Moscow Has Eyes On WikiLeaks, Too

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."

Comments

Opportunity Knocks

[Ensign_Expendable]

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

Well getting rid of wikileaks is easy then

[gilbert644]

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.

Re:Martyrdom is the answer?

[The End Of Days]

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

Re:So?

[Totenglocke]

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

Re:yes

[Enderandrew]

Really?

Wikileaks =/= Assange

Just like Microsoft =/= Bill Gates. In fact, Microsoft continued chugging on along after Gates left.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prosecute

WANTING to prosecute, and prosecuting are different things.

And again, the American government can't pressure Sweden to do anything. Sweden is exceedingly neutral and doesn't cave into foreign pressure. Again, see Polanski.

Two seconds ago you insisted that Greenpeace and Amnesty International don't disclose their records. When I demonstrate that your statement is a complete lie you simply said my argument is invalid.

You argue like a five year old. Thankfully I can just hide your posts.

Problem solved.