Wikileaks = terrorist organization?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Guido,
Just curious, do you have a trust of the government?


My answer first - no I don't really trust it very much.  Which really means, I probably don't trust most of the people very much, since they (we) are the ones that create that government.

[Conan71]

Some people handle the effects of pot smoking better than others.  You make it way too easy to guess which side of the paranoid scale you fall on.  

[heironymouspasparagus]

Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Bah!  Who needs a microwave?

Just a small crock pot, box of Velveeta and two cans of Rotel tomatoes.

And chips!

[guido911]

Guido,
Just curious, do you have a trust of the government?

Not particularly, but it seems Patric REALLY doesn't. That's okay though. I was teasing him a bit earlier.

[Conan71]

Bah!  Who needs a microwave?

I'm Just a small crack pot, box of Velveeta and two cans of Rotel tomatoes.

And chips!

FIFY 

[heironymouspasparagus]

Ahhhhhh, how cute!!!! 

He tried to make a funny!!!  We're all so proud of the baby-steps in the direction of enlightenment and personal self-development!!!


Haven't had a chance to get on the Wiki site to see what it going on.  So far, the anecdotes heard on various radio and TV sources seem to be rather mundane and in some cases, mildly amusing.  Gotta be something more to come up to the level of terrorism.  Anyone found anything really dangerous there yet?

And by the way, yes, I think there should be some criminal prosecutions here.  Terrorism?  How about just plain old criminal activity without beating the "T" word to death even more than it has been?  Remember the old story about the boy who cried "Wolf" just one too many times?

[Conan71]

And by the way, yes, I think there should be some criminal prosecutions here.  Terrorism?  How about just plain old criminal activity without beating the "T" word to death even more than it has been?  Remember the old story about the boy who cried "Wolf" just one too many times?

How about rape charges?  Sounds like the CIA is reaching into their old bag of tricks.

"The WikiLeaks founder was accused of rape during a trip to Sweden but he has vehemently denied allegations made by two women. Mark Stephens, his London-based lawyer, has called the allegations "false and without basis", and has said they amounted to a smear campaign following recent high-profile political leaks by Assange's organisation. Assange is currently believed to be in the UK."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/02/julian-assange-arrest-warrant

[nathanm]

The interesting thing about the Swedish charges is that the charges were dropped once before and then reinstated, and that they have thus far declined to question Assange, despite (reportedly) several offers being made.

[Conan71]

The interesting thing about the Swedish charges is that the charges were dropped once before and then reinstated, and that they have thus far declined to question Assange, despite (reportedly) several offers being made.

Maybe I've watched too many spook movies, but I find the timing really interesting.  The US Gov likely doesn't have a case against this guy, but they figure they can throw up enough distractions or road blocks and perhaps get him away from his computer. 

[Ed W]

I saw an interesting spin on this story.  The thrust was that Wikileaks was performing a public service by providing information that would otherwise never be seen.  It went on to say that US journalists do not have a federal shield law permitting them to keep their sources secret, so stories that involve illegal or embarrassing information from the government are quietly spiked.

[nathanm]

Maybe I've watched too many spook movies, but I find the timing really interesting.  The US Gov likely doesn't have a case against this guy, but they figure they can throw up enough distractions or road blocks and perhaps get him away from his computer. 

Unfortunately for the US Government, Assange is not the only person involved with WikiLeaks. He's just the public face.

It is rumored that some folks in the group are preparing to split off and form another group because they're apparently sitting on a bunch of leaks from other governments that haven't yet been released and these people would like to see less focus on the US leaks.

Personally, I'm interested to see what WikiLeaks' cache of documents from Bank of America has in it.

[we vs us]

Unfortunately for the US Government, Assange is not the only person involved with WikiLeaks. He's just the public face.

It is rumored that some folks in the group are preparing to split off and form another group because they're apparently sitting on a bunch of leaks from other governments that haven't yet been released and these people would like to see less focus on the US leaks.

Personally, I'm interested to see what WikiLeaks' cache of documents from Bank of America has in it.

This was my main question:  to what degree the loss of Assange would actually kill the organization. 

I think it's obvious from the amount of information they've collected and released to date that the idea of an anonymous leak site definitely has a purpose and an audience.  To me that means that regardless of whether Assange or Wikileaks individually stay in the spotlight, that sort of site is here to stay.

[Conan71]

This was my main question:  to what degree the loss of Assange would actually kill the organization. 

I think it's obvious from the amount of information they've collected and released to date that the idea of an anonymous leak site definitely has a purpose and an audience.  To me that means that regardless of whether Assange or Wikileaks individually stay in the spotlight, that sort of site is here to stay.

Unless all the principals are rooted out and exterminated.

[nathanm]

Unless all the principals are rooted out and exterminated.

I doubt all the principals are known to Assange. The things I read about them in the early days indicated that it's pretty decentralized. There's no technical need whatsoever for anyone to be known to anyone else in the organization. That said, those who buy hosting and other services for the organization have easily discoverable identities. Anybody working behind the scenes may be impossible to track, however. That's probably best for them, given that Assange is the only one high profile enough to cause a furor if he ends up dead.

Between encryption, Tor, and Freenet, it's not difficult to be anonymous on the Internet if you have the necessary discipline.