Slashdot Mirror


Ecuador Spent $5 Million Protecting and Spying On Julian Assange, Says Report (theverge.com)

Citing reports from The Guardian and Focus Ecuador, The Verge reports that Ecuador's intelligence program spent at least $5 million "on an elaborate security and surveillance network around WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange." The intelligence program was known as "Operator Hotel," which began as "Operation Guest" when Assange took refuge in Ecuador's UK embassy in 2012. From the report: Operation Hotel has allegedly covered expenses like installing CCTV cameras and hiring a security team to "secretly film and monitor all activity in the embassy," including Assange's daily activities, moods, and interactions with staff and visitors. The Guardian estimates Ecuadorian intelligence agency Senain has spent at least $5 million on Assange-related operations, based on documents they reviewed. The report details attempts to improve Assange's public image and potentially smuggle him out of the embassy if he was threatened. But it also writes that relations between Assange and Ecuador have badly deteriorated over the past several years. In 2014, Assange allegedly breached the embassy's network security, reading confidential diplomatic material and setting up his own secret communications network.

84 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by captbollocks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    to get a new credit card couriered to a backwater in Brazil because he thought he was helping the world by publishing my personal details and my credit card details on WikiLeaks.

    All because I subscribed to a geopolitical newsletter which I used for research to write investment reports, but WikiLeaks thought I was part of an international private spying network. If I was I certainly wouldn't be on /. I would be drinking martinis on a tropical island whilst contemplating my next mission.

    The good news is that eventually he will have some sort of medical emergency and will have to be taken to a hospital. Hopefully, I will get my money back then by laying a bet that he will be put in a dark hole somewhere.

    1. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by captbollocks · · Score: 2

      Are you sure your not a government worker? I mean, putting someone in a dark hole for life over $200 does sound like one.

      I

      Not a govt. worker. Whilst I don't have any respect for him these days, I don't want to necessarily see him in a dark hole, but I won't mind making money out of his misfortune since he has made money from mine.

    2. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by captbollocks · · Score: 5, Informative

      Er, actually they selectively publish what people send them, usually to suit whatever PR strategy they are using at the moment.

      Yes, the information was compromised already, but now I am stuck with my personal information (not to mention the 10,000s of others) on WikiLeaks for anyone to get hold of it.

    3. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And what about the 100 million others with their personal information on the darkweb for anyone to get ahold of?

    4. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      got you, so like, you'd rather just not know about it ... Wikileaks problem here is exposing your ignorance and you are suitably upset ..... poor muffin

    5. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by iCEBaLM · · Score: 2

      Regardless, your information was compromised. If Wikileaks didn't publish it, you may not have ever known.

    6. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by pots · · Score: 1

      I'm not seeing your point here. Yes the information is on Wikileaks, plus whatever other websites which have also published it. Because it's compromised information and that's how that works. How are you tying that fact to blaming your loss of $200 on Wikileaks? Are you saying that you wouldn't have needed a new card if Wikileaks hadn't published your compromised information? That is not true.

    7. Re:Fuck him, I had to spend $200 by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      He is literally the definition of a shitweasle. Even looks like one.

  2. It's not paranoia by phantomfive · · Score: 1, Funny

    But it also writes that relations between Assange and Ecuador have badly deteriorated over the past several years. In 2014, Assange allegedly breached the embassy's network security, reading confidential diplomatic material and setting up his own secret communications network.

    He annoys people and they are out to get him. It's not paranoia, he just can't help himself.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:It's not paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This kind of jackasses always make excuses and cry that people are just bad with them without reason.

    2. Re:It's not paranoia by tinkerton · · Score: 1, Troll

      He crosses the CIA and the US government. So they destroy his reputation and they destroy him to show everyone who's boss. They just can't help themselves, it's standard procedure . From the article:

      In an extraordinary breach of diplomatic protocol, Assange managed to compromise the communications system within the embassy and had his own satellite internet access, according to documents and a source who wished to remain anonymous. By penetrating the embassy’s firewall, Assange was able to access and intercept the official and personal communications of staff, the source claimed.

      In tweets on Tuesday WikiLeaks denied that Assange had compromised the embassy’s network. “That’s an anonymous libel aligned with the current UK-US government onslaught against Mr Assange,” WikiLeaks wrote, adding that its editor-in-chief was not in a position to respond.

      .
      Of course it's a made up claim. That's also people just doing their job.
      Your job is to be gullible and to despise Assange.

    3. Re:It's not paranoia by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      It's ok to like what he built while also thinking he's a lousy person.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:It's not paranoia by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You want to know some really nasty folks? The people going after Assange. Somehow that thought occurs to nobody.

      That thought occurs to everybody. There are Hollywood movies about it even. Sorry, you're not original.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:It's not paranoia by jythie · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people dislike both Assange and the CIA.

    6. Re:It's not paranoia by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      In general. But I'm telling what I see when Assange turns up in a news item.

    7. Re: It's not paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, but why give him any more credit than we do for any of the other Russian Trolls in their propaganda machine?

    8. Re:It's not paranoia by houghi · · Score: 1

      I like driving my New Beetle on the Autobahn.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re: It's not paranoia by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Because he's obviously not a Russian troll.

      Anyone against Hillary is a Russian troll!

    10. Re:It's not paranoia by thomst · · Score: 3, Informative

      tinkerton sneered:

      You despise him because you're an induhvidual eh. Apparently the idea is that if Assange is anything less than perfect we can easily betray him and your standards are so very high that everything Assange has contributed melts away when you consider the charges.

      Actually, I despise the sonofabitch, too - and it has nothing whatsoever to do with his sex life.

      Instead, it has everything to do with the contents of more than 11,000 Twitter DM's between Assange and a select group of "long term and reliable supporters" of Wikileaks that were leaked to The Intercept by a member of that group, and published on Valentine's day, 2018. (How's that for irony?)

      Those DM's make it Waterford clear - in Assange's own words - that, far from being the neutral information broker he has always portrayed it as, Wikileaks always was, instead, an instrument designed to impose his own, personal agenda on the USA in particular, and the world, in general. It was - and is - engaged in a deliberate propaganda campaign to sway public opinion in favor of the Republican candidate in the 2016 presidential campaign, and in favor of Russia (as what Assange claims to be a necessary counterbalance to American influence on the international stage, a positive influence on the world, and, bizarrely, a weak - and helpless - victim of American covert tampering).

      It's transparently obvious from even a cursory scan of the trove that Julian Assange is, at best, arrogantly delusional about how geopolitics works in the real world, is determinedly ignorant of how American domestic politics actually influences its international policies and actions, and is either grossly misinformed about, or is deliberately misleading his key financiers (because that's what, from context, his audience of "long term and reliable supporters" consists of) regarding the effectiveness of Vladimir Putin's covert operations to destabilize democracies not just in the USA, but globally, as well. Regardless of which is the case, in these DM's to his inner circle of "reliable" supporters - one of whom, I remind you, is unquestionably responsible for having leaked them to The Intercept - his determination to influence the USA's 2016 election against Hilary Clinton, and for Donald Trump is repeatedly, explicitly made clear (as is his belief, all historical evidence notwithstanding, that Democrats, rather than Republicans, are the primary authors of American global adventurism).

      But, hey, don't take my word - or the Intercept's - for that. Instead, read their most germane Twitter DM's for yourself, and come to your own conclusions ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    11. Re:It's not paranoia by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      It's ok to like what he built while also thinking he's a lousy person.

      I'm not actually 100% sure it is. The thing is, it takes a certain kind of person to build something like wikileaks, and a person driven to do something like that is basically never going to be a nice person.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    12. Re: It's not paranoia by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting point. But I do like Wikileaks.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    13. Re:It's not paranoia by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I generally accept that people are pretty much flawed, though I am less tolerant when bullying is involved and I react here because it feels too much like 'two minutes hate' and that is because of a successful campaign.

      Wikileaks is important because it reintroduces a degree of checks and balances to power where it's mostly lost. The watchdog function of the mainstream is almost gone. That argument by itself may not provide enough drive for someone to actually go ahead with it so I accept that those who actually make it work are fairly radical. I don't know that much about Assange and I don't know what to look for in the twitter links you give. That he is not likable? Something worse than rape? He despises Clinton. I understand that, I think my opinions are similar in that respect. I don't see why that would disqualify him. His comment (i assume it's his) that if Clinton is elected the end result taking in account all the pressures would be worse than if the GOP got elected is legitimate(though it appears to be wrong). Making a lot out of it is misleading. Or it's just being misled by the propaganda war. It certainly does not mean he's pro GOP or pro Trump. Or working for the Russians. He's working for civil society and against the established power.

      Wikileaks is a neutral broker in the sense that if you deliver the data, they will make it available. Maybe they could be tempted to play with the timing depending on the material, but likely much less than mainstream media. Mostly the politics will shine through in the publications of Wikileaks themselves, but since they excel at providing the actual sources with it that is not really a major flaw.

      What I find ridiculous is that there could be serious discussions about wikileaks and instead people get upset about bias and attitude.
      The main issue with wikileaks is that instead of becoming a back end for the publishers: them providing leaked data to journalists - they became their own publisher, and they filter lets things through much more radically than mainstream. Wikileaks reflects Assanges politics in that power is self-serving and there is need for resistance. It does function as checks and balances but it hopes for more radical changes.
      That is because of the mistrust of the mainstream media and a strong sense to give power to the people. Again, there are very good reasons for that but that is a radical step. It's withdrawing trust in the system. Compare it to Snowden. He gave his material to Greenwald and gave the full responsibility for what to publish to Greenwald. From then on it was out of Snowden's hands and if Greenwald decided to sit on something then Snowden had no say in it.Greenwald himself kept working with the Guardian despite serious conflicts - often Guardian dragging its feet about publishing. That attitude means 'Ok the system is seriously flawed but I stay within the system'. It doesn't necessarily mean Greenwald's view on the state of the media is less pessimistic. The difficulty with radicals is not necessarily their analysis but their solutions.

        Afterwards Greenwald started the Intercept which in many respects is mainstream: it publishes things which would have been published elsewhere without any problem, like the links you provide. So the Intercept is flawed and compromised as well but overall it provides good value. It often does not do the adversarial journalism Greenwald himself believes in, but it has enough of it. It can publish things like this condemnation of what is happening to Assange, which cannot be done in the mainstream: https://theintercept.com/2018/...

      I believe in checks and balances and I'm no revolutionary but I think in the current state there should be room for both Assange and Greenwald. Your comment that Assange doesn't know what he's talking about is plain wrong.

  3. Re: I think hes done a service for mankind.. by Ecuador · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meh. I'd offer him my embassy... Oh, wait!

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  4. Re: How much did they spend... by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

    Agreed... as someone who's lived all their life in the UK, and travelled quite a bit, I can safely say that the UK is no worse than any other civilised place I've been to.

    Plus, I don't get regarded like an idiot that can't cross the road unsupervised.

    Plus, literally, I do not feel in fear of government one iota (except from a "what stupid thing are they doing now" viewpoint, but that's universal).

    Strange that people complaining they live freer lives than other countries that they've never been to also think they have to sustain a household armoury in order to do so.

    (P.S. The last time I was questioned in any official capacity, or had any interaction with official law enforcement bodies, was while entering the United States for a brief holiday... honestly, I've never been asked so many obtuse, unrelated, obscure questions and I hear they're going to start asking for social media details? Oh... unless you count the policeman who came to my daughter's school fair and let the kids press the siren button)

  5. Assange allegedly breached the embassy's network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You keep bees, you will get stung.

  6. Re:5 million for A few camera?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Assange's daily activities, moods, and interactions with staff and visitors

    These are all things that the Ecuadorian government should leak to the public. Afterward, they should kick that freeloading, attention whore to the kerb.

    At first I was willing to give Assange the benefit of the doubt, but as time went on and he demonstrated what an utterly disrespectful, ungrateful and pretentious twat he is, I've changed my opinion.

  7. Re:5 million for A few camera?? by ledow · · Score: 2

    Cameras are cheap.

    People to watch them, however, aren't. Nor are security-cleared installers to install stuff in international embassies.

    That $5m also did a lot more than just put a camera in.

  8. The most like consequence of this by DrXym · · Score: 1
    If Ecuador knows who was meeting Assange and what they were talking about then the chances are the UK/US does too - by spying on Ecuador's spying.

    What is funny to me is that Assange allegedly hacked through a firewall and gained access to the embassy's own personal network. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

    1. Re:The most like consequence of this by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Yeah it does make you feel more ok with it if Ecuador now finally hands over Assange doesn't it.

  9. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Is that actually how they tell you guys that it works?

  10. Re: How much did they spend... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    P.S. The last time I was questioned in any official capacity, or had any interaction with official law enforcement bodies, was while entering the United States for a brief holiday... honestly, I've never been asked so many obtuse, unrelated, obscure questions

    If it makes you feel any better, that is exactly the experience I had while entering the UK.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  11. Re: How much did they spend... by Xest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I had it in Canada of all fucking places.

    I think it's really just a symptom of the universal truth that the role of customs officer across the globe is the sort of role that has a high likelihood of attracting the odd dickhead who failed at everything they wanted to do in life (like becoming a police officer) and so had to settle for what little power tripping they could do at a checkpoint on a national border instead.

    I've always found US customs officers decent, and UK customs officers nice on my return (albeit a little fucking dense), I've found Canadian customs officers to be universally complete arseholes in Ottawa and Montreal, but usually pretty nice in Toronto and Vancouver. Across the rest of the globe it's always been a mixed bag - nice and laid back in the Caribbean, corrupt and dodgy in Egypt for example.

    Personally I wouldn't judge a country by it's customs officers because the high likelihood of down and out power trippers is bound to be at odds with the norm.

  12. Assange: "The Five Million Dollar Man!" by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    They are made of pure gold or what lol ???

    Back in the 70's, $6 Million would have bought you a whole Bionic Man.

    But I guess Assange is not a former astronaut and test pilot, so Ecuador didn't consider that extra investment.

    Although, it would have been definitely cool for them to be able to brag:

    "We have a Bionic Man in our London embassy!"

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Assange: "The Five Million Dollar Man!" by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I'm getting old.

    2. Re:Assange: "The Five Million Dollar Man!" by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      It was cheaper due to the initial research already being complete. I mean, the US broadcast an entire series of documentaries over the public airwaves.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  13. Re: Assange allegedly breached the embassy's netwo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The only thing Assange produces is piss & shit but you're welcome to eat/drink that down if you still believe in his holy personage.

  14. Re:I think hes done a service for mankind.. by jonwil · · Score: 1

    I gaurantee you that if the UK government wasn't so determined to put him in jail (possibly followed up with a one way flight to federal pound me in the a** prison in the USA) he would be in a country with no extradition treaty with the USA, UK or EU by now.

  15. Re: Skepticism required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    More likely is that Focus Ecuador found out the details of the story but sold it to The Guardian and The Verve to get international distribution.

  16. Re: How much did they spend... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Then you most always tow the public line on everything. A police force in England was threatening to imprison people for making fun of a "drug bust" they made on Facebook. Then there was that Scottish guy who was in real risk of being sent to prison for making a nazi joke where the judge said the context which the joke was made was unimportant and could be disregarded when applying the law. If you don't find that terrifying, you're a fool.

  17. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    1. You are confusing Socialist vs Communist. It is sometime confusing because a Communist country will often call themselves Socialist Democratic Republic a big long name of things that make them seem like they are for the people. Also the Ideas of Socialism vs Communism have a lot of similarities, but there are major differences. Socialism is a regulated free market, vs Communism which is a controlled market. So in Socialist government and you owned a food store, you can sell whatever food you want just as long as the food is deemed safe by the government. While a Communist government will ship you the food that it thinks is needed, hence the stereotypical long bread lines in the USSR. Where those days is when the bread was shipped to the stores, so people were getting that. Because next week the store may be filled with Cooking Oil or Meat.

    2. The Supply vs Demand is always in play. Finding the number of people willing or able to do a job, vs. how much someone wants the job done. For this case Ecuador needed people who could install this stuff secretively against a guy who is famously paranoid. In an area that is more tightly controlled. You can't just get the normal Cable Guy to go and install it without making people suspicious. So Ecuador will need to spend more to get the guy to do the job.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  18. Re: How much did they spend... by burtosis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hahahaha - Canadians don't even know how to be assholes properly, though I've seen them try a few times. I live in Minnesota and am a dual citizen and have family in Canada so I cross the border a lot. I sometimes get a few curt questions from the Canadian customs, one sent me to immigration (lol) because I had forgotten my Canadian passport and didn't let me explain I was a citizen. But in perhaps 50 crossings I was treated rudely maybe 3-5 times and it was at best a 3/10. When I filed for my social insurance number the lady behind the desk at service Canada rudely said "and why do you think you need one?" Going off my American accent she probably thought I was a medical refugee. After saying "umm, because I'm a citizen..." she absolutely couldn't stop apologizing and directed me straight to an open agent lmao, here in America they would have called the cops over and doubled down and never, absolutely never apologized.

    At the border coming back the customs agents are assholes about 40% of the time, one asked why I was in Canada and part of my answer involved being a citizen at which point he interrupted me "Son, we don't recognize dual citizenship (lol a lie), just what kind of American are you? Son, If we went to war with Canada what side would you fight for??!?" Then he went off the goddamn handle and started to make racially charged comments about my family member names and asked me insane questions for another 5 minutes. Then I got sent to be searched. I felt lucky to have made it across alive and until I see it, Canada just dosent have the culture to put assholes like that in authority and approve of thier treatment of citizens.

  19. Re: How much did they spend... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    I am guessing you are also of Western European Decent as well, with a charming English Accent.
    Culture, TV and Radio has made the British White Man seem like the general good guy. So Officials just don't get immediately suspicious of you.
    However if you don't quite meet that stereotype, and you look like someone who matches a negative stereotype. Then you will get questioned and hassled much more.

    I see a difference when I go to work where I am wearing my work cloths and rather well shaved vs. on the weekend where I am in a tee-shirt and jeans and Have a few days of beard growth. Interaction with officials move from very cordial and polite, when I am in my work cloths. To more demanding and rude when I am looking a bit more scruffy. I didn't change my Sex or my Race, or precede religion and there is a noticeable difference. Imagine if you had one of those traits as well.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  20. Re: How much did they spend... by thomst · · Score: 1

    Xest observed:

    I've always found US customs officers decent, and UK customs officers nice on my return (albeit a little fucking dense), I've found Canadian customs officers to be universally complete arseholes in Ottawa and Montreal, but usually pretty nice in Toronto and Vancouver. Across the rest of the globe it's always been a mixed bag - nice and laid back in the Caribbean, corrupt and dodgy in Egypt for example.

    Dude - "corrupt and dodgy" describes pretty much every employee of every Egyptian bureaucracy.

    They've had more than 5,000 years to perfect bureaucratic corruption, after all, so it's hardly surprising that they've managed to refine it to such an exquisite degree ...

    --
    Check out my novel.
  21. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and 90 of all statistics are made up

  22. Re:Skepticism required by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Informative

    You missed something somewhere. What about The Guardian's wish to credit Focus Ecuador makes the story possibly "disinformation"? Or alternatively what about The Guardian being British and the Verge being American makes it that? (If this is some kind of weird ass smear about The Guardian, well, you do know The Guardian is one of the only independent media outlets in the world, right? It's owned by a self-contained trust that exists solely to publish The Guardian and related newspapers, and the trust itself is run by journalists. It has its biases but it's not in any way establishment or government controlled - hell, they've had MI-5 enter their offices and smash their computers in the past, and were one of the first newspapers to raise the profile of Wikileaks, and assisted them for a time.)

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  23. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by i286NiNJA · · Score: 2

    https://www.google.com/search?...

    I know this will shock you, AEtna is doing even better than gold which we all know is the holy grail of investing. /s
    The insurance companies are ripping people off genius.

  24. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    That's how it works if your work is valuable. Maybe yours isn't.

  25. Re: How much did they spend... by Xest · · Score: 1

    Try being held for them for 3 hours for literally no reason before you're allowed to go on your way whilst they ask absurdly irrelevant and probing questions about your friends, family, sex life, finances, job, and search your laptop and ask who you speak to on random websites like Facebook and to aggressively accuse you of lying to try and rile you up and get a reaction.

    Believe me, Canadian customs officers most definitely do know how to be absolute cunts for no reason.

    To be fair though yes, I did cross one of the land borders at Montreal once, and they were fine there actually, so maybe it's just Montreal and Ottawa airports that are staffed by unnecessarily angry jackasses.

    You probably get an easier ride if you're a citizen too though as they ultimately have to answer to you (i.e. via your MP), my wife has Canadian citizenship and generally gets an easier ride. The only time they were shitty with her is when she left on her Canadian passport and flew back on her British passport because she didn't want to renew two passports so let her Canadian one expire. Apparently they can't track whose in the country if you're not consistent on your passports, and I believe they changed the law recently so you now legally have to travel only to and from Canada on your Canadian passport if you have one for precisely this reason.

  26. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by Kulahan · · Score: 2

    not sure if trolling or stupid, but it doesn't take that long in either of those listed locations

  27. Re: How much did they spend... by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    I've had the anti-terror grilling in the UK and the US. Paranoid cunts.

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
  28. Skepticism of skeptic required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  29. Re: How much did they spend... by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    War with Canada!!!! Yay!!!!

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
  30. Re:5 million for A few camera?? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with being disrespectful?

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  31. Kick Assange to the curb by mysidia · · Score: 1

    In 2014, Assange allegedly breached the embassy's network security, reading confidential diplomatic material and setting up his own secret communications network.

    Seriously? After all the hospitality they've provided Assange? They need to write up formal charges for this and extradite him for computer crimes committed at the embassy. He should get a LONG stay in an Ecuadorian prison that will make the Sweden rape allegations look small by comparison.

    1. Re:Kick Assange to the curb by swb · · Score: 1

      True or not, overstated or not, you'd think that Assange would be of a mind to be as deferential as humanly possible to the the embassy, located in a country desperate to nab him, which was sheltering him.

  32. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

    In this case, it's the truth. When Assuage was releasing all the terrible stuff Bush did, he was considered a hero. It wasn't until he started ratting on the next admin that we started talking about what kind of traitor he was.

  33. Re:5 million for A few camera?? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "Cameras are cheap.

    People to watch them, however, aren't. Nor are security-cleared installers to install stuff in international embassies."

    Especially if the installers have to be flown in from Ecuador.
    (secret services don't trust the local people)
    And like all those people they always need some piece of equipment that they 'forgot' and have to go back to the 'office'.

  34. Re: How much did they spend... by ledow · · Score: 1

    If you think they are at all reflective of anything other than "stupid instances that get laughed out of court" then you're sadly mistaken.

    Every country has stories of such things and there's ALWAYS more behind it than the headline would have you belief. And even when there isn't, it gets laughed out on appeal and people sanctioned.

    Sorry, but you honestly AREN'T British if you haven't constantly taken the piss out of every establishment in the country at every opportunity, and you'll not suffer in any way, shape or form for doing so. Honestly, watch one of OUR cop-shows. They are incredibly boring and frustrating as some guy yells into a police officers face and calls him every name under the sun and the police just go "Yes, right, okay" in a display of utter, accustomed, British tolerance.

    If you think there are police (with batons, not even guns) on every corner beating the populace into line, you just haven't been to the UK.

    P.S. I've lived in some of the scummiest areas of London and Essex. I've worked in schools under "special measures" because the teenagers are kicking off so much that they have assigned police officers. And I have ZERO cause to be scared of the police or any similar organisation. If anything, I pity them immensely and I'm not sure I could apply their same coolness to that job, especially not for the wages we pay them.

    Far from being an oppressed population under a police state, we tend to live out our lives without interacting with the police at all, and then only positively.

    My father-in-law was in America once and was removed from his car at gunpoint for "failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign". I guarantee you this is true. I also don't believe it's reflective of the entire US.

    By contrast, after dropping an unnecessary second (foreign) mobile phone into a bin on Liverpool Street Station (back in the days before we imported US terror-phobia when we had bins on them), short after the July London bus bombings, without thinking, the same guy was surrounded and questioned by unarmed anti-terrorism police officers in seconds. Who were then laughing with him about the whole thing and barely even bothered to take his name.

    These things are not indicative of real life. But real-life between the US and the UK in terms of policing is RADICALLY different. Honestly, come over. Spend some time here. Find out. Police here are professional people. Highly trained. Highly regulated. Held responsible for every action, word, gesture and implication they provide.

    What you're referring to are media-blown instances missing 99% of the facts. P.S. the judiciary are NOTHING to do with the police force at all. They aren't allowed to be, they are entirely separate, and blurring the two shows your ignorance.

  35. Re: How much did they spend... by ledow · · Score: 1

    In actuality... nope.

    And I didn't have a TV for about 5 years.

    You just write them a polite letter that says "go away" and then tend to stop bothering you until someone else moves into that house again. Or you buy a TV (the shops have to dob you in by law).

  36. Re: How much did they spend... by alexo · · Score: 1

    A country is obligated to let her citizens in even if their travel papers have expired (or lost) as long as they can prove their citizenship status.

    I once flew to visit my parents abroad and did not notice that my passport (of the destination country) had expired. They told me straight away that if I didn't take care of it during my stay, I would not be able to fly out back home.

  37. Re:5 million for A few camera?? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

    What's wrong with being disrespectful?

    You should have said "What's wrong with being disrespectful, you warthog faced buffoon?"

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  38. Phrasing is everything, in "news" stories... by zarmanto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... allegedly breached the embassy's network security, reading confidential diplomatic material and setting up his own secret communications network. ...

    Rough translation: Assange found that little placard with the WiFi password written on it for all to freely use, discovered an open share on one of the embassy's network-connected computers (but probably didn't find anything particularly interesting on it) and then he casually turned on his VPN to tunnel through the embassy firewall and log into Wikileaks.

    It feels to me like certain high profile personalities in the media (like Assange, but certainly not limited to him) are all-too-often treated like they possess some sort of super-intelligence, and can do shockingly amazing things with computers. The reality is likely to be underwhelming most of the time, when you break down the colorful but vague terminology into layman's terms.

    1. Re:Phrasing is everything, in "news" stories... by PPH · · Score: 1

      It really could be this simple.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Phrasing is everything, in "news" stories... by zarmanto · · Score: 1

      Great scene... and now I have a sudden urge to go home and watch the movie again. (Oh, but if only I could up-vote comments in my own thread...)

  39. Re: How much did they spend... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

    Its toe the line, not tow. The police are not in a disabled boat that needs to be towed back to shore.

    Though this might solve a few problems if they were.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  40. Re: How much did they spend... by burtosis · · Score: 1

    Canada just dosent have the culture to put assholes like that in authority and approve of thier treatment of citizens.

    Bwahaha! Oh wait, you're serious? Let me laugh even harder!

    Canada is just like the US, except a bit more authoritarian while pretending to be nice and polite. I would know, I live here.

    And you don't live in the US. I hear the same bitching from my family that lives there, they feel just like you because they don't experience all America has to offer. Every time I need a light hearted break from the harsh reality here I tune into Canadian news and listen to the cure problems you have there. Tredau crapping out on represtational voting, aww we have a corrupt greedy toddler dismantling the EPA, HUD, Department of Education, and who is breaking every promise America has made to the world under obama ruining our international reputation further. Aww, you sold a few APC to the saudis who might use them to kill civilians, trump sold 200 billion in planes, missles systems, and weapons of war to definately ethnicity cleanse Yemen. Oh and the poor Canadian guy who got a heart attack and was flown to ND hospital with no medical recriprocity so he owed 100k hospital bill and it was national news lmafo!!! I know three people who got fkd harder by the healthcare system here, that story happens every 5 minutes lmafo. But do go on about your problems, I've been depressed by the news lately.

  41. Re: How much did they spend... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    I've been ruded to coming into Canada from the US. Later I realized they were probably trained to do that in an attempt to fluster a crook into making a mistake.

    If I were writing a process for them, I might do that.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  42. Re: How much did they spend... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

    I've always found US customs officers decent, and UK customs officers nice on my return (albeit a little fucking dense), I've found Canadian customs officers to be universally complete arseholes in Ottawa and Montreal, but usually pretty nice in Toronto and Vancouver. Across the rest of the globe it's always been a mixed bag - nice and laid back in the Caribbean, corrupt and dodgy in Egypt for example.

    I've found most customs everywhere is about answering their questions without setting off any flags, which mostly involves knowing where you are going to be staying and what you are going to be doing. If they ask you some question that lets you ramble on enthusiastically about what you are going to be doing or have done, they'll usually tell you to shut up, finish your paperwork, and get you on your way. Personally, I've found the easiest way to get through customs is to wear the leather jacket with the studs, the offensive band t-shirt, big boots, and all the metal accessories I have to take off for security, and tell them I'm going to/coming from a music festival. They usually never even give me an opportunity to ramble on to one of their questions. The one exception tot hat seems to be crossing the physical border into Canada. Then they want to see cash. I didn't have $50 cash in my pocket because I was planning to withdraw local money from an ATM once in country for best exchange rate like I always do, and had me park to the side and go talk to some woman who was litterally explaining how they are not responsible for the damage done to my car when they take it apart, when I pulled out a ATM slip with my bank balance on it showing I had money, and then they let me go and waved me through without any more questions.

  43. Re: How much did they spend... by burtosis · · Score: 1

    War with Canada!!!! Yay!!!!

    On cold, clear nights, you can hear sounds from sharpening hockey sticks eerily drifting across the border.

  44. Re: How much did they spend... by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you are just ugly? As a tall attractive man, I’ve never had problems with authorities anywhere. Hell, in China, they didn’t even ask for id at checkpoints.

  45. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by Shotgun · · Score: 2

    Problem is, communism will always fall into totalitarianism.

    Why you say?

    From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs.

    That says it all. We'll take from those that we think can do stuff, and give it to those that we think need it. Someone has to make the decision. But, what if they decide that YOU can do stuff, but YOU don't need stuff? What if you start to think that their decision is completely arbitrary, and think that YOU need stuff, too? What if you begin to think that YOU are doing to much, and not getting enough? What if you decide that YOU just aren't going to do so damn much anymore?

    Well, you can't just make that decision, because then everybody will make that decision. And then, nobody is working, and everybody still has needs. So, the government has to come down hard and demand that such-n-such work be done. We call that ..... totalitarianism.

    Now, think of how capitalism can be used to funnel greed into good behavior.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  46. Wikileaks *always* pushed a political agenda by drnb · · Score: 1

    He turned Wikileaks from a service publishing information to the public while protecting the source to a political weapon to push a specific political agenda.

    Actually wikileaks *always* pushed a political agenda. Their famous gulf war video was edited so as to remove the fact that the journalists killed were essentially "embedded" with an armed insurgent group while blocks away American troops were fighting other insurgents. Hang with insurgents near a firefight and you run the legitimate risk of getting Apache'd.

    Wikileaks was the same during the Bush and Obama years, the only difference is that some cheered during the former and others cheered during the latter. The difference only being the politics of those cheering.

    1. Re:Wikileaks *always* pushed a political agenda by drnb · · Score: 1

      Except America didn't belong in that country.

      Irrelevant. Your political opinion does not disprove wikileak's political agenda, it merely exemplifies the the political beliefs behind wikileaks's political agenda.

  47. Google can fix that by drnb · · Score: 1

    Cameras are cheap. People to watch them, however, aren't.

    Google is working with the Pentagon to fix that.

  48. Now adjust for inflation by drnb · · Score: 1

    Back in the 70's, $6 Million would have bought you a whole Bionic Man.

    Now adjust for 40+ years of inflation. Might want to review the costs using modern components too. :-)

  49. Re: How much did they spend... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    If it makes you feel any better, that is exactly the experience I had while entering the UK.

    The UK border guards are fuckers. I've been asked obtuse, obscure questions where they wouldn't accept the truth for an answer and I'm fucking British with a valid passport.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  50. weird priorities by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Spending $5m on Assange seems like weird priories from a country where 25% of the population makes less than $2/day.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  51. Re: How much did they spend... by MoaDweeb · · Score: 1

    It's a cat detector van...

    --
    New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
  52. Re:Hang him by MoaDweeb · · Score: 1

    Perhaps he means Australia? However I have not heard of the Australian Government mentioning Assange as a traitor.

    --
    New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
  53. Re: How much did they spend... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Maybe they thought you were going to help Assange.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  54. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Lol ok, no. My work is very valuable. A lot more valuable than your buddy's formula allows for apparently. Let me teach you Siberian scrubs something important.

    You start with roughly 65%. That is the money your employer gives you. That is your salary. The other roughly 35% is taken by the government: that is the tax. Then through various forms of paperwork and logistical trickery, you can earn some or all of that 35% back. The employers aren't where the taxes come from. In fact, the government taxes them, too.

    Now, from that remaining 65%, most but not all states do charge sales tax on purchases, but at most that's only 10% of each individual purchase. You're in the end left with much more than 20% unless you're doing something very wrong. Telling yourselves that the employer taxes you personally at a rate of 80% is absurd on paradigm-shift type of fundamental level even if you don't count the absurdity of the figure "80%" itself.

  55. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    My salary is a drop in the bucket compared to the eventual value of the work I do for my company but my wages are driven by supply and demand.

  56. Re: 5 million for A few camera?? by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    Your work is valuable when your mistakes cost more than your salary and you have to make them constantly to get fired.....Unless you do something spectacular.

  57. Re: How much did they spend... by Xest · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I pointed this out to my wife, that if they denied her entry, they'd be breaking human rights law.

    I'm also not sure they could stop her leaving frankly either, because she's got dual British citizenship and I don't think they can arbitrarily detain you over something like an expired passport unless it's actually a criminal offence, so as much as they huff and puff about having to travel on that passport, I think if you really wanted to push it they could neither stop you entering, nor leaving on another passport quite frankly. In fact, she could simply just not even mention she has Canadian citizenship and enter and exit on her British passport like anyone else and I doubt they'd even know.