Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks Receiving Gestapo Treatment?
An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks announced on Mar 21 (via its twitter account) its intentions 'to reveal Pentagon murder-coverup at US National Press Club, Apr 5, 9am.' It appears that during the last 24 hours someone from the State Department/CIA decided to visit them, by 'following/photographing/filming/detaining' an editor for 22 hours. Apparently, the offending leak is a video footage of a US airstrike."
...providing a service similar to what Wikileaks provides is always dangerous.
Living With a Nerd
Seriously. Saying "we have something" is boring. Post it, or shut up.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
There are national security laws for a reason. If Wikileaks is going to publish sensitive information that is genuinely covered by those laws — and while I haven't seen the details, if this really is military video footage it might well be — then of course the security services are going to take steps, the same way they would with anyone else. Why anyone using/working on Wikileaks thinks they are above the law, I have never understood.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
'following/photographing/filming/detaining' an editor for 22 hours
Following someone for 22 hours and detaining someone for 22 hours are so incredibly different they should not be lumped together like that. It's the difference between a creepy stalker and an oppression of basic freedoms.
Don't leave it up to my imagination how long each of those 4 actions took place. Because I'm imagining the "detaining" being about 15 seconds as they accidentally walked into each other, and then they both stepped to the side, oops still in the way, stepped to the side again, oops, and did this about 5 times.
A Twitter page is now the source /. is running with?
I suppose when you put "it appears" and "apparently" you can just pass anything off as "news".
I'll try anything once. Twice if it tastes good
So the pentagon is using Scientology to scare wikileaks?
http://wwww.zerospeaks.com
air strike? who care the means. if they alledge murder, the target is the main point of interest, fine editor.
air strike on some iranian military base? air strike on the twin towers?
see?
Yeah, I'm sure they experienced the full Gestapo treatment including torture and being held indefinitely.
Taco, you're a fucking tool.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Sadly, it doesn't really matter what the truth is to people that are determined not to believe it. How well documented are atrocities like Operation Keelhaul or the USA's active involvement in the genocide of the people of East Timor in the 70s? Very. Many people have taken it upon themselves, at great risk to their own safety, to bring things like that to the attention of the public at large... most of the time it does no good whatsoever.
For every 1 dedicated researcher out there, there is a countless myriad of parrots that simply read off the carefully prepared messages their teleprompter tells them to, to the slews of average citizens that are more concerned with bickering over which news channel is actually presenting unbiased raw facts.
When you bother to alert said average citizens that no major news outlet is trustworthy because all major news outlets agreed with one another in 2005 that they should be allowed to lie on public airwaves, legally*, you get labeled as a conspiracy theorist.
* http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-the-media-can-legally-lie
Don't think you can get away with it. You cannot. This is WikiLeaks.
Yeah, yeah. I know... you are legion, and you don't forget, and you don't forgive.
THL phish sticks
The State Department must be blushing right now. Their "secret ops" is no longer a secret.
It's easy to decry from the position of luxury afforded by enjoyed freedoms. "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." - Winston Churchill
The original tweet has been removed.
This was the original text:
"WikiLeaks to reveal Pentagon murder-coverup at US National Press Club, Apr 5, 9am; contact press-club@sunshinepress.org 10:43 PM Mar 21st via bit.ly"
Two possibilities: they're planning immediate release, or they decided to give up with it.
Out of curiosity I decided to take a look at what wikileaks had to offer (never been there before), and I ended up on the PDF purportedly from the Army Counter Intelligence center (*) that describes the Wikileak operation and how it could be ground into the dust.
Within that document is a table (on page 8) that lists equipment deployment in Iraq. The NSN column seems to be listing some sort of ID number like 581001X111125. But then you get entries like "1.24001E+12". That to me looks like Excel converted the data from a string to a floating point format - something that probably belongs more on the Daily WTF than wikileaks!
* The document itself refers to the possibility of posting "fake" documents to wikileaks in order to spread disinformation - so now my head is spinning as I don't know what to believe
If you are decrypting or gaining access to decrypted classified video, what do they expect is going to happen? Even if the video shows things that the government doesn't want us to see, I'd be a little disturbed if they did nothing about the breach of security. It's like saying that if a guy knocks over a bank with my money in it, it's okay for him to have done it as long as he only took the money from the mobsters who use the bank. Determining that footage "shows bad things" is not a security determination, it's a political determination. I don't want security personnel making value judgments about the data that is entrusted to their care. If it is classified, they need to find out who the leak is and deal with it.
To be honest, while I think its a good thing that cover-up data can come out, I worry a little that throwing raw data out there with interpretations like "murder-coverup" is just as political an act as covering it up, not to mention a little sensationalistic. I mean, if its airstrike footage, it's not like they brought the aircraft camera into the room to film the alleged conspirators rubbing their hands together and saying "terminate them!". It's a grainy black and white video of someone launching a missile or a laser-guided bomb and hitting something. Maybe there is some date/time or even location data in the video. What I don't expect we will see is "TERMINATED: Abdul Sayyid al-Derka HEADSHOT +50 points" pop up on the screen.
Nice to see slashdotters talking of this - but doing nothing of any value per se.
Freedom is just another word here - as in censorship or for that matter illegal activities by the government. Everyone gets to talk and talk about China and censorship and torture.. and when things like wikileaks happen, you realize how useless we as a group are.
Do something or shut up already people
Yes and the real story here is that we all know that members of the "National Press Club" are never ever terrorist scumbags. I mean, he/she had an id card, a camera and an official looking badge, that should be enough to satisfy even the most doubting believers.
regarding alien technology...but i'm a coward so i'm safe.
Didn't you know? Hillary swings both ways.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
SHUT THE FUCK UP, MORON.
This proves he's a war criminal/fascist dictator!
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Being the only one (or one of very few) people who have this material is dangerous for the reasons mentioned. Posting it on usenet and various p2p networks ASAP should do the tric: then they can be sure noone, not themselves, not the US government, not even scientology, could get it offline anymore, so it would be useless to harrass this one person about it.
If you've got some hot information that you know governments will try to suppress, why the heck would you give them a few weeks to do so? Just put the information out right away; then it's too late to be effectively suppressed.
More frequently than you might think, CIA employees operate under the cover of being State Department employees. Delineating where one "job" begins and the other ends can oftentimes be rather tricky.
This little tidbit may help you understand why you have been modded Troll.
Which is worse? Something not supposed to be classified NOT being leaked, or something SUPPOSED to be classified being leaked? I, and most people, would say the latter.
I disagree. That's like saying:
"Which is worse? Someone NOT guilty of a crime being convicted, or someone guilty of a crime NOT being convicted? I, and most people, would say the latter."
I would assume (not trying to build a strawman) that this would be your general line of thinking. I'd rather have the occasional "oops, we should have classified that" than "we're being safe and classifying everything (including stuff that's classified and shouldn't be).
An occasional blunder to not classify something that should have been secret is less dangerous to a free society than having everything locked up (probably embarrassing things too). I have a friend who works for the DoD in an intelligence role. He once said, and I quote, "No one ever got fired for over-classifying information". That is a mindset we need to change.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Ignoring the Godwin in the headline.
What do you think would have happened to someone in 1938ish Germany who had similar film and accusations regarding the Spanish civil war?
Would it have ended with monitoring?
Fuck Wikileaks and their hyperbole.
Fuck them right in the ear.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
And here's where it gets worse.
If I have 10 low-skilled employees such as yourself and I now must pay for expensive medical care, I'll simply cut the number of employees that I have to pay for.
After all, I'm not getting more money, something has to give here.
I've said many many times, you can put any sort of obligation on employers except that don't have to hire you, and they certainly don't have to keep you.
You may have won a victory, but you've lost the war. Maybe when you get 10 years experience they'll pay for your healthcare; until then, you're unemployed. Oh wait, how will you get that experience?
Oh well, you can always get it for "free" from the government.
Good luck to you.
When national security laws are used to cover-up the immoral actions of high-level personnel, Wikileaks *IS* above the law
The essence of principled civil disobedience is that you accept the consequences of your actions.
You do not proclaim yourself to be above the law.
If only because for the first - and quite possibly the last - time in your life, your words will be taken at face value.
Where there is no respect for law, the dissident - the inconvenient - the unwelcome - the dangerous - simply disappear. What you have is government by the Mafia. The Ku Klux Klan. The Death Squad.
Maybe that's the point. They've been under serious surveillance for awhile now so maybe they wanted everyone else to know...
There really should be some sorta law...
It is not just the USA - look at how Israel has been caught forging British passports so that it could a Hamas leader. Governments do dirty deeds and then pretend that they did not. The world would be a better place if governments where run by honest, decent people - from top to bottom.
The parallels between what wikileaks does and the Pentagon Papers case are significant, and should be obvious.
From the SCOTUS Ruling in New York Times Co. v. United States:
From the leaker in that case (who did face prosecution):
-- Ellsberg on why he released the Pentagon Papers to the press
Why do you think everyone else in ANY industry are pre-announcing what they do?
Products, goods, actions, whatever..
You need to create the expectation for your information to last long enough. Otherwise, its going to be on the news for 2 days and gone and forgotten even if it was rather sensationalist.
We're at Slashdot, ever thought about Apple's marketing? It's all about that; Rumors, expectations, then a big announcement.. and actual product availability month later.
You did not think it was related to their success?
The other points are irrelevant. What wikileaks want, is to share some specific information with the population. To be shared in the fastest and widest way possible, you've to do like the "big boys" and use advertisement tactics. No way around it (unless they discovered aliens exist, maybe).
Check out these older tweets from wikileaks:
http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/7530875613
http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/9412020034
It has to be a video about a heavy US airstrike in Afghanistan, dated May 7, where 97 civilians died.
Why they don't use freenet for this is beyond me. Yes, freenet is not lighting fast but it's getting better and it would be MUCH more difficult for anybody to get them if they used it.
http://freenetproject.org/
The author compares being followed and detained for 22 hours to "Gestapo treatment".
The lack of knowledge about the Gestapo truly makes you either
an dumbfuck who knows noting about history or a spotlight seeking sensationalist.
Your use of the word GESTAPO ridicules the suffering of Gestapo victims.
Show a couple of dead/tortured/mutilated citizens next time before you dare spell GESTAPO.
Wikileaks, while providing an amazing humanitarian service to us all, is expendable in a beautiful way. I say that because no matter what any government decides to do, there will always be another person/group to take the torch up when they fall. Yes, we should all contribute money, code, time and whatever else we can spare for them. We should shout praises of them from mountaintops. But at the end of the day, organizations such as them should be expendable after a period of time. Make the government(s) spend metric ass-loads of money on shutting them down. Make them waste their resources. Then dissolve the organization and create another one in it's place. Lather, rinse, repeat. You can't stop the signal. There are just too many bits to flip. The only question is WHEN to cut and run. Two years? Ten years? THAT'S the discussion we should be having. When are our contributions actually being wasted. Sorry if this is off-topic at all, but I think that needed to be said.
Dress for success AND excess.
In WWII there was that saying, "loose lips sink ships". It is generally applied today to mean that our nation cannot compete militarily or economically with the rest of the world if we are open about what our military does, where they are deployed, and what weapons they have.
I imagine the same goes for various companies, and their products.
I don't buy it. First of all, the Intertubes pretty much allow unrestricted transfers of information around the world. Spies don't have to meet reading newspapers in parks, or smuggle microfilm in false teeth. We are not going to fool the people we have to fool militarily.
On the other hand, secrets allow governments/companies to harm others without any recourse to the victims.
We should error on the side of being open. We have never done so to date. We should try it, then fix any problems that might occur.
My bet is that no significant problem would occur.
A little bit of digging around on the wikileaks twitter reveals the following message: "Finally cracked the encryption to US military video in which journalists, among others, are shot. Thanks to all who donated $/CPUs." I'm surprised by the level of animosity shown by /. commentators towards wikileaks. Any idea that they are politically motivated is bizarre.
Wikileaks doesn't censor content, or choose what to post. Full Stop. They've taken this idea very seriously and i applaud them for it - to the point where they leaked their own *anonymous* donor list because someone got hold of it and submitted it back to them. I'm sure that didn't help their fund raising program. (Turns out staff emailed them all without hiding each others addies)
The point is that wikileaks doesn't pass judgment on what it's sent. It simply acts as a platform for the dissemination of information that citizens feel should be out there.
Which is worse? Something not supposed to be classified NOT being leaked, or something SUPPOSED to be classified being leaked? I, and most people, would say the latter.
Honestly...if Wikileaks got the information, what makes you think foreign spies can't get to it? As far as I'm concerned, if Wikileaks manages to get their hands on missile launch codes and leak it, that's a win for everyone. Now the government knows to change the code as well as start an investigation into how in the hell this information was leaked and who needs to be tried for treason as a result of leaking it.
Exactly. So when they get into a terrible car accident while driving down the GW parkway..
"Finally cracked the encryption to US military video in which journalists, among others, are shot. Thanks to all who donated $/CPUs" -wikileaks twitter
More frequently than you might think, CIA employees operate under the cover of being State Department employees. Delineating where one "job" begins and the other ends can oftentimes be rather tricky.
This little tidbit may help you understand why you have been modded Troll.
[citation please]
anus licking fed
Twitter needs a way to verify that tweets are legitimate. How long before {Government Agency of Any Country} simply hacks the account of {anyone with anything to say} and retracts anything that might be damning?
But way to think the government did it, and convince everyone you're not worth listening to about policy.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Exactly. So when they get into a terrible car accident while driving down the GW parkway..
O, that will just be an accident... caused by the undetectable poison that had killed them moments earlier...
But really, such measures hardly need to be undertaken when you can destroy their lives legally. Is that an illegal metalica download you got there son???
You're right. They are morally equal since North Korea hasn't invaded any sovereign state recently.
Because if your employer discovers that you are BNP member and are a teacher, prison guard or a policeman you will be fired on the spot!
Shooting video Assange revealed in the speech that Wikilieaks going to run a video they have managed to decrypt. The video will be posted on the 5th in April and will, according to Wikileaks-spokesperson display photos from a massacre that has happened quite recently. - I can not say much more than that. It has happened in the past year, "said Assange.
You keep using that word. The Framers do not think it means what you think it means.
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
You think they haven't already sent it to other parties for "backup"? Knowing the sensitivity of the information, and that agents are prepared to take take extra-legal action against them, they would be stupid not to share it before announcing they have it. It's one of those "in the event of my demise" situations.
However, the people to whom they entrusted the information will sit on it as requested, if they ever want to be given the same consideration in the future.
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Wikileaks is a self correcting system. If the information is available to them, then it is by definition available to a motivated third party such as a foreign government. If information makes it to wikileaks then American citizens have the right to know the information as well.
In other words, by the time a leak makes it to Wikileaks the damage has already been done.
Thank you wikileaks. Your vigilance on our behalf is appreciated by many.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -- Thomas Jefferson
If you've got some hot information that you know governments will try to suppress, why the heck would you give them a few weeks to do so?
Well, a few reasons come to mind:
Here's my solution. Create a position new directly elected (like the president) official whose only job is to fight corruption and oversecrecy in government, and whose only powers are:
* Access to information. Like the president, the tribune automatically has the highest possible security clearance, and is empowered to demand any information from any government agency or offical.
* Declassify information. Like the president, the tribune has the power to unilaterally declassify information.
* Prosecute. The tribune has the standing to take the government to court over any issue relating to infringement of rights, corruption, or a violation of procedure.
More details at:
http://bayleshanks.com/wiki.pl?ideas-groupDecisionMaking-tribune
I'm sure the announcement was an attempt to give the leak more publicity, possibly by attracting reporters. In fact, wikileaks occasionally offers an interested reporter an exclusive access period, once they promise they'll write a story about the leaked document. In this case, they got more publicity than required for just another war porn flick.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
And this is a problem, how?
If you're in a job that requires that you treat all members of the public equally, a membership in a party that explicitly calls for unequal treatment is not compatible with your job. So yeah, the public has a right to know that the local bobby is a racist who will look the other way when a molotov cocktail is thrown into a Pakistani shop.
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Realistically, all political parties call for unequal treatment of one form or another.
And the problem here is that it's not just a right for the public to know, which might or might not be justified depending on the circumstances. What we have here is a prohibition on people with a certain political view doing certain jobs, even if they scrupulously keep their private views away from their work. That is not a healthy precedent, regardless of the merits (or lack thereof) of the views in question. Indeed, it is political freedom of speech that is the strongest argument for any law protecting freedom of expression.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I cannot call up the Gawker article unless I go through a proxy outside the US. I can get to gawker.com, but I cannot call up the article. http://bit.ly/cOqlAU
Looking at the source code, I don't even get an HTML header. It's completely blank. Zip. Nada. I can look at any other Gawker article except that one.
Also, the Norwegian newspaper, www.skup.no is down hard. I tried via proxy, no joy. I checked out www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com and sure enough, it's dead.
Something wicked this way comes.
[End Of Line]
Well, that's just an argument to forbid membership in a political party to public officials. Which, frankly, is no great loss, IMO. Unless of course you just straight out admit that the BNP and its friends call for a tad more unequal treatment than other parties..
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Winston was a wonderful fellow, yeah, yeah.
It's easy to justify violence with quotes from memorable figures.
Jesus also said "the poor will always be with us" - so who am I to counter his wisdom with my useless charity?
Here's a *pithy* little retort to counter yours....
We sleep soundly in our beds because cowards sit 5000 miles from innocent civilians and bomb the living crap out of wedding parties and schools using remote-controlled drones to drop bombs on their impoverished alien heads, as if it were merely an XBOX shoot-em-up video game.
I'm quite happy that whistleblowers and wikileaks help keep the reins on the potential abuse and retain at least a little common morality within our armed forces.
Of course, it's a crying shame that Rumsfeld and Cheney and crew have all walked away from first-class war crimes (so far), but I suppose there will be some escape the net from time to time.
Yet more proof that LOWKEY's song has it spot on!:
LOWKEY - OBAMA NATION (OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4OI0GUCI_A
"I love the Australian People... I just hate their bloody Government!" Nancy Wake,"the White Mouse"-20 February 2002
Yep, that's the very point!
Plus it is Obama's State Dept with the CIA & Pentagon also jumping @ them. Which attracts extra scrutiny and media attention!
So now we all know. That IS the point.
"I love the Australian People... I just hate their bloody Government!" Nancy Wake,"the White Mouse"-20 February 2002
Plus it is Obama's State Dept with the CIA & Pentagon also jumping @ them.
Doesn't matter who's the figure head the evil inside is always the same. To win office in the US you have to make a deal with the devil.