint Assange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423840)

Just a note, people saying something negative about Assange doesn't automatically equal "troll" of course this is falling on deaf ears because on Slashdot, Digg and Reddit he's held up as a religious figure.

Wikileaks isn't the culprit (4, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423864)

Why is the focus on Wikileaks and it's leader? This is a great case of shooting the messenger. Bradley Manning [guardian.co.uk] was the solider who stole the information. How he disseminated it is not the point. Granted: Wikileaks posted the information, but if Wikileaks didn't exist they would have just posted it elsewhere. Do you think that if a dozen newspapers suddenly got this information in the mail, they wouldn't have posted it? I doubt it. And are the owners of the newspapers who posted the information being targeted by the federal government? I haven't heard anything about that.

Stopping Julian Assange isn't going to solve the problem. Better idea: infiltrate Wikileaks and corrupt the information before it arrives. Let them post garbage. Ruin their reputation.

Par for the Slashdot course (2)

spaanoft (153535) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423884)

As usual with the Slashdot editorializing, it botches the facts.

Flanagan hasn't been an adviser to Stephen Harper for a long time, and the government was quick to distance itself from him.

They'll defeat it the same way Napster was (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34423922)

Since The Memory Hole has gone, Wikileaks and others have taken up the banner with the latter becoming the most prominent. Still, there will be others. And others. And others.

Interestingly, a central repository of US diplomatic reporting was created after Sept 11 to share information. This replaced the very personalized and irregular territorial fifedoms that the diplomatic people used before. The idea was to widen and speed the spread of this content; however, once that starts, it makes it easy to have a single point of failure by allowing THREE MILLION PEOPLE to see these cables. A leak was almost inevitable if you get rid of compartmentalized data.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?