Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks: Ecuador Cut Off Assange's Internet Access (bbc.com)
Following a report from WikiLeaks claiming that its co-founder's internet service was intentionally cut off by a state actor, the anti-secrecy organization released a statement confirming the state actor was Ecuador. WikiLeaks tweeted: "We can confirm Ecuador cut off Assange's internet access Saturday, 5pm GMT, shortly after publication of Clinton's Goldman Sachs speechs." BBC reports: There was no way to immediately verify if he had been knocked offline, and if so, what was Ecuador's motivation. The anti-secrecy organization did not return calls and emails on Monday, though it said in a tweet: "We have activated the appropriate contingency plans." A woman who picked up the phone at the Ecuadorean embassy said: "I cannot disclose any information." The Wikileaks claim follows the latest emails it disclosed from a hack of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails. It released three transcripts on Saturday of Mrs Clinton's paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, which her campaign had long refused to release. The scrips reveal her bantering relationship with the investment bank's executives, which is unlikely to allay fears among liberal Democrats that she is too cosy with Wall Street.
I suspect, since we're saber rattling and threatening Russia over Hillary's DNC email cover up. That they have pretty much threatened Ecuador to hand over Assange or the U.S. will pretty much make hell for Ecuador.
I strongly suspect Assange will be in U.S. custody within the next two months.
Has wikileaks ever confirmed they got the emails from a hacker? couldn't they be, lets say, leaked?
Ecuador has been walking a line for some time providing refuge. Assange has made clear at this point both in statements and in actions, that when it comes to this election he has a very strong bias. Ecuador does not want to be seen taking steps to interfere in a US election. By providing the platform and venue for Assange to do what he's doing, as it becomes increasingly clear that he's not providing unbiased data release but rather acting as a proxy for Russian propaganda product, that's exactly the position they're in. By cutting off his access, they're preventing him using their protection to interfere in the US election.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
more likely the ecuadorian government got a call they couldn't refuse..
That may be, but whatever you think of what's happening, if the US is behind this (and not just Ecuador tiring of Assange's presence and the strain it has put on relations with the UK, not to mention the likelihood that they're being used by Russia as a conduit for cyberattacks on the US), then the message being sent to those tasked with enacting Assange's contingency plans is pretty clear.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The announcement of internet access being cut by a "state actor"--insinuating that this is somehow Clinton's doing--fails to pass basic scrutiny:
1. If it was cut, why not cut it before the transcript leaks, rather than after?
2. What would be accomplished by having parties sympathetic to Clinton cut Assange's internet access when everyone knows that such actions would be ineffective?
The whole thing strikes me as an attempt by Assange to exaggerate his claims. If he had real dirt on Clinton, he would not need to be so coy: it would be plastered all over the headlines. The Russians have been working nonstop to discredit Hillary and the Democrats, and this is the best they could come up with? If anything the result of their attempts would seem to suggest that there's nothing meaningful to be uncovered.
I don't think it's just the Hilary stuff. Stuff like the statement from John Podesta wishing that Syed Farook was the informant, rather than the shooter in San Bernardino, and that the shooter was Christopher Hayes, as well as the discussions about a 'Catholic Spring' - those things are more damaging, since they say a lot not just about Clinton's aides, but the very mindset of her campaign.
Yes, which is why it was never a serious proposition. But the Trumpites need any ammunition they can get, and no wonder, with the early voting and the strong indications that Trump is going to lose badly.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Is Assange the only person at WikiLeaks? Are the only computers in WikiLeaks the ones in the Ecuadorian embassy? Aren't there WikiLeak employees in other countries in Europe? Do they have servers? Do they have operatives in Russia or its allies who break into these emails?
I'm sure if he had dirt on Trump he'd release it also.
At one time, I would have agreed with you. However, it's becoming clear that Assange is not simply freeing information; he's playing politics -- possibly in hopes of a Trump pardon. That's not a far-fetched goal. Assange's standing among conservatives has improved greatly since he started dumping on Clinton. Take the example of Fox News anchor (and Trump lapdog) Sean Hannity. In 2010, he was calling for Assange's head and castigating Obama for not taking out wikileaks. Now, Hannity wants Assange to go free. (Source) So, if Assange had dirt on Trump, I highly doubt that Assange would release it. He wouldn't want to alienate his most powerful audience.
We kinda always suspected this was true, but it's really nice hearing it come out of their own foul mouths. That's corruption on a level rarely ever seen outside of dictatorships.
If anybody votes for Hillary, they are giving their stamp of approval to corruption. I encourage everybody to watch the video and then honestly think about who you're voting for this November. Trump is no saint, but he's a far cry away from that shit.