Wikileaks Movie Coming To the Big Screen

I hope the script gets leaked by EmperorOfCanada · 2011-01-23 04:39 · Score: 5, Interesting

I hope the script gets leaked.
The contracts get leaked.
An audio recording of one of the actors being a little bitch gets leaked.
And the icing on the cake would be the film being leaked.
Yet I still think WikiLeaks rules!!!

Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Nemyst · 2011-01-23 05:24 · Score: 1

Did Wikileaks leak that?
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by ma1wrbu5tr · 2011-01-23 06:42 · Score: 1

Steve Jobs died in
1984
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_was_the_Mac_Computer_invented
.... and then again in 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/06/steve-jobs-dead-how-the-m_n_155639.html http://www.spooftimes.com/NewsDetail.aspx?articleId=7836cb01-1471-4590-aab4-7c562261bc2e&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

and then again yesterday.

--
Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:07 · Score: 0

No but I leaked all over Steve Jobs' corpse.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Opportunist · 2011-01-23 07:20 · Score: 2

In other words, it will be available from torrents before the movie premiere. And how is that different from the way it usually is?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Moryath · 2011-01-23 08:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

Interesting.
I'm sure that this movie will have just about as much to do with real life as any "made for TV movie" ever has.
Of course, after the way Wikileaks shifted from simply releasing data, to massively editorializing and chopping things up to suit their own slant (especially that horribly butchered video), they basically have no credibility left anyways.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by JamesP · 2011-01-23 09:20 · Score: 3, Funny

The real question is: Who's going to play Julian Assange's hair?!

--
how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Scrameustache · 2011-01-23 10:23 · Score: 1

massively editorializing and chopping things up to suit their own slant (especially that horribly butchered video)
Butchered? Civilians, children and reporters butchered with hollow point bullets, you're fine with that. Showing the world it's happening, you call that butchery.
Sheeple.

--
You can't take the sky from me...
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by vadim_t · 2011-01-23 12:24 · Score: 1

Wouldn't see the harm from that, or the benefit really.
I've read scripts before. They're generally dreadfully boring to read and in no way a replacement for watching the movie, with a few exceptions. In the exceptional cases they're interesting but only after watching the movie.
For the contracts and audio recording, who gives a damn? And the film will definitely get torrented one way or another.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Nazlfrag · 2011-01-23 15:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

Yeah, that butchered video they released at the exact same time as they released the full, unedited, uncut video really ruined their reputation by making them suddenly world famous instead of an obscure site that only nerds like us knew anything about. Get a grip.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by cold+fjord · 2011-01-23 15:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

Butchered? Civilians, children and reporters butchered with hollow point bullets, you're fine with that. Showing the world it's happening, you call that butchery.
Let me guess.... "collateral murder"?
The "civilians" were armed insurgents, apparently associated with running firefights and rocket attacks through the night. They were also probably in violation of curfew, which would once again make them targets. (You noticed how empty the streets were, right?)
The children should have been left behind by the insurgents attempting to rescue their comrades.
By accompanying the insurgents, and without marking themselves, the reporters made themselves targets. They weren't attacked because they were reporters. That was a risk they took upon themselves when they decided to accompany violent extremists fighting against the Iraqi government.
The lot of them were apparently engaged with the apache's 30mm automatic cannon. The military doesn't use hollow point bullets (Geneva & Hague Conventions, and all that).
2 Iraqi Journalists Killed as U.S. Forces Clash With Militias

Clashes in a southeastern neighborhood here between the American military and Shiite militias on Thursday left at least 16 people dead, including two Reuters journalists who had driven to the area to cover the turbulence, according to an official at the Interior Ministry....
The American military said in a statement late Thursday that 11 people had been killed: nine insurgents and two civilians. According to the statement, American troops were conducting a raid when they were hit by small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades. The American troops called in reinforcements and attack helicopters. In the ensuing fight, the statement said, the two Reuters employees and nine insurgents were killed.
''There is no question that coalition forces were clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force,'' said Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, a spokesman for the multinational forces in Baghdad.

Butchery? No. If you want to know true butchery, look at Al Qaeda's attack on the Yezidi.

A U.S. air strike killed a senior al Qaeda militant who masterminded truck bombings on Iraq's minority Yazidi community last month that killed more than 400 people, the military said on Sunday.
"On September 3, a coalition air strike killed the terrorist responsible for the planning and conducting of the horrific attack against the Yazidis in northern Iraq on August 14," military spokesman Rear Admiral Mark Fox told a news conference.
Iraq's government has put the death toll at 411 from the suicide bombings, although the Iraqi Red Crescent has said it could be more than 500. The bombings in the villages of Kahtaniya and al-Jazeera were the deadliest militant attacks in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
A U.S. military statement named the mastermind as Abu Mohammad al-Afri, adding he was the al Qaeda "emir", or prince, in the area where the bombings took place.

Or Al Qaeda's attacks on markets: Al Qaeda use two Down's syndrome women to blow up 99 people in Baghdad markets
Do you have any words for Al Qaeda's actions? Genocidal might fit, as they want to rub out the Yezidi as a people & belief system. What about the attack on the market?

--
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 22:34 · Score: 0

You can't misspell retarded, you really just can't.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 23:12 · Score: 0

The real question is: Who's going to play Julian Assange's hair?!
that will be played my mister thrump's hair.
Re:I hope the script gets leaked by Scrameustache · 2011-01-24 12:42 · Score: 2

Butchered? Civilians, children and reporters butchered with hollow point bullets, you're fine with that. Showing the world it's happening, you call that butchery.
Let me guess.... "collateral murder"?
The "civilians" were armed insurgents, apparently associated with running firefights and rocket attacks through the night. They were also probably in violation of curfew, which would once again make them targets. (You noticed how empty the streets were, right?)
The children should have been left behind by the insurgents attempting to rescue their comrades.
No: Innocent bystanders and journalists. You don't get to just label anyone "insurgent" to justify shooting them.
That car was there because he was bringing the children home from school, he saw people who were injured and stopped to help them, and he and the children were shot. By cowards hiding faraway, shooting armor-piercing explosive shells.
Yeah, those are forbidden to use against people, making this a clear war crime.

--
You can't take the sky from me...

When he comes...all Hell breaks loose by RDW · 2011-01-23 04:40 · Score: 4, Funny

Presumably it's a 're-imagining' of this:

http://www.astrodispatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/10/9725f_warlock-the-armageddon-205x300.jpg

Julian Assange by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 04:40 · Score: 0

OMG, he's so awesome!!! I love you, Julian!

Re:Julian Assange by c6gunner · 2011-01-23 06:32 · Score: 4, Funny

Can't wait for the sex-scene!
Re:Julian Assange by Provocateur · 2011-01-23 10:11 · Score: 1

You're like the diametric opposite of those people who read Playboy for the articles.

--
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
Re:Julian Assange by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 13:03 · Score: 0

Watch out. Given that this is about government corruption, the sex scene might be a pat down sequence by the TSA.
Re:Julian Assange by harmonise · 2011-01-23 17:45 · Score: 1

I imagine it'll be a real surprise.

--
Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.

astounding ! by Dolphinzilla · 2011-01-23 04:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

And you guys thought Julian had a big ego before - honestly, the only way I'd ever waste a dime on this movie would be if Jim Carey played the lead role, and they did it as a comedy

Re:astounding ! by korgitser · 2011-01-23 04:59 · Score: 1

No need to waste money on the movie. It will get leaked onto the Pirate Bay.

--
FCKGW 09F9 42
Re:astounding ! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 05:14 · Score: 0

He didn't want to write the book, he said he was only going it for the money seeing as his legal bills are mounting, he probably had to sign over movie rights at the same time he released rights for a book.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUR2FxDK7ClDsVWtrfbNlEZImWNA?docId=00d580fa7717477b970d24006b0bb6e4

I don't want to write this book, but I have to... I have already spent 200,000 pounds for legal costs and I need to defend myself and to keep WikiLeaks afloat.
Re:astounding ! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:13 · Score: 0

And you guys thought Julian had a big ego before
Yeah, indeed, how dare he write an autobiography. And sell the movie rights, just because there's people interested in them! And what for? To defend himself against some trumped-up charges - pure luxury. Yes, he's got a huge ego indeed, and since we all know that big egos automatically mean people are wrong, this leaves Wikileaks without credibility, too.
Re:astounding ! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:24 · Score: 1

Stop talking about Assange you idiots! He's just some guy. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEAKS ARE OF INTEREST.
Re:astounding ! by Kenja · 2011-01-23 07:34 · Score: 1

Make up your mind! Do you want Jim Carey in the movie or do you want it to be a comedy?

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Re:astounding ! by meeotch · 2011-01-23 11:38 · Score: 1

No kidding. Back when he took all the site's content offline to "concentrate on fundraising" (can't find the relevant slashdot story right now), I visited the site to try & donate. Not knowing anything at all about what sort of stuff they'd leaked, I was hoping to get a quick sense of it to make sure it wasn't a scam or conspiracy nut-job site. But of course I couldn't, because all the content was offline. I wrote Assange to (politely) suggest that simply hiding everything was perhaps counter-productive to the goal of raising funds, and that he should at least post an explanation or fundraising goal, to let people know how much they needed to keep operating. His response:
"I understand you wish us to save the world, suffer assassinations, work for free and pay for everything out of our children's heritage,
forever, but it is just not possible. If we haven't proved our committment thus far we never will."
I still admire the concept, and the dedication. But the dude seems like a total dickcheese. As noted in other posts, that doesn't mean he's not bettering the world. But I think he'd be serving the purpose (of giving a voice to whistleblowers) a lot better by not trying to be a celebrity, and perhaps acting like less of a douche. For one thing, it diverts attention from the actual content, and funnels it towards "Is Julian Assange a Terrorist?" style fluff media. How many mainstream media reports did you see on the actual content of the recently leaked cables? Me neither.
Re:astounding ! by vadim_t · 2011-01-23 12:28 · Score: 1

What's his ego got to do with the movie? One's huge ego doesn't automatically result in a movie getting made, you know.
If it does, I'm still waiting for mine!
Re:astounding ! by Nazlfrag · 2011-01-23 15:46 · Score: 1

This is not his book. Notice the lack of 'auto' in front of biography? This is by some Aussie hack, Assange has nothing to do with either the book or movie apart from being the subject.
Re:astounding ! by tkalfigo · 2011-01-24 01:40 · Score: 1

Why expect from an exceptional person to be modest? If a big ego is the price to pay for enjoying the works of a genius, so be it. The point is that J is maintaining a balance. And that's priceless regardless of which of the two sides you support. If your subjectivity gets in the way of understanding that balance in more important than right&wrong per se (which only exist in your mind anyway) then it's understandable that J's ego is a problem and not an insignificant side-effect.

What a... by TimeOut42 · 2011-01-23 04:42 · Score: 1

complete waste of time.

Re:What a... by gmuslera · 2011-01-23 04:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

You mean, like the Facebook movie?
Re:What a... by TimeOut42 · 2011-01-23 06:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

Exactly like the facebook movie....
Re:What a... by RotateLeftByte · 2011-01-23 08:15 · Score: 1

you mean the one that is a sure fire certainty to get more than a few Oscars?
Yeah Right.

--
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
Re:What a... by TimeOut42 · 2011-01-23 08:37 · Score: 2

Yep, that's the piece of garbage I'm referring to.
Re:What a... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 10:38 · Score: 0

Oscars == Nobels

Translation by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 04:43 · Score: 1

say they are planning a 'suspenseful drama' in the vein of All the President's Men and with the thrill of a Tom Clancy novel

They are going to take MASSIVE artistic license, such that the movie will be completely different from the book and no one will be able to tell how they got the movie from the book.

So basically, by unity100 · 2011-01-23 04:43 · Score: 1, Interesting

hollywood will picture the man and its work in a bad light with subtle messages, while appearing not to be doing so.

business as usual. wag the dog.

--
Read radical news here

Re:So basically, by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 05:02 · Score: 0

Oh, I suspect tit will be about an evil man doing terrible things that causes the economic apple cart to become unbalanced, wreaking havoc and destroying innocent children. The western world is in dire need a scapegoat, and the message has to be sent, in force, before hitting the big ol' reset button.
Re:So basically, by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:03 · Score: 0

so the movie will feature lesbian communists from sweden in rape scenes?.
Re:So basically, by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:57 · Score: 0

It will of course depend on your definition of rape:
Scene:
Rape Woman 1: 'Ugh, baby, I think the condom broke.'
Leaky Guy: 'Oh, what you're saying is, I'm leaking a little too much information?'
*sex continued amidst mutual laughter*
End Scene.
Next scene begins with voiceover of american threats amidst rape allegations.
Re:So basically, by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 10:22 · Score: 1

Wah, wah, THE MAN is keeping ME DOWN!
Assange is an egoistical prick who's only problem with this movie is that he isn't getting a cut.

Wow... by Haedrian · 2011-01-23 04:44 · Score: 1, Interesting

If his ego gets any bigger, his head will burst out of any cell they try to put him in.

Re:Wow... by Scrameustache · 2011-01-23 10:25 · Score: 1

If his ego gets any bigger
A producer made a deal with a writer, you parse that as "the subject the author chose has a big ego".
Damn, people suck.

--
You can't take the sky from me...
Re:Wow... by Haedrian · 2011-01-23 10:40 · Score: 1

We already knew that fact. This is just more proof for the giant pile.
Re:Wow... by Scrameustache · 2011-01-23 10:58 · Score: 2

We already knew that fact. This is just more proof for the giant pile.
This isn't proof of anything you dumb sheep! HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS, you idiot.

--
You can't take the sky from me...

so ? by unity100 · 2011-01-23 04:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

a lot of people in history had big egos, yet you still are using what breakthroughs and changes they have brought to this civilization without any issues.

or, you though that all the prominent historical figures that have provided anything of value to the society took after mother theresa ...

are you sure that, its not someone else's ego, but your own, getting irritated with someone else's ?

--
Read radical news here

Re:so ? by Haedrian · 2011-01-23 05:08 · Score: 1

Yeah, but celebrate their breakthroughs and changes, not the person. They should make a movie on the leaks themselves, not some inspirational film about J's life.
Re:so ? by Darkness404 · 2011-01-23 05:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

Except for the fact that Assange isn't some great revolutionary. Yes, we can admire the fact that he started it, but that was it. He started it. He didn't leak documents. While Assange is important and is to be commended for starting such a site, he seems to get all the credit which he doesn't deserve. The real revolutionaries are those who leaked things like the Iraq War documents, the "collateral murder" video, the diplomatic cables, etc. all Assange did was host them, which, while noble, doesn't make him a revolutionary.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Re:so ? by Dolphinzilla · 2011-01-23 05:17 · Score: 0, Troll

there is a big difference between having a big ego and accomplishing great things (JFK, Neil Armstrong, MLK) and being Paris Hilton famous which is what Julian Assange is - he is a famous for being famous, he is not doing anything to better humankind or help people.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:40 · Score: 1

>changes they have brought to this civilization
umm.
What'd they change?
Manning's freedom status?
Assange's freedom status?
I don't..really..understand what was changed.. in civilization?
Is anybody being prosecuted because of the contents of the cables?
Are policies being changed to prevent this behavior? Is that even a topic of discussion among political circles who still rule over every single action of the people on this planet?
No. Policies are being implemented to make it even harder to live an honest life in the information technology sector because some douchebag with a lady gaga cd and half a wit outsmarted his superiors though.
Thanks for making a totalitarian rule that much easier, wikileaks?
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:41 · Score: 2, Informative

revolutionary - A revolutionary is a person who either actively participates in, or advocates revolution. Also, when used as an adjective, the term revolutionary refers to something that has a major, sudden impact on society or on some aspect of human endeavour.
So not only is Assange a revolutionary person, he allowed other revolutionary people (who possibly wouldn't have been courageous enough to do it without him) when he started wikileaks...which is also revolutionary.
Re:so ? by unity100 · 2011-01-23 06:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

Thanks for making a totalitarian rule that much easier, wikileaks?
no, thank to you, the fool, for making totalitarian rule real behind a 'free' storefront, with your 'let the sleeping lords lie' mindset. thinking that if there wasnt wikileaks, the sources which are trying to censor and repress were not going to do it. they started it in 2002, the acta proceedings. they brought the 2006 anti-net neutrality attack, they brought coica long ago.

yet, morons like you still trying to blame wikileaks for censorship. boy. its easy when you pay zero attention to what's happening in the world, apart from headlines you get served.

as for what is being changed in civilization, its in the process of being changed. it is a move towards transparency and truth, which was promised with a straight face and then ignored by almost all politicians. anyone befouling a cause for transparency and truth, regardless of how it is being handled, is a moron that deserves being herded. 'let the sleeping lords lie' indeed ...

--
Read radical news here
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:54 · Score: 1

The process being changed?
Cryptome didn't exist b4 this?
cryptome isn't doing a better job of handling information dissemination that isn't targeted and spun, even now? ..right. No, they publicized everything. They monetized it while doing it. I'm just against a capitalist assface being crowned the king of transparency when in fact he's nothing more than a talking head.
You sure fabricated a lot of total crap out of one statement.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 08:19 · Score: 0

So... you could have done it? You would have stood up knowing very well that you are standing up against the most powerful people in the world, who wouldn't bat an eyelid before destroying your reputation and your life, turn your family and friends against you, and you'd be lucky if you didn't disappear overnight and turn up dead the next day in a sewer.
Right...I didn't think you would. You know the difference between him and us. He has a spine. He sticks to his principles come what may, not just when it is convenient, unlike us. It is called having integrity.
There are many parts to be played in a revolution. Some plan it, start it, guide it, lead it, fight for it, die for it, win it or lose it. Every one is a revolutionary. Not sure what your definition is, but it seems vey narrow if you don't include those who plan it or start it. These are the most important stages because they are also the most vulnerable. It is very easy to kill the few and crush the revolution, before it goes mainstream. It requires a lot of foresight and courage and smarts to get through this.
Re:so ? by Jarik_Tentsu · 2011-01-23 12:07 · Score: 2

That's like saying, it wasn't Lenin that was the great revolutionary, it was all the little Bolshevik soldiers and members who rose up and struck down Kerensky's provisional government.
Yes, those people who did the actual leaks are significant figures, but you need someone to start it. That's what Assange did - he created a medium to release leaks, encouraged more and more whistleblowers and released in the information in a way to gain maximum publicity and exposure. There's a level of leadership involved in that - and to some extent, it's those figureheads that are needed in any sort of revolutionary movement.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 12:37 · Score: 0

Stand up to the US, who doesn't go around assassinating political enemies anymore? Especially when it isn't clear that any laws were broken? I'll believe he has principles when he does a massive embarrassing leak on Russia or China and then we'll see what happens. He isn't facing anything more than a politician running for president does in terms of these "attacks on him." It is pretty pathetic to see all of you sycophants latch onto this David/Goliath story and gush like a pre-teen does over Justin Bieber. You'll suck down any bullshit he spews because you're in love with the "fight the man" angle. Makes you feel all counter-culture-ry, doesn't it? You're probably one of those dweebs who goes to protests (the cause really doesn't matter) hoping to taken away in handcuffs so you can brag how you got "arrested" for your principles.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 15:44 · Score: 1

Yeah, because China and Russia are big evil boogeymen while the good ol' US of A is just a peaceful and caring nation who only wants to spread love and freedom and who would never say sign a presidential order for a citizens assasination.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 19:03 · Score: 0

Wouldn't is be funny if the revolutionaries who leaked to Iraq War documents, the "collateral murder" video, the diplomatic cables, etc... are those in charge of the Iraq War, the "collateral murder", and the diplomatic process?
Re:so ? by pinkushun · 2011-01-24 01:48 · Score: 1

I'm glad you see this. Sadly the U.S. government doesn't, or do but not admit it. They would rather use him as a scapegoat.
Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-24 02:00 · Score: 0

Hear, hear.
I'm behind the idea of Wikileaks, but absolutely opposed to the way Assange seems to paint himself as a James Bond figure, rather than an ancillary guy who bought a domain. His leaked dating profiles seem to suggest that the guy has a serious god complex, and this kind of treatment only panders to it.
viva OpenLeaks.
Re:so ? by BitZtream · 2011-01-24 05:27 · Score: 0

Its important to note that the 'collateral murder' video wasn't leaked.
It was created.
You can say that the video was created from a leak, but what the world saw was not a leak. It was a video created to push an agenda.
Agree with the agenda or not, you're completely wrong with saying it was leaked.
That video was 'leaked' only slightly more than Saving Private Ryan was a WWII 'leak'.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

The Onion by hack++slash · 2011-01-23 04:51 · Score: 1

I'll be interested if The Onion are doing the production.

--
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.

Re:The Onion by Dolphinzilla · 2011-01-23 05:51 · Score: 1

Now that's a movie I would watch !

Just great by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 04:52 · Score: 1

Assange gets world-wide fame for being a messenger, yet nobody knows the details of the message.

Cash-in movies... by GameboyRMH · 2011-01-23 04:53 · Score: 1

Watching cash-in movies always makes you feel like a dirty whore.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel

Re:Cash-in movies... by gmhowell · 2011-01-23 12:28 · Score: 1

Watching cash-in movies always makes you feel like a dirty whore.
That's the closest most slashdotters will ever come to feeling like they've had sex.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by a+Flatbed+Darkly · 2011-01-23 04:54 · Score: 5, Interesting

They're claiming the film rights from an unofficial biographer who, as far as I have heard, did not pay Assange or Wikileaks royalties, and only according to rumour paid them a one-time payment - in short, a biographer who may have paid Assange nothing. They're not claiming the film rights from Assange, or from Wikileaks, or from the Sunshine Press, or from any associated organization or person. Unless Assange or Wikileaks step in, they won't be making a penny and we'll have one more shitty current-events movie.

Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by a+Flatbed+Darkly · 2011-01-23 05:00 · Score: 3, Informative

In addition, as Assange's lawyer earlier condemned the biographies, and no one has their lawyer condemn things that they'll be profiting from, we have it near enough confirmed that, like Wikileaks or Assange or not, no money from this is going anywhere near them.
Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by Frosty+Piss · 2011-01-23 05:11 · Score: 0

In addition, as Assange's lawyer earlier condemned the biographies [twitter.com], and no one has their lawyer condemn things that they'll be profiting from, we have it near enough confirmed that, like Wikileaks or Assange or not, no money from this is going anywhere near them.
Perhaps. On the other hand, it could be that Assange *did* sign off on it, and knows that the louder he "condemns" the film, the more press it will get, and the more people will see it. Assenge is a skilled manipulator of the press.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by NiceGeek · 2011-01-23 07:57 · Score: 0

Likely he is condemning it because he isn't getting a cut, not due to any moral outrage, or need I remind you of his million dollar book deal?
Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by a+Flatbed+Darkly · 2011-01-24 00:47 · Score: 1

Did I ever claim moral outrage? I doubt that many people's reaction to having a film, however bad, made of their life would be moral outrage. I simply stated that Wikileaks, as you agree, is not getting a cut.
Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by BitZtream · 2011-01-24 05:34 · Score: 0

Assange has made himself a public figure.
Biographies do not have to be 'authorized' nor is there any retarded law that says I have to pay you to tell the story of your life.
Assange has no recourse, he made himself a public figure, he's fair game to everyone. He isn't entitled to shit.
All an 'official' or 'authorized' biography is, is one that the person or persons family (after death) agreed too ... maybe ... that isn't even a real requirement since its just a title and there aren't laws governing what a book can be called (other than trademark and copyright).
Nothing they are doing is illegal in any way, nor is there any reason they should need to pay anyone for doing so.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:Are Wikileaks actually making anything? by NiceGeek · 2011-01-24 16:07 · Score: 1

*shrug* I would think that Mr. Transparency would be fine with it. It's just information right?

Stainless Steel Head Cage by Frosty+Piss · 2011-01-23 04:55 · Score: 1

If his ego gets any bigger, his head will burst out of any cell they try to put him in.

He wears one of THESE to prevent his head from separating from his body and floating away... But seriously, I hope the rape allegation finds a quick conclusion so we can regain some focus on the leaks rather than the leaker...

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.

Re:Stainless Steel Head Cage by peragrin · 2011-01-23 05:10 · Score: 0

If wikileaks was a democratic organization all done without any one person behind having total control then the leaker wouldn't be a big deal.

--
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Re:Stainless Steel Head Cage by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 05:21 · Score: 0

What does your comment have to do with the parent comment? Anything?

Reminds me of Spaceballs... by Jazz-Masta · 2011-01-23 05:01 · Score: 1

I'm surprised at how quickly movies about people's lives and current events make it to the big screen. Biographies out when a person is only 25...soon they will start releasing movies before they're even done...reminds me of Spaceballs.

[Watching "Spaceballs: The Movie". They reach "now" in the movie.]
Dark Helmet: What the hell am I looking at? When does this happen in the movie?
Colonel Sandurz: You're looking at now, sir. Everything that happens now is happening now.
Dark Helmet: What happened to then?
Colonel Sandurz: We passed then.
Dark Helmet: When?
Colonel Sandurz: Just now. We're at now now.
Dark Helmet: Go back to then.
Colonel Sandurz: When?
Dark Helmet: Now!
Colonel Sandurz: Now?
Dark Helmet: Now!
Colonel Sandurz: I can't.
Dark Helmet: Why?
Colonel Sandurz: We missed it.
Dark Helmet: When?
Colonel Sandurz: Just now.
Dark Helmet: When will then be now?
Colonel Sandurz: Soon.

License to Leak by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2011-01-23 05:03 · Score: 4, Funny

'The Most Dangerous Man in the World' ?

"My name is Assange. Julian Assange. I have a license to leak."

In the film he gets not one, but two Bond, oh, I mean two Assange girls. But then they accuse him of rape, and the film's plot goes downhill from there.

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!

Re:License to Leak by Dolphinzilla · 2011-01-23 05:41 · Score: 2

Wasn't "leaking" part of the problem with said Assange girls ?
Re:License to Leak by 0100010001010011 · 2011-01-23 06:46 · Score: 1

Except the title is already used for a documentary on The Pentagon Papers.
It's a very dry documentary* but very interesting. Very scary how it parallels what is happening now. Except it happened in a time when the papers stood up to the federal government.
*Compared to other stuff like: Food Inc, The Union, Super Size Me, Beer Wars, The Smartest Guys in the Room, etc
Re:License to Leak by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:16 · Score: 0

I thought it was going to be about what beer he prefers, when he drinks beer.
Re:License to Leak by fluffy99 · 2011-01-23 08:07 · Score: 1

Wasn't "leaking" part of the problem with said Assange girls ?
Wish I had to points to mod this funny. It's still ludicrous that consensual sex without a condom is considered rape in some countries. The rest of the world considers rape to be non-consensual sex (statutory rape is due to the believe that some people are incapable of consenting)
Re:License to Leak by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 21:56 · Score: 0

What. The. Fuck.
Conditional consent on a condom being used does not constitute consent to sex without a condom.
Saying it is "considered rape" is clouding the issue. Having sex with someone without consent at all is a different, worse crime in Sweden. They do not use their word for "rape" to refer to what Julian Assange is accused of.

But what I really want to know... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 05:06 · Score: 1

Is what beer he prefers, when he does drink beer.

Re:But what I really want to know... by VortexCortex · 2011-01-23 13:04 · Score: 1

Is what beer he prefers, when he does drink beer.
...
Voiceover: He's Julian Asange, the most dangerous man in the world.
[Pull in to frame up Assange sitting in a dimly lit booth between two beautiful, yet angry women.]
[Half a box of expired condoms is slightly out of focus in the foreground]
Assange: I don't always drink beer; Hovever, when I do, I drink Arrogant Bastard Ale.

This is the movie we should have had last year... by damn_registrars · 2011-01-23 05:07 · Score: 5, Interesting

Instead of a movie about a wealthy kid making absurd amounts of money by selling snake oil. I love that the MSM became so enamored with facebook that Time magazine named facebook kid "person of the year" in spite of the fact that Julian Assange had 10 times the number of votes.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Ugh. by orphiuchus · 2011-01-23 05:18 · Score: 1

I really hope this film is fact-based and honest, but I have a feeling its just going to be Hollywood climbing onto his dick for 2 hours.

this is gonna undermine by McTickles · 2011-01-23 05:35 · Score: 1

wikileaks credibility (as a whole, not just assange, you know the grunts doing his biding)

as if the ridiculous rap/news parody wasn't damaging enough to their image...

sometimes i regret financially and technically supporting them...

sigh, i guess there are no real heroes anymore

Re:this is gonna undermine by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:13 · Score: 0

"sometimes I regret financially and technically supporting them.."
Do you see that? All of you fakers who probably never donated to wikileaks but consider your undying espousal of their benefits as 'support' -- this is someone who claims to have supported them on two levels that are far more beneficial than everything you've ever done added up..and he regrets it.
Wikileaks stated a goal of making Assange the face of leaks. Whether or not you believe wikileaks has capability of profiting on this, or that Assange does (which btw, unless you're actually involved in the contract negotations of this movie, you should really stfu speculating on that, we dont know either way) -- you have to believe that this contributes their goal of making a "face" out of leaks. This is actually not good, because another one of their stated goals in that same round of comminucation was to obtain "5 million" with which there is no justifiable reason for wanting to do so. Their proclaimed yearly hosting expenses are egregious and none of their financial claims of being broke make any sense -- even AFTER the seizures (go check around on the German foundation that gave them a clean million usd worth of money after the closures and seizures of accounts).
It doesn't really matter what their intention was, if it was ever at any point pure... it certainly has become skewed and distorted ..it is exactly what it claims to be fighting..and you shouldn't want to support or enable that kind of beast to grow..
Re:this is gonna undermine by Nazlfrag · 2011-01-23 16:27 · Score: 1

This is completley different to the rap/news thing. This movie and book is not the one Assange is going to write but an unauthorised biography from some bloke in Australia. Your regrets are misplaced.

Oblig: by houghi · 2011-01-23 05:35 · Score: 2

http://houghi.org/Fun/4L3O6E9.jpg

--
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.

Re:Oblig: by McTickles · 2011-01-23 05:40 · Score: 2

Offtopic:
That jew suckerberg... ALL MY HATE... Him and his little "Facebook" script can suck my cock.
Re:Oblig: by Opportunist · 2011-01-23 07:29 · Score: 1

You have to understand, giving away valuable things away for free is communism, while selling junk for good money is capitalism.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Oblig: by pinkushun · 2011-01-24 01:58 · Score: 1

Well Played!

bad idea by initialE · 2011-01-23 05:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

Whatever happened to waiting until the story is over to tell the tale? History used to be written by the winners, not by the ones vested in getting their opinion turned into the "correct" one.

--
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.

Re:bad idea by orphiuchus · 2011-01-23 05:50 · Score: 1

Whatever happened to waiting until the story is over to tell the tale? History used to be written by the winners, not by the ones vested in getting their opinion turned into the "correct" one.
I already posted so I cant mod this up, but this is a excellent point. Its pretty clear that the filmmakers already know which side of the issue they're going to present, regardless of what happens in the long term. Hopefully at some point a filmmaker will really get embarrassed by reality and they will take a more cautious approach in the future.
Re:bad idea by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 10:09 · Score: 0

History used to be written by the winners, not by the ones vested in getting their opinion turned into the "correct" one.
Pardon me if I misunderstand, but are you arguing that having the winners write history is the best strategy? Are you arguing that the winners are not "vested in getting their opinion turned into the correct one"?
Let's say Assange is convicted of rape and the US government succeeds in censoring Wikileaks. They will have won. Can you seriously say, then, that the US government's history on Wikileaks would be definitive and unbiased?
Re:bad idea by initialE · 2011-01-23 12:20 · Score: 1

My bad, next time when I write something sarcastic (but nonetheless true), I'll do it with my hand raised like Ellen Degeneres taught. The point being, nearly everything you read about in your history books is written with bias to it. If the Germans had won world war 2, I'm sure you would be prattling on about the evil British and American corporatist schemers and how they were enslaving the world. The difference here is, who is the winner? We're only just begun with the good stuff and there's that insurance file that's still out there. Does making this movie influence the outcome? What will future generations think of this?

--
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Re:bad idea by Rary · 2011-01-23 15:25 · Score: 1

Whatever happened to waiting until the story is over to tell the tale?
When exactly is it "over"? This is a story that will live much longer than Julian Assange. The movie, however, is about him.

History used to be written by the winners...
Who said anything about writing history? It's just a movie.
Movies can be about many things. This one is about the life of Assange up to the creation of WikiLeaks. You can bet there will be others later on.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:bad idea by m50d · 2011-01-23 23:55 · Score: 1

History used to be written by the winners, not by the ones vested in getting their opinion turned into the "correct" one.
Even if we assume there's a difference, you're being very naive there. This has been going on since history began.

--
I am trolling

Assange'e ego by FrankHS · 2011-01-23 05:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

I have heard a lot of people say that Assange has a big ego, is a narcissist etc. But when I actually listen to him speak he strikes me as a level headed guy.

Why do so many people think he has a big ego?

Re:Assange'e ego by countertrolling · 2011-01-23 06:45 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why do so many people think he has a big ego?
That's the press talking. If he doesn't grant an interview, they get all pissed off and start making shit up to try to make him come out and deny, or whatever. Old trick.

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Re:Assange'e ego by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:05 · Score: 0

It's propaganda pushed by the mainstream American press. Assange can definitely be criticized, but the "enormous ego" claims are almost entirely baseless and are rarely seen outside of the U.S. Furthermore, even if true, it's almost completely irrelevant.
For a decent interview with Assange, I suggest watching David Frost's interview here.
Re:Assange'e ego by ewe2 · 2011-01-23 07:43 · Score: 2

He won't play their game. Not playing the game is bad, mkay.

--
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Re:Assange'e ego by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:59 · Score: 0

Exactly!
Re:Assange'e ego by furbearntrout · 2011-01-23 09:50 · Score: 1

There's a reason they removed Narcissism from DSM-5...

--
Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
Re:Assange'e ego by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 10:27 · Score: 0

Yes, he's very level headed.
"Killing people is fun." -Julian Assange
Re:Assange'e ego by FrankHS · 2011-01-23 11:03 · Score: 1

"Killing people is fun." -Julian Assange
This was taken out of context. He was discussing why some in the military kill when there is no need to. You make it sound as if Assange enjoys killing people.
Re:Assange'e ego by ScentCone · 2011-01-23 11:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

But when I actually listen to him speak he strikes me as a level headed guy.

Don't listen to what he says (or how he says it). Watch what he does (and doesn't do). Note the number of former associates/co-workers who've shared his stated purpose but found themselves highly annoyed by his condescending behavior towards them. Note his comments about how the papers he's giving the stolen documents to have to release them according to his plans, because "he owns them." He's all about him.

--
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Re:Assange'e ego by shiftless · 2011-01-23 11:36 · Score: 1

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -- Albert Einstein
Re:Assange'e ego by Foobar+of+Borg · 2011-01-23 12:39 · Score: 1

Yes, he's very level headed.
"Killing people is fun." -Julian Assange
"You see where we are? On the floor, in our own urine." - Timothy Dalton
My quote is about as in-context as yours.

--
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Re:Assange'e ego by Foobar+of+Borg · 2011-01-23 12:40 · Score: 1

But when I actually listen to him speak he strikes me as a level headed guy. Don't listen to what he says (or how he says it). Watch what he does (and doesn't do). Note the number of former associates/co-workers who've shared his stated purpose but found themselves highly annoyed by his condescending behavior towards them. Note his comments about how the papers he's giving the stolen documents to have to release them according to his plans, because "he owns them." He's all about him.
[citations needed]

--
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Re:Assange'e ego by ScentCone · 2011-01-23 12:52 · Score: 0

No, I'm not going to regurgitate months worth of reading on the subject, much of which has been the subject of articles linked-to right here on slashdot. Of course, you know that, and you're just holding your hands over your ears and going "la la la!" ... or hoping that people who haven't been paying attention will see your post as somehow constructive.

--
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Re:Assange'e ego by FrankHS · 2011-01-23 13:35 · Score: 1

He behaves like a journalist. He gets stories and publishes them without asking the government for permission. He has the courage to take on the governments and the powerful.
How I wish journalists in the main stream media were willing to do this!
Re:Assange'e ego by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 15:46 · Score: 0

After almost a decade, he has had a handful of people that were actually close to him complain about his behavior/decisions. If you don't have at least a couple of people complaining about your behavior/decisions after that long, you're not doing anything that matters or anything that requires much of any thought.
Re:Assange'e ego by guruevi · 2011-01-23 16:32 · Score: 1

He actually didn't until they came up with some false charges in order to take the attention off of what is really going on in the world government.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Re:Assange'e ego by cold+fjord · 2011-01-24 00:42 · Score: 1

I have heard a lot of people say that Assange has a big ego, is a narcissist etc. But when I actually listen to him speak he strikes me as a level headed guy.
Why do so many people think he has a big ego?
From the picture that emerges in the media, Assange is generally good before a camera (not always), and can charm people. However, people who know him, even his friends, generally recognize that he can be dismissive, abrasive, and is encumbered with an ego at least equal to his substantial programming talents. He tends to berate, insult, and drive people away. If he was better with his people skills and treated people with consideration (after he gets what he wants from them), he probably wouldn't have two sets of sexual assault charges lodged against him by women who apparently threw themselves at him for a fling, not a long term relationship.
Unpublished Iraq War Logs Trigger Internal WikiLeaks Revolt

Domscheit-Berg announced his resignation in an interview with Der Spiegel. By then, a key WikiLeaks programmer had resigned as well, sources say. The coder was responsible for building the software tool WikiLeaks’ volunteers were using to perform a painstaking, line-by-line harm-minimization review of the Iraq logs.
Then Snorrason, the Icelandic university student, resigned after he challenged Assange on his decision to suspend Domscheit-Berg and was bluntly rebuked.
“I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier and all the rest,” Assange wrote Snorrason. “If you have a problem with me, piss off.”
“I believe that Julian has in fact pushed the capable people away,” Snorrason said in an interview with Wired.com. “His behavior is not of the sort that will keep independent-minded people interested.”
Narcissism?
Assange: 'I'm the only victim' in rape scandal

"The only victim here is me," stressed the 39-year-old Australian spokesman of the whistleblower website notorious for having recently published nearly 77,000 classified US military documents about Afghanistan.

--
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Re:Assange'e ego by ScentCone · 2011-01-24 04:21 · Score: 1

He behaves like a journal

No, he behaves like an activist with an agenda. The world is full of leakable corruption, but he very carefully chooses the dead horses he likes to flog and the specific axes he likes to grind.

--
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.

Colin Mochrie as Julian Assange! by Freshly+Exhumed · 2011-01-23 06:05 · Score: 1

Eerie physical similarities...

--
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.

The script ... by PPH · 2011-01-23 06:05 · Score: 4, Funny

... is already up. Posted on the State department's web site.

--
Have gnu, will travel.

"forthcoming Julian Assange biography" by Culture20 · 2011-01-23 06:15 · Score: 1

No wonder the condom broke.
Bom chiga bow wa chiga bom wow!

Re:"forthcoming Julian Assange biography" by Culture20 · 2011-01-24 04:37 · Score: 1

I know it ruins a joke to explain it, but: "fourth"

Too much violence? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:33 · Score: 0

Does it contain the rape scenes?

But Assange isn't in it for the money by NiceGeek · 2011-01-23 06:34 · Score: 1

trust him.

Re:But Assange isn't in it for the money by KeensMustard · 2011-01-23 08:57 · Score: 1

Given that he won't get a cent from the movie (the author of the book didn't pay him royalties, and neither, it is likely, will the movie based on the book), that seems obvious.
Re:But Assange isn't in it for the money by NiceGeek · 2011-01-23 13:29 · Score: 1

Why do you think that he's condemning the movie? Seems to me that Mr. Transparency wouldn't have a problem with a movie being made about him, even if he wasn't getting any $$$ from it.

his profound book by countertrolling · 2011-01-23 06:42 · Score: 1

his incredibly extensive depth of knowledge..thought-provoking thriller..

OMG! Who wrote this summary?? Had to come from the man himself..They should know that turning the hype up to 11 leaves no head room.

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 06:42 · Score: 0

Instead of a movie about a wealthy kid making absurd amounts of money by selling snake oil. I love that the MSM became so enamored with facebook that Time magazine named facebook kid "person of the year"

The "person of the year" is simply the one judged to have had the most influence on the world in that year; it doesn't mean the influence has to be positive. Even Hitler was person (man, back then) of the year.

in spite of the fact that Julian Assange had 10 times the number of votes

Are you seriously complaining that TIME did not feel bound by the results of an online poll? Doubly so when they never said they would?

he isnt is it. by unity100 · 2011-01-23 06:44 · Score: 2

Except for the fact that Assange isn't some great revolutionary.

at their time, a lot of the revolutionaries were being dubbed with adjectives which wouldnt even compare to this 'ego' business. not to mention that, a minority of them were considered revolutionaries until a few centuries later, when history was written.

moreover, the 'real revolutionaries' are the ones which leaked those videos, right. then answer me, why there were no such real revolutionaries, up till wikileaks, until someone provided those revolutionaries with the means to be a revolutionary ?

--
Read radical news here

Screenplay writing software? by Suki+I · 2011-01-23 06:58 · Score: 1

Can't wait for the sex-scene!

Does the screenplay software help or hurt those?

--
Home of The Suki Series

He's a propagandist by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:02 · Score: 0

Hes not a great man, he a is barely tolerable person who thinks that being contrary is how to be famous.

The "collateral murder" was so heavily edited and omitted the images that clearly showed that he was wrong.... but I guess people like Ass-hinge and Moore don't need the truth, they need a nugget to incite.

Re:He's a propagandist by colinrichardday · 2011-01-23 11:13 · Score: 1

But the mainstream American media, hiding behind its mantle of "neutrality", was much more informative about the US justification for the war in Iraq, as well as our continued presence in Afghanistan.

child leaker by hey · 2011-01-23 07:05 · Score: 1

"The book details Assange's life from his childhood on Magnetic Island in Queensland, Australia,"

Hey class-mates here's a copy of tomorrow's test!

Assange vs. Manning by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:07 · Score: 0

Who wants to bet that Assange is going to be portrayed as the hero and Bradley Manning will be just a bit player?

Re:Assange vs. Manning by Opportunist · 2011-01-23 07:30 · Score: 1

It's Hollywood we're talking about. Who wants to bet that they'll BOTH be portrayed as the villains?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

yes by unity100 · 2011-01-23 07:16 · Score: 2

and tell us what did cryptome accomplish. tell me one single thing, that cryptome has been able to carry into world news at prime time.

ah also

http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1910704&cid=34556662

maybe this is the reason ?

--
Read radical news here

Re:yes by Duradin · 2011-01-23 07:28 · Score: 1

Unlike The WL, that site isn't in the entertainment biz.

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by damn_registrars · 2011-01-23 07:24 · Score: 1

Instead of a movie about a wealthy kid making absurd amounts of money by selling snake oil. I love that the MSM became so enamored with facebook that Time magazine named facebook kid "person of the year"

The "person of the year" is simply the one judged to have had the most influence on the world in that year; it doesn't mean the influence has to be positive.

Which only further supports the assertion that facebook boy was the wrong choice for person of the year. The person of the year should be someone who influenced some important event - there are several things of significance that have happened as a result of wikileaks and Julian Assange. Yet not a single event of any importance came out of facebook boy and his product that would not have occurred anyways.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

distorted by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:25 · Score: 0

I would like to watch a movie if its real. But with so much hype even before the movie is announced makes me lose hope.

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by Opportunist · 2011-01-23 07:27 · Score: 1

Well, do you really want to be in a list with Hitler, Stalin, Nixon, Kissinger, Khomeini, Bush and Putin?

There are certain "honors" I can well do without.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Tobermory Effect by phobos13013 · 2011-01-23 07:33 · Score: 2

Let be honest folks, this is just the next step in the information war. It has nothing to do with telling the "real" story or giving us any understanding of the issues wikileaks revealed. Instead it is just an attempt to make a circus sideshow out of a non-issue. Meanwhile the foot soldiers throw their potshots as evidenced on the replys at slashdot and around the web. Worse yet, if it becomes a box office bomb (which i easily envision) it becomes a "who cares about assange" issue. The free-market will have spoken on what is more important in the information war....

--
...and it should be known by now

psyop by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 07:56 · Score: 0

Is there anyone who hasn't figure out that he's a CIA asset?

http://theintelhub.com/2011/01/22/wikileaks-is-the-cognitive-infiltration-operation-demanded-by-cass-sunstein/

"Ninety-five percent of the work of intelligence agencies around the world is disinformation and deception." - Andreas von Bülow, former parliamentary official responsible for the budget for Germany's intelligence agencies, December 2001

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William Casey, former CIA director, at his first staff meeting in 1981

Re:psyop by dbIII · 2011-01-23 11:32 · Score: 1

That would imply that the CIA is competent enough to tie their own shoelaces or to catch Bin Laden when the military had him pinned down for them to go in and catch him for the credit.
Oh that's right, they WANT us to think they are incompetent because they secretly want their funding to be cut.

yeaaaaaaaaaah or by unity100 · 2011-01-23 08:16 · Score: 1

because they have not been in the 'entertainment biz', they havent been able to carry anything to headlines to poke the truth in the eyes of people who care for nothing but the 'entertainment' ?

--
Read radical news here

so by unity100 · 2011-01-23 08:54 · Score: 1

you are not holding transparency and proliferation of bare truth, as something that would better humankind.

--
Read radical news here

what's next? by TravisHein · 2011-01-23 09:48 · Score: 1

slashdot - the movie ?

omg by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 09:58 · Score: 0

the lying brainwash-industry of Hollywood is making a film about a truth-seeking guy hated by the American government...i guess, this will be as embaressing as the remake of the "Girl with the Dragon tatoo". why can't you just leave the rest of the world alone with your all american bullshit?

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by damn_registrars · 2011-01-23 09:59 · Score: 1

Well, do you really want to be in a list with Hitler, Stalin, Nixon, Kissinger, Khomeini, Bush and Putin?

There are other figures on the list who are also Nobel Peace Prize Recipients - Gandhi, MLK, Carter, and Lech Wasa, to name a few.

There are certain "honors" I can well do without.

Well, regardless, you have already been selected.

That said, the award is supposed to be for the most influential person of the year, good or bad. However I cannot think of anything of merit that facebook boy has influenced. For pretty well each individual person on the list, good or bad, I can think of at least one important event that happened directly as a result of a choice they made. I cannot say that about facebook boy, as not a single thing of merit has happened as a result of his web site.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

If they do not feature the tech behind it by Provocateur · 2011-01-23 10:09 · Score: 1

They should also feature this guy http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-most-dangerous-man-in-cyberspace-20100818 in it; otherwise without the tech, it's only half the story.

If you ever read one article this year, this should be it. (Apologies to /.)

--
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.

Casting by retardpicnic · 2011-01-23 10:26 · Score: 1

George bush should be played by Danny Devito
Assange should be played by jon Heder
that as far as i have gotten

Ideas?

--
sig loading.......

wow. by unity100 · 2011-01-23 10:28 · Score: 0

i just realized that, the man is not keeping us down, because, well, you have just said so !!! and in the face of all abundant evidence to boot !!

how wrong i have been ...

--
Read radical news here

Re:wow. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 10:40 · Score: 0

but of course I'll put blind faith in a egomaniac who is only in it for the money...remember his book deal?
Sucker.
Re:wow. by unity100 · 2011-01-23 10:58 · Score: 1, Insightful

your speech gives out your iq/age, however i will play this once more :

openness and transparency and truth, are GOOD things (tm). so far, these were only brought to us by wikileaks.

all else does not matter. he can be someone who likes to wipe his ass with golden toilet paper, i dont care. what i need is, openness, transparency, and truth, DESPITE and IN LIEU OF the corporate propaganda machine that is trying to suppress them.

kapisch ? kapischero ? kapischomento ?

--
Read radical news here
Re:wow. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 12:45 · Score: 0, Troll

Awww, looks like I struck a nerve with the self-righteous douche. Hey, go ahead and post all your personal info since you're so in to openness and transparency.
Re:wow. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 12:46 · Score: 0

And I just realized that these rape charges are all trumped up and baseless because, well, HE says so and I have to go with my hero worship.

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by Scrameustache · 2011-01-23 10:29 · Score: 1

the MSM became so enamored with facebook that Time magazine named facebook kid "person of the year" in spite of the fact that Julian Assange had 10 times the number of votes.

Meh, *I* was person of the year before that.

--

You can't take the sky from me...

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by damn_registrars · 2011-01-23 10:47 · Score: 1

the MSM became so enamored with facebook that Time magazine named facebook kid "person of the year" in spite of the fact that Julian Assange had 10 times the number of votes.

Meh, *I* was person of the year before that.

Really? You're Ben Bernanke? Because I know I won it back in 2006 - but I'm generous enough to share it...

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by colinrichardday · 2011-01-23 11:03 · Score: 1

Of course, Kissinger is also a Nobel Peace Prize Recipient, so the GP might not want to be in that group, either.

Pussy magnet by noz · 2011-01-23 11:10 · Score: 1

If you thought he got a lot of pussy now, just wait until he's on the silver screen, running from the Department of Defense like Harrison Ford in Patriot Games; chasing leads and evading trained killers like Liam Neeson in Taken; his loose hair moving around his face like Johnny Depp!

One word by colinrichardday · 2011-01-23 11:18 · Score: 1

NNNNOOOOOOOOO! Sorry I can't include Munch's The Scream.

In the "land of heroes" some miss the point by dbIII · 2011-01-23 11:18 · Score: 1

People brought up on the idea of the lone hero being responsible for everything really miss the point of an organisation actually carrying things out. It's the mindset where they think Edison actually invented the Edison light bulb when it was really one of his many technicians. They are the sort of people that really do think Al Gore invented the internet because he made money available for it to be done. Those are the sort of idiots that are blaming Assange for leaks in the US military, Kenyan government and all the rest. He's very much like a newspaper editor and not the only one because the newspaper is still being edited while he is in jail.

Let's try this a different way by dbIII · 2011-01-23 11:24 · Score: 1

If Pepsi was a democratic organization ...
Now do you get how utterly stupid and pointless that argument is?

Dambed by bussdriver · 2011-01-23 11:50 · Score: 1

Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.
Wikileaks can't win. If they release unedited source materials they get attacked, if they work with the major newspapers to edit the releases they get attacked. Not even honest attacks, the big ones lately have been easy to disprove but they continued to be promoted. The whole point of the military plot to undermine Wikileaks was to remove their credibility and likability; which they are doing whether or not their hands are directly involved in the things going on.

Wikileaks suffered from lack of visibility until the massive attack was recently launched; all those useful leaks over the years and people didn't know who they were or what they were doing until now --- but they heard about some of the news stories powered by their work over that span. People must know what they are doing or they won't know why to support them or oppose them (although people seem just fine opposing those they know nothing about.)

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news

In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth by bussdriver · 2011-01-23 11:52 · Score: 1, Interesting

In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act
George Orwell

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news

indeed. by unity100 · 2011-01-23 12:50 · Score: 0

the wordage you use, like 'douche', 'sucker', 'prick' et al are quite effective and convincing. they really make the person you are arguing with, to see the error of his/her ways. not to mention, portraying your immense depth and intellectual capacity at the same time.

however, you havent used your chance well, and im out of time to play with you. audieu. oops. that was french..

--
Read radical news here

Re:indeed. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-23 13:14 · Score: 0, Troll

and you're so obsessed with my manner than you refuse to address the meat of my statements. Image over substance, that's a good little Assange fanboy.

Wiki site by ew5engineer · 2011-01-23 13:51 · Score: 0

This is an invitation to all to check out www.merlinslibrary.com, a wiki site where you can upload all your favorite links to help each other find good sites. All you need to do is just find the appropriate topic or create a new article and upload the link. It's that easy! So check out www.merlinslibrary.com

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by Fatalis · 2011-01-23 21:04 · Score: 1

Actually Assange had about 20 times more votes (382k) than Zuckerberg (just 18k).

--
Deus est fatalis

Typical factual inaccuracy : by RockDoctor · 2011-01-24 00:02 · Score: 1

"the whistleblower website [in 2006] to publish classified material."

The site was set up to publish confidential and/ or suppressed material. Most people equate "classified" with "government or military secret". While I'm sure there was an expectation that such material would become available, the target was (and is) much broader than just governments and military.

Remember the first big news concerning Wikileaks? The attempt by a Swiss bank to bring it down for publicising the bank's illegal and/ or immoral activities.

I bet the US government is pissed off with that Swiss bank (Julius Baer, or something similar) for disproving their claims that WikiLeaks is picking on the USGovt by continuing to highlight WikiLeaks other activities.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"

Julian Assange - Hero by hotelscyprus · 2011-01-24 00:46 · Score: 0

Can't wait for the movie...Make Julian act in the main role..when its expected to hit the screens.!!? Hotels Cyprus

Re:This is the movie we should have had last year. by mqduck · 2011-01-24 00:47 · Score: 1

I still can't believe they made that movie. When I saw previews for it, I was 100% positive it was a joke, one of those "generic dramatic trailer" parodies about a mundane and unexciting subject. When I saw comments along the lines of "I can't wait to see this movie!", I laughed at them for not getting the joke.

--
Property is theft.

Insightful? by Nicolas+MONNET · 2011-01-24 02:08 · Score: 2

That's neocon propaganda. That's not insightful.

Re:Insightful? by cold+fjord · 2011-01-24 05:41 · Score: 1

That's neocon propaganda. That's not insightful.
Perhaps you could do us a favor and show what is actually wrong?
Or is "neocon propaganda" French for "facts inconvenient to my position"?
One of the interesting lessons the Allied powers learned in WW2 was that the most powerful "propaganda" was the truth.

--
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Re:Insightful? by puterg33k · 2011-01-24 21:16 · Score: 0

Yet another +1
Re:Insightful? by puterg33k · 2011-01-24 21:21 · Score: 0

Join up, see what it's like then call it (insert buzz word here).
The fact of the matter is, backseat drivers don't know shit, especially about perspective. Troll me all day long, fine with me...
Trace my IP, get a little perspective. Then get some more facts to support your bullcrap, serve a term or two then talk to me.

Title by jkeelsnc · 2011-01-24 02:51 · Score: 1

I think this movie should be named Cablegate 2010: The Assange Story. LOL, or maybe Michael Moore will make his own documentary by this name. "The most dangerous man in the world" sounds a little overkill to me. :P But if it has enough drama then maybe it works.

Warning: Anti-WL conspiracy ahead by uninformedLuddite · 2011-01-24 11:37 · Score: 1

Look at his past. That's all you need to do to know everything about JUlian. No links provided. The family, funny hairstyles, multiple passports for stolen children connected to a government intelligence operation. The fcat he still sports his 'Children of the Corn' - 'The Family' haircut says it all.

--
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.

Slashdot Mirror

Wikileaks Movie Coming To the Big Screen

181 comments