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.
And their unlimited plan isn't actually unlimited. And now some Ecuadoran IT official is stuck on the phone with "tech support." Raise a glass for that poor soul.
Color me astonished...
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
are only likely to bother people who only read Assange's carefully-chosen excerpts, rather than those who actually read them as a whole. As a whole she comes across very well in them.
The internet is not a series of tubes. It's more like a net. Or a network of computers. Or an internet.
Et tu, Equador?
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
What's one little act of war between friends?
Ecuador moved at the behest of Hillary, Kerry and pals in the US government. I have no doubt that the pressure on Ecuador is immense.
The elites are desperate to stop Assange and his leaks. Even at this late hour, the thought that the truth might get out terrifies them enough that all agree on increasingly desperate measures.
As the web of lies and tattered economy they have left in their wake comes undone, I have no doubt that we will see more and more extreme actions like this from our ruling elite. Today also, RT's bank accounts in the UK were unilaterally closed, again at the behest of the US government. War with Russia is being drummed up at all costs, because only a major war can save the Elites from the banquest of consequences their enraged populations have in store for them.
Don't be naive enough to swallow the pathetic excuses the shills will render up. The US and western elites have finally moved on Assange, because he committed the most unforgivable sin of all; he made them afraid.
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.
I think that happens in November.
The Ecuadorian ambassador was quoted as saying, "Julian never cleans his room or puts his dishes in the dishwasher, and he keeps trying to feel up the housekeepers. He better shape up, mister, or next time it's going to be the Playstation. He'll have to start contributing around here. It's not like we work for the broadband company."
You are welcome on my lawn.
quick some give him a LTE router + per payed sim
Re droning him, I'm curious, what the rules of engagement are? He's a fugitive on the run, and arguably a national security threat. Suppose he was droned down. How would that fly (no pun int.) in our courts, based on past cases?
Table-ized A.I.
Ecuador, I thought we were friends. You constantly gave me free math and cs ebooks during my thesis, what happened? I thought we were friends?
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
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
I wonder who had enough "juice" to make this happen?
Ecuador has been very willing to poke Sweden, Europe, and the US in the eye over Assange for years. So, why now?
Did Wallstreet firms make some threats about investment?
Did the Clinton campaign threaten vengeance when Hillary is selected as president?
Did the US State Department make some threats to cover for Hillary?
Did the CIA threaten tit for tat against Ecuador as part of rumored actions against Russia?
Are foreign donors to the Clinton Foundation leaning on Ecuador to stop Assange from exposing them?
Is the Obama administration threatening military action over the claimed interference in the US election?
Is the media threatening reports on Ecuador? Or is someone threatening to leak to the media about them?
Are there some lucrative deals Ecuador's elites have going that are in danger?
The possibilities seem almost endless. Whoever it was must have the ability to make a substantial threat, big enough for Ecuador to fold like a cheap deck chair.
But who was it?
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
Uh, wouldn't it be an act of war against either the UK or Ecuador if they bombed him that way?
Human Rights Campaign. It's the largest LGBT lobbying association in the US.
The internet is not a series of tubes. It's more like a net. Or a network of computers. Or an internet.
I'm sure if he had dirt on Trump he'd release it also.
But no matter what he thinks Hillary did to him, his recent actions have him in active support of Donald Trump for president of the world's largest superpower, and that's just beyond fathoming level of dumb.
Sad to say it but I guess being cooped up must really make you neurotic after a while.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
understand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I think Assange has over-stayed on that moniker as well.
While I used to support what he did, at this point he has lost all credibility.
Of course Ecuador could do something about it. They could escort him out of the embassy, or ask British police to come in and take him away. They may not do that yet, but the writing is on the wall. Cutting off his Internet is the first step towards Assange being handed over to British authorities.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yes.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pini...
You are welcome on my lawn.
The real thing is so far, I haven't seen anything I didn't already know. I mean maybe some of the "bombshell" revelations are news to some people, but not to anybody who has followed Clinton for any amount of time. She's cozy with Wall St.? Oh so fucking shit, tell us something we didn't already know :P.
Perhaps I've just missed it (I haven't gone and read everything, I've been relying on synopses provided by others) but I've seen nothing that would change my opinion, nor would I think anyone else's. Everything "revealed" was already known: She's cozy with big business, favours free trade, had the Democratic establishment behind her, etc. All the reasons why I would much prefer that Sanders was the Democratic candidate.
However, none of it makes me think any better of Trump. Like Senator Sanders himself, I can be pragmatic about what happened.
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?
There's a source for that quote right here.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Funny how everyone who doesn't worship the liberal establishment automatically turns into "literally Hitler", and the same people who previously supported that person have a full body orgasm when they're taken down.
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.
So what, is your little Trump Squad going to go around hunting anyone who supports Clinton? Is this what the Brown Shirts would have done if Hitler hadn't become Chancellor?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re droning him, I'm curious, what the rules of engagement are? He's a fugitive on the run, and arguably a national security threat. Suppose he was droned down . . .
Not going to happen. The only people the US deliberately attacks and kills with drones are members or affiliates of terrorist groups like al Qaida and ISIS. For all of his faults, Assange isn't a terrorist or affiliated with terrorists.
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
Sure. The Embassy could refuse to accept delivery. He is at the embassy as Ecuador's guest, and if they're going to cut off his Internet access, they sure the hell aren't going to allow him to put a bloody dish up.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
ITYM January 20th.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
This was my thoughts exactly. It's not a pretty popular one around here, me thinks. But I have a good feeling that it's dead-on accurate.
My guess is next they'll consider either kicking him out of the embassy, or assist him in trying to get asylum somewhere else so that they can clean their hands of this mess. I don't think they realized what was going to happen when they made the original decision to take him in four years ago.
...that the Clinton machine hasn't had him taken out with a drone yet....
Why do that when you have the Obama machine to take care of it through other channels.
Can't. The UK has had the entire Ecuidorian embassy signal jammed for over a year now.
Has wikileaks ever confirmed they got the emails from a hacker? couldn't they be, lets say, leaked?
Doesn't matter. The source only is an issue because the people screaming about it don't want to discuss the content of the leaks.
The DNC is as corrupt as the GOP. That's the takeaway that the people who believe themselves to be the "good" guys are cognitive dissonancing themselves into a tizzy over.
Remember, Wikileaks were heroes when they were releasing Bush era war documents. Now that they're revealing that Hillary's campaign and the DNC have been illegally taking money from foreigners and using shell companies to circumvent laws about collusion with Super PACs they're the devil working with $szCurrentRival to undermine democracy itself.
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.
That would explain it.
You conveniently omitted the part where the "brown shirts" held a fundraiser to help defray repair costs.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I think you're an idiot. Or a shill.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
It was OK for a while, but once Wikileaks got into the pants of the DNC, Obama decided to either play hard ball, or offer them something.
Obama? I'm sure he'll be glad to be rid of the Clintons and get out of DC. I don't see why he'd lift a finger to protect her reputation. Please he's a lame duck and of no consequence at this point. The only ones to fear at this point are the Clintons. It Ecuador is trying to appease anyone its the Clintons.
https://youtu.be/5IuJGHuIkzY The Democratic Party has gone slam off the farm. I only wonder where the Republican machine corruption is relatively..., and are they really scared of Trump. So far, I've only given the Rep's inner circles credit for better operational security.
Is Trump our Underdog to get the Simon Bar Sinister's of the world, or is he a devious plant by the establishment? I don't see how they could plan to work this where Trump just shifts the NWO agenda to the next gear without the rest of us down here going ballistic on their asses.
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
Re droning him, I'm curious, what the rules of engagement are? He's a fugitive on the run, and arguably a national security threat. Suppose he was droned down . . .
Not going to happen. The only people the US deliberately attacks and kills with drones are members or affiliates of terrorist groups like al Qaida and ISIS. For all of his faults, Assange isn't a terrorist or affiliated with terrorists.
Actually he provided material support by releasing classified US military information in support of terrorists. So a weak affiliated argument could be made. Seriously, other people have been droned for doing nothing more than making videos and speeches supporting terrorists.
black helicopters and foil hats.
Table-ized A.I.
They would be much more discrete than that.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
That "material support" argument was made at Bradly Manning's trial and was not allowed, so legally that isn't going to cut it. I'm not sure that is or should be the final word, but there it is.
As to that "making videos and speeches" line .... I assume you're referring to Anwar al-Awlaki? If so you considerably understate his role. Were the propagandists of the Soviet Communists, Italian Fascists, and German National Socialists unconnected to their crimes and aggression? al-Awlaki was more than just a propagandist, he was a recruiter, operational planner, and more.
Anwar al-Awlaki: Drone kills US-born preacher who inspired lone wolf terrorists
One official said Awlaki was involved in the printer bomb packages found at East Midlands airport last year.
The Yemeni outfit had developed bombs that contained no metal and were so hard to detect that police missed the material on first inspection.
To distract police, Awlaki put a copy of Great Expectations in the packages. His finger prints were found on the book.
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
No that was "Scooter" Libby.
Particularly with the "state actor" thing. I mean there is no reason to use that language I can think of other than to insinuate it was the US (or maybe UK) that did it. Yes, it is correct, that Ecuador is a "state actor" but if you knew it was them, well the just say so up front. If my ISP cut off my Internet access I would say "Cox cut off my Internet," not "A corporate actor cut off my Internet," even though both are true.
Now if they didn't know who cut it off, fair enough, but then saying a state actor did it would be again misleading, implying knowledge they didn't have. Then it would have been accurate to say "Assanage's Internet was cut off by an unknown party."
To me it seems like just another way to try and drum up more attention, which is all these leaks have been so far.
As I said in my other post, the leaks have been exceedingly "meh" for anyone who's looked at Clinton with anything even approaching a critical eye in the past. I can't see them changing anyone's mind. Die hard Clinton supporters will ignore them, claim they are made up, or claim they don't matter. Die hard Trump supporters will scream and shout about how evil Clinton is... just like they have been since day one, they have convinced themselves she's done much worse. All the rest like the Bernie supporters will just say "Ya, we knew all that shit, that's why we wanted Sanders. What a crap election. Oh well, better her than Trump."
Plus if they had anything major they'd really better reveal it now-ish. Early voting is already happening in many states.
The AC who posts doomsday scenarios with absolutely no sources :P.
Seriously man, if you think this crap you are peddling is real, then some sources please. If not then fuck off.
I'd imagine the reason you don't is because, of course, the real story is far less dramatic than you make it out to be. NatWest is closing RT's account why is not known, as they haven't said. There is no "at the behest of the US" reported anywhere. They also aren't doing anything dodgy like seizing funds, they've notified RT "We don't want to do business with you anymore," and they will close the account down next month.
Here's a source, since you can't be bothered: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
I am voting for someone who isn't Trump. That's all I need to know. I'd vote for Big Bird over that mouth-breathing hippo.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Do you know these guys who are talking in the video ? Are they stupid enough to tell people about things that no one is supposed to know? Don't you suspect they are working for the opposite cause than they admit to - or just spewing FUD ?
Like, hey man - you cannot trust anyone, you just might as well trust me than actually smart people!
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Hey, how can I get one of those shill jobs? I've got some free time at work, how much does it pay?
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Nice try shitlord, but that corruption is on the Right Side of History and it's time to Correct The Record!
Quick! Look over there!
>> The only people the US deliberately attacks and kills with drones are members
Not sure about that, but for sure, for journalists, they use manned helicopters.
aaaaaaa
Well, he can't leave the Ecuadorian embassy or he would be arrested by the U.K. Police; a drone attack therefore would be firing a missile into the side of the embassy which would be a very public act of war against the sovereign state of Ecuador.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
It's not merely that. During the Lewinsky saga, anybody who was appalled at the behavior of President Bill Clinton was haranged and lectured that it was his personal life, and none of our business, and so on. If one brought up Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broderick or Paula Jones, we were given the 'so many years ago' excuse - even though Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky and Kathleen Willey were contemporaneous at the time. Now, all of a sudden, the Dems have had their Road to Damascus moment when Trump is caught on Access Hollywood tapes from 11 years ago, and allegations women make about stuff he supposedly did 35 years ago is supposed to disqualify him from president.
Only problem - Trump was a Democrat when he supposedly did those things, and when he said the things on Access Hollywood. If Dems want to disqualify him for that, then the more Leftist among them - the Bernie/Stein/Pocahontas supporters ought to also endorse him for his past support of Single Payer Healthcare, no matter that he doesn't support it now. After all, if he groped women years ago, but has reformed since, and we're not supposed to recognize it, then if he had a different Leftist position years ago that he no longer has, we shouldn't recognize that either. Right? RIGHT?
No, he is no hero, as his actions over the past few months have plainly shown. Just a tool, willing or otherwise. I just hope he realizes that Putin doesn't have a great track record of protecting tools that have outlived their usefulness and not to drink tea he hasn't prepared himself.
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
Well, that would be fair turnabout for all the Clinton/Bernie supporters who attack Trump supporters, steal their signs, and vandalize GOP campaign offices, but I don't think they've sunk as low as that in that regard. If anyone has lived up to the Brown shirts ideal this election, it's been the Leftists, because actions speak louder than words.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Assange has made very clear that he's chosen a side in this election campaign. He really has given up any possible moral high ground he ever claimed.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
Uh, wouldn't it be an act of war against either the UK or Ecuador if they bombed him that way?
It isn't going to be a hellfire missile through the window of his little room. I'm sure you have the technical imagination to understand.
(||) Nehmo (||)
So do tell. How is it that you are OK with Assange deciding to not release information he has but you're not OK with the government withholding that same information? Either the public has a right to know or they don't, right?
Seriously! With all the folks being called shills on this thread, it's amazing anyone needs a real job anymore. Apparently we're all on the payroll of Big Corporation Inc.
He is a fugitive on the run, but not currently from Sweden. He's a fugitive from English justice, having fled when they wanted to arrest him to return him to Sweden on a rape charge.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Are you serious? You don't see it?
Assange has put his life on the line to inform us about all kinds of government mischief.
He even went as far as putting Ecuador against him by releasing data on Hillary from within the embassy and still YOU are blaming him for being 'not open'?
You're not just an idiot, you're a *fucking stupid* idiot. Or a shill/troll/whatever.
(Bye karma. I don't need you, here.)
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
You forgot the word 'or'. It's not certain at all yet whether he's a shill or not.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I fully agree w/ you - I support Trump, regardless of whether or not what he said or did. The Clinton Foundation taking money from the Saudis and other Gulf emirates is more serious, and what's more - in the WikiLeaks dump, Clinton is shown being aware that the Saudis and the Qataris are secretly backing ISIS. If it is true that they are backing ISIS, then what Clinton is doing is downright treason. She's actively opposing Russia and the Baath regime in Syria for goodness knows why, while looking the other way while her friends back somebody w/ which the US is actively at war
Ecuador does not want to be seen taking steps to interfere in a US election.
You sure? Given the history of CIA meddling in Ecuador (and the rest of South & Central America), Correa might relish the chance.
So you are equating war crimes on one side with the use of what may now be legal fundraising loopholes *pushed by the conservatives* on the other? Wow talk about cognitive dissonance.
She bragged about framing an Iranian citizen to try to trick one of our allies into war with Iran on false pretenses.
Yes, she is as evil as Bush.