2. Iran - was a moderate country that nationalized their oil in 50s (like a lot of countries at the time). BP (the company!) was butt hurt and cried, US installed their puppet government and BP got their oil access back.
The US was so altruistic. To overthrow a government just so British Petroleum could profit. Admittedly the UK was certainly our ally, but still. That is rather extreme. Maybe that's the problem. The US is too altruistic. Always putting others before ourselves.
Can you be more specific about in what ways France and Germany are similar culturally? While I have never spent any time in Germany, I have spent some in France. I just don't see much cultural similarity. In fact it's really hard for me to think of two European cultures that are less similar. For one thing French culture would never have allowed going on a worldwide rampage trying to take over the whole planet and exterminating every one who looks different from your ideal. French people are laid back and not particularly obedient. They just want to be happy enjoying their beautiful women, their beautiful language, and their delicious food. Germans are good with science and technology and manufacturing. In fact they have always been one of the leaders in those areas. They are also one of the more robotic and hard working cultures in the world. Similar to Japan in that sense. I don't really see how the two cultures could be more different.
These explanations of why Hitler was so popular and was elected president are overly simplistic. It would be like offering an explanation of why Obama won the last election. Any such explanation is highly suspect. Probably each German had their own reasons for electing him. It is extremely difficult to deconstruct all those reasons and offer up one particular overriding factor. Germany was no third world country. If they had been they could not have conquered most of Europe. They were a major industrial power with a huge manufacturing base. And being poor isn't much of an excuse for genocide on a scale never seen before or since or trying to literally conquer the whole world. I've traveled to and even lived in some very poor countries where the average monthly wage is under $100 per month, and I didn't notice any Hitlers exterminating "inferior" races or even planning to conquer the world. Germany is the only country in the modern world that has ever been quite that naughty. In fact I think it's fair to say that the Germans of that time were pretty much the definition of evil. That's what makes them so great for computer games. It's rare that such purity of moral blacks and whites exists in the real world. You have to remember that they actually voted for Hitler. It would be the equivalent of the US voting for a skinhead KKK leader with real plans to attack and conquer every other country in the world. Can you imagine if Hitler had gotten his hands on nukes? And he was working on it. I don't mean to compare the leader of Iran to Hitler. The only thing they really have in common is the promise to exterminate all or most Jews. If Iran really did rain nukes down on Israel and kill 99% of the population there I wonder if that would satisfy them. Probably if they also nuked NYC that would be enough Jew killing. Unlike the Third Reich, I doubt if they would devote much energy to individually tracking down and exterminating every jew on the planet. And they probably wouldn't bother with gypsies or homosexuals at all.
Nuclear is not the cheapest form of electricity even in the US. In Iran it would likely be much more expensive. Especially since they need help from Russia to even do it at all. Now does Iran have the right to nuclear power? I would say yes they do. Is it in US interests to allow them a virtually unlimited supply of plutonium? Probably not. And look at things from Israel's POV. If Israel acts in their self interest they will go to war with Iran as soon as there is any sign that Iran is attempting to turn plutonium into bombs. Frankly I don't really see why Iran would want to get involved with the Israel-Palestine issue. It's not really any of their business. But if Iran claims that as soon as they have a nuke they are going to attack Israel with it then, well, we really are talking about an actual nuclear war. The first real one in human history. It's strongly in the interest of the rest of the world to make sure that doesn't happen. Definitely worth going to (conventional) war to avoid.
Besides the US, who else has motive to frame him? The US is the foreign power that he released classified documents about, including the "collateral murder" video. The US Government are the only ones who have any serious motive to discredit and/or kill him. And they are also the only ones who might be worried about his insurance file. I really think that insurance file was smart. It may be his only chance at staying alive. Assuming that the CIA/NSA can't neutralize that threat. He's dealing with military types now. They don't kid around. Getting imprisoned as a rapist and/or pedophile or whatever should be the least of his worries.
Agreed. This was in itself a punishment. Discrediting him. Destroying his reputation. But it was also a warning: "We can get to you. If we can do this think of what else we can do." But they haven't done it yet. But if they ever do (and they will be a lot less obvious about an actual assassination), he will be lacking in public symptathy for being an alleged serial rapist and a hater of women. People who suspect the US of being responsible for the suicide or random traffic accident will just not care as much either way. They have shown some restraint so far. They could have accused him of being a child rapist and a pedophile and then killed him a couple of months later, leaving a long detailed suicide note with his signature. I don't know what I would do if I were Assange. I suspect that at this point he will suffer an accidental death or suicide within the next 6 months no matter what he does. I think that the CIA and NSA is going to work on the issue of the insurance file for a while first.
It takes quite a heap of stupid to release thousands of pages of classified documents.
No. That just takes courage and ideals. He will be found dead soon. Maybe suicide or a car accident. Who knows. And people like you will not suspect anything fishy. "Oh well. He got what he deserved." is what you will say. And you will deny as ridiculous any US Government involvement in his death. All I can say is I hope he is ready to release his password. The only reason he is not dead already is because of that. I think the US Government is making a clear statement here: "Maybe we can't kill you because of your insurance file, but we can imprison you for the rest of your life, no matter where you try to run." People like you don't seem to get that the US Government is taking this *very* seriously. Assange is considered a threat to national security. They will take whatever measures possible to silence him. Period.
So how do you know so much about this? I mean, you seem so certain. Have you ever actually raped someone? If I were to rape someone it wouldn't have anything to do with dominance or control. Only certain types of people are into that. People like cops for instance. For me it would be both a way of getting sex from a very beautiful girl that I could normally never, ever have and simultaneously a way of punishing not only her individually but all the hot girls who have ever rejected me etc. That's what I call a *real* motive. Not this stupid pseudo-psychological dominance-control bullshit. Nothing in the real world involving human motivation is ever as simple as that. I'm not even sure how it is supposed to console the victim. It doesn't really make any sense at all. The truth is nobody knows the reason why a person decides to rape someone except the rapist himself. I can only assume that there could be a near infinite number of different reasons depending on the individual. In my case it would be about an ugly person taking revenge on a beautiful person for a lifetime of being ignored and rejected and also getting some sex with an actual living pretty girl, but it could be lots of different reasons. It really is a combination of violence and sex. So motivations will always be complex, but I think there will usually be some level of hatred or resentment and some level of sexual desire as well.
As for this particular case, I'll have to see what, if anything, comes out. It could be a deliberate smear campaign against him, though I'm a bit doubtful of that as the risk of backfire would be pretty large.
Backfire? You must be kidding. Lots of people on slashdot seem to automatically believe he is guilty. Unless you could somehow catch the US agents red handed this sort of scheme has no chance of "backfiring". They have succeeded. Assange has already been discredited. At least on slashdot. Personally I don't like or dislike Assange. I just think this is the most obvious setup I have ever seen. Coincidences like this just don't happen. Period. There is plenty of evidence here against the US Government. It's just all circumstantial.
So they are claiming that he is not violent, but that he is guilty of a "violent sexual assault", and that they are not pressing charges? They are contradicting themselves. Sorry. I don't buy it. They have already made the big step of publicly accusing Assange. If he really raped them, they wouldn't be backing down for no reason. I can't believe that anyone could really be stupid enough to even consider believing these charges under the circumstances. I guess the US government is just having a very, very, very lucky day. Some people are saying the US government wouldn't be so stupid as to try something so blatant and obvious, but apparently it does not seem so blatant and obvious to many of you. I guess you really can never lose, not just money but anything, by underestimating the intelligence of the general public. You just can't. Ever. And whatever US agency is behind this is well aware of this fact.
You mean when it's released on Freenet from a USB drive at a crowded internet Cafe in Myanmar using TOR and/or a chain of anonymous proxies? Yup. That person is definitely going to prison. Good luck with that.
Of course, he may also have went into a raping tour in Sweden with the idea that he would just claim it is a CIA conspiracy should he face charges.
That's not much of a plan. He could claim it was a conspiracy all he wanted but Swedish law would still convict him of the crimes if there were enough evidence. That is exactly what would have happened here if there had been enough evidence or if it were part of the US strategy. Apparently the strategy wasn't to actually send him to prison for multiple counts of rape, which is surprising. Discrediting him was deemed sufficient for the time being. I don't think they want him in prison. I think they want him dead. People will be less outraged at the assassination if they regard him as an evil rapist. Most people will believe that it was just a car accident anyway, but some percentage of those who don't will be pacified by thinking of him as a rapist. And I suspect that if he really did go an a rape spree there would be plenty of evidence. While I can't imagine the state of mind of someone who is being hunted by what is probably the largest intelligence organization in the world, I highly doubt a "raping tour" would figure anywhere in your plans.
The two women who went to the police have stated that the U.S. Government is not involved
What did you expect them to say? "Yes, we are being paid to do this by the CIA. Oops. I guess we don't get paid now since we admitted it." The US Government was counting on people like you being gullible and frankly stupid enough to believe the charges despite the insane coincidence. When it comes to rape it's always guilty unless proven innocent. Just being accused of it will normally destroy your life. It's only because not everyone is as gullible as you that he won't necessarily have these accusations hanging over him for the rest of his (very short) life. I'm sure you will also believe it when he is arrested for being a terrorist and a traitor working with the Taliban and is found to be a member of Al Queda as well.
#3 doesn't make any sense if you live in the real world. Assange is a human being just like you or me. No one likes to be accused of rape. It is one of those guilty until proven innocent things like molesting children. No sane person would intentionally scheme to have themselves falsely accused of it. It is exactly what you would use to frame someone though. Only the timing is suspicious to people. Very suspicious. Coincidences like this simply don't happen in the real world. The CIA are obviously counting on the general public being stupid and gullible. I wonder if the Swedish attorney general is as well. I suspect what really happened is when these women were cross examined their stories were just not convincing. And when the women realized that they weren't being believed they withdrew, secure in the knowledge that they would still get some amount of CIA funds just for the accusations. It is funny that the US Government agency considered it necessary to recruit 2 accusers. I guess they thought that would be more convincing. They neglected to consider that it makes the whole thing even more unlikely. Assange may be somewhat suicidal with how he has crossed the US Military (they will get their revenge), but he would not be so stupid as to rape, not just one, but two women while being actively hunted by the CIA etc. I have little doubt that very soon Assange is going to be in an unfortunate accident. His plane will crash or he will be in a fatal car accident with a blood alcohol level off the charts and lots of illicit drugs in his system. Maybe there will also be a kilo of heroin in his glove compartment and a stack of kiddie porn and bomb making equipment in his trunk.
It had to be said. You can try to control information, but it will slip through your fingers. That is in the very nature of information. It is a property inherent to it. If you want to keep something secret you have to take extreme precautions. Especially if a leak will cost lives. The US military is responsible for this leak for not keeping that information secure. And that's the bottom line. Maybe they shouldn't have even stored it in written form if it was so sensitive. They were relying on security through obscurity. Of course, if the military had brought those murderers to justice themselves and even released honest information on the massacre themselves maybe Bradley Manning wouldn't have felt it necessary to release that video. But the military chose to ignore the heinous murders and not every soldier is without a conscience. In the end one safety against military massacres is the consciences of the soldiers themselves. I do think that soldiers usually are of a higher moral fabric than police for instance. On certain slashdot threads in the past about a hypothetical scenario of the US military being ordered to attack US civilians several soldiers posted that they wouldn't do it. Or even that they would switch sides in any such battle. That's what happens in a revolution. That's how the vastly outnumbered and outgunned Fidel Castro managed to overthrow Batista. He won over the government soldiers themselves.
If they were all killed how do you know the story in such detail? Isn't that kind of information classified anyway? And it took an hour for "hundreds" of Taliban to kill just 4 US soldiers even though they were "surrounded"? I can't picture that. Were they armed with toothpicks or something? Why am I not buying this story? Do you have a source? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Why would the Mossad care? This has nothing to do with them. You think the Israeli government cares about what happens in Afghanistan? And you think the CIA would actually consult them even if they did care? If you think that you are seriously delusional. CIA assassins are probably right now preparing to kill everyone having any involvement with wikileaks whatsoever. And probably friends and relatives of said people as well since they don't know who exactly is holding the AES key. More likely they will torture the first few victims to find out everyone who has a copy of the AES key and then eliminate those people.
Actually FreeNet is only meant for plausible deniability. It was intended to help you in a trial kind of situation. So that they can't prove it was you. It was not intended to be robust enough to protect you from large governments who want you dead. If it were my life on the line, I would publish on freenet, but I would do it from a busy internet cafe in a country with no diplomatic relations or extradition treaty with the US and where most people don't speak English or any language that is commonly spoken as a second language in the US. And I would use Tor and maybe a short chain of anonymous proxies. Or as someone else said you could just use some poor soon-to-be-dead SOB's wifi connection, preferably by cracking his WEP key as opposed to using one that is unsecured. Ideally some kind of LEO or politician or just someone you don't like. Although it would be safer to use a wifi connection in a foreign country. Frankly, if any of the wikileak principles really wanted to stay alive they would have taken great pains to stay truly anonymous. You can't release embarrassing/damaging information about major governments and not expect said governments to come after you and kill you. Probably after they torture you to try to get any information they want from you. I don't think I would sleep well at night knowing that an endless stream of CIA assassins are going to be coming after me until I am dead.
The danger is not revealing cover-ups. The danger is some of the ancillary information also revealed.
This "ancillary information". Have you seen it for yourself? Because it is awfully convenient that the same release of information on the cover-up of a heinous multiple murder, including the injury and attempted murder of young children, also happens to have information dangerous to the lives of friendlies on the ground. Very convenient for the US government, wouldn't you say? I mean they would look like monsters trying to nail the people responsible for leaking information on their little war crime and its cover-up. Boy were they lucky! Sorry, but I don't buy it. How about some evidence of these people who have been killed by the opposite side due to the release of this information? Haven't seen any of that. Not that I think the US military couldn't manufacture some. All of this is a red herring to distract people from the US military war crime so clearly shown on that video. And it seems to be doing an excellent job.
If it were released on video complete with comments from the soldier murderers (in your example it would be the ones controlling the drone) that clearly show a disregard for civilian casualties including children, then yes I think most Americans (who aren't brainwashed neocon fascists) would give a damn. Obviously the US government agrees with that. Otherwise they wouldn't be going on witch hunts to try to nail those responsible for uncovering the cover-up.
Wow. You are the first neocon to even admit or mention the fact that the names were blacked out. So can you cite an example of a name that wasn't blacked out? Or a single example of an afghan who was outed and killed? Please, do tell.
Your wikipedia link mentions nothing about a 24 hour period. That is *not* the standard in the US. It is the standard in the UK however. So much for it being the "shortest time in the western world". If they had enough evidence for an arrest then they should have arrested him, but indefinite detention without cause is a violation of international law and human rights. They didn't arrest him because they had no evidence against him whatsoever. They were just going on a fishing expedition and harassing him. Abusing their powers.
Slashdot Mirror
2. Iran - was a moderate country that nationalized their oil in 50s (like a lot of countries at the time). BP (the company!) was butt hurt and cried, US installed their puppet government and BP got their oil access back.
The US was so altruistic. To overthrow a government just so British Petroleum could profit. Admittedly the UK was certainly our ally, but still. That is rather extreme. Maybe that's the problem. The US is too altruistic. Always putting others before ourselves.
Can you be more specific about in what ways France and Germany are similar culturally? While I have never spent any time in Germany, I have spent some in France. I just don't see much cultural similarity. In fact it's really hard for me to think of two European cultures that are less similar. For one thing French culture would never have allowed going on a worldwide rampage trying to take over the whole planet and exterminating every one who looks different from your ideal. French people are laid back and not particularly obedient. They just want to be happy enjoying their beautiful women, their beautiful language, and their delicious food. Germans are good with science and technology and manufacturing. In fact they have always been one of the leaders in those areas. They are also one of the more robotic and hard working cultures in the world. Similar to Japan in that sense. I don't really see how the two cultures could be more different.
These explanations of why Hitler was so popular and was elected president are overly simplistic. It would be like offering an explanation of why Obama won the last election. Any such explanation is highly suspect. Probably each German had their own reasons for electing him. It is extremely difficult to deconstruct all those reasons and offer up one particular overriding factor. Germany was no third world country. If they had been they could not have conquered most of Europe. They were a major industrial power with a huge manufacturing base. And being poor isn't much of an excuse for genocide on a scale never seen before or since or trying to literally conquer the whole world. I've traveled to and even lived in some very poor countries where the average monthly wage is under $100 per month, and I didn't notice any Hitlers exterminating "inferior" races or even planning to conquer the world. Germany is the only country in the modern world that has ever been quite that naughty. In fact I think it's fair to say that the Germans of that time were pretty much the definition of evil. That's what makes them so great for computer games. It's rare that such purity of moral blacks and whites exists in the real world. You have to remember that they actually voted for Hitler. It would be the equivalent of the US voting for a skinhead KKK leader with real plans to attack and conquer every other country in the world. Can you imagine if Hitler had gotten his hands on nukes? And he was working on it. I don't mean to compare the leader of Iran to Hitler. The only thing they really have in common is the promise to exterminate all or most Jews. If Iran really did rain nukes down on Israel and kill 99% of the population there I wonder if that would satisfy them. Probably if they also nuked NYC that would be enough Jew killing. Unlike the Third Reich, I doubt if they would devote much energy to individually tracking down and exterminating every jew on the planet. And they probably wouldn't bother with gypsies or homosexuals at all.
Nuclear is not the cheapest form of electricity even in the US. In Iran it would likely be much more expensive. Especially since they need help from Russia to even do it at all. Now does Iran have the right to nuclear power? I would say yes they do. Is it in US interests to allow them a virtually unlimited supply of plutonium? Probably not. And look at things from Israel's POV. If Israel acts in their self interest they will go to war with Iran as soon as there is any sign that Iran is attempting to turn plutonium into bombs. Frankly I don't really see why Iran would want to get involved with the Israel-Palestine issue. It's not really any of their business. But if Iran claims that as soon as they have a nuke they are going to attack Israel with it then, well, we really are talking about an actual nuclear war. The first real one in human history. It's strongly in the interest of the rest of the world to make sure that doesn't happen. Definitely worth going to (conventional) war to avoid.
Besides the US, who else has motive to frame him? The US is the foreign power that he released classified documents about, including the "collateral murder" video. The US Government are the only ones who have any serious motive to discredit and/or kill him. And they are also the only ones who might be worried about his insurance file. I really think that insurance file was smart. It may be his only chance at staying alive. Assuming that the CIA/NSA can't neutralize that threat. He's dealing with military types now. They don't kid around. Getting imprisoned as a rapist and/or pedophile or whatever should be the least of his worries.
Agreed. This was in itself a punishment. Discrediting him. Destroying his reputation. But it was also a warning: "We can get to you. If we can do this think of what else we can do." But they haven't done it yet. But if they ever do (and they will be a lot less obvious about an actual assassination), he will be lacking in public symptathy for being an alleged serial rapist and a hater of women. People who suspect the US of being responsible for the suicide or random traffic accident will just not care as much either way. They have shown some restraint so far. They could have accused him of being a child rapist and a pedophile and then killed him a couple of months later, leaving a long detailed suicide note with his signature. I don't know what I would do if I were Assange. I suspect that at this point he will suffer an accidental death or suicide within the next 6 months no matter what he does. I think that the CIA and NSA is going to work on the issue of the insurance file for a while first.
It takes quite a heap of stupid to release thousands of pages of classified documents.
No. That just takes courage and ideals. He will be found dead soon. Maybe suicide or a car accident. Who knows. And people like you will not suspect anything fishy. "Oh well. He got what he deserved." is what you will say. And you will deny as ridiculous any US Government involvement in his death. All I can say is I hope he is ready to release his password. The only reason he is not dead already is because of that. I think the US Government is making a clear statement here: "Maybe we can't kill you because of your insurance file, but we can imprison you for the rest of your life, no matter where you try to run." People like you don't seem to get that the US Government is taking this *very* seriously. Assange is considered a threat to national security. They will take whatever measures possible to silence him. Period.
So how do you know so much about this? I mean, you seem so certain. Have you ever actually raped someone? If I were to rape someone it wouldn't have anything to do with dominance or control. Only certain types of people are into that. People like cops for instance. For me it would be both a way of getting sex from a very beautiful girl that I could normally never, ever have and simultaneously a way of punishing not only her individually but all the hot girls who have ever rejected me etc. That's what I call a *real* motive. Not this stupid pseudo-psychological dominance-control bullshit. Nothing in the real world involving human motivation is ever as simple as that. I'm not even sure how it is supposed to console the victim. It doesn't really make any sense at all. The truth is nobody knows the reason why a person decides to rape someone except the rapist himself. I can only assume that there could be a near infinite number of different reasons depending on the individual. In my case it would be about an ugly person taking revenge on a beautiful person for a lifetime of being ignored and rejected and also getting some sex with an actual living pretty girl, but it could be lots of different reasons. It really is a combination of violence and sex. So motivations will always be complex, but I think there will usually be some level of hatred or resentment and some level of sexual desire as well.
As for this particular case, I'll have to see what, if anything, comes out. It could be a deliberate smear campaign against him, though I'm a bit doubtful of that as the risk of backfire would be pretty large.
Backfire? You must be kidding. Lots of people on slashdot seem to automatically believe he is guilty. Unless you could somehow catch the US agents red handed this sort of scheme has no chance of "backfiring". They have succeeded. Assange has already been discredited. At least on slashdot. Personally I don't like or dislike Assange. I just think this is the most obvious setup I have ever seen. Coincidences like this just don't happen. Period. There is plenty of evidence here against the US Government. It's just all circumstantial.
So they are claiming that he is not violent, but that he is guilty of a "violent sexual assault", and that they are not pressing charges? They are contradicting themselves. Sorry. I don't buy it. They have already made the big step of publicly accusing Assange. If he really raped them, they wouldn't be backing down for no reason. I can't believe that anyone could really be stupid enough to even consider believing these charges under the circumstances. I guess the US government is just having a very, very, very lucky day. Some people are saying the US government wouldn't be so stupid as to try something so blatant and obvious, but apparently it does not seem so blatant and obvious to many of you. I guess you really can never lose, not just money but anything, by underestimating the intelligence of the general public. You just can't. Ever. And whatever US agency is behind this is well aware of this fact.
You mean when it's released on Freenet from a USB drive at a crowded internet Cafe in Myanmar using TOR and/or a chain of anonymous proxies? Yup. That person is definitely going to prison. Good luck with that.
Of course, he may also have went into a raping tour in Sweden with the idea that he would just claim it is a CIA conspiracy should he face charges.
That's not much of a plan. He could claim it was a conspiracy all he wanted but Swedish law would still convict him of the crimes if there were enough evidence. That is exactly what would have happened here if there had been enough evidence or if it were part of the US strategy. Apparently the strategy wasn't to actually send him to prison for multiple counts of rape, which is surprising. Discrediting him was deemed sufficient for the time being. I don't think they want him in prison. I think they want him dead. People will be less outraged at the assassination if they regard him as an evil rapist. Most people will believe that it was just a car accident anyway, but some percentage of those who don't will be pacified by thinking of him as a rapist. And I suspect that if he really did go an a rape spree there would be plenty of evidence. While I can't imagine the state of mind of someone who is being hunted by what is probably the largest intelligence organization in the world, I highly doubt a "raping tour" would figure anywhere in your plans.
Do you in fact work for the US government? How stupid do you think we are?
The two women who went to the police have stated that the U.S. Government is not involved
What did you expect them to say? "Yes, we are being paid to do this by the CIA. Oops. I guess we don't get paid now since we admitted it." The US Government was counting on people like you being gullible and frankly stupid enough to believe the charges despite the insane coincidence. When it comes to rape it's always guilty unless proven innocent. Just being accused of it will normally destroy your life. It's only because not everyone is as gullible as you that he won't necessarily have these accusations hanging over him for the rest of his (very short) life. I'm sure you will also believe it when he is arrested for being a terrorist and a traitor working with the Taliban and is found to be a member of Al Queda as well.
#3 doesn't make any sense if you live in the real world. Assange is a human being just like you or me. No one likes to be accused of rape. It is one of those guilty until proven innocent things like molesting children. No sane person would intentionally scheme to have themselves falsely accused of it. It is exactly what you would use to frame someone though. Only the timing is suspicious to people. Very suspicious. Coincidences like this simply don't happen in the real world. The CIA are obviously counting on the general public being stupid and gullible. I wonder if the Swedish attorney general is as well. I suspect what really happened is when these women were cross examined their stories were just not convincing. And when the women realized that they weren't being believed they withdrew, secure in the knowledge that they would still get some amount of CIA funds just for the accusations. It is funny that the US Government agency considered it necessary to recruit 2 accusers. I guess they thought that would be more convincing. They neglected to consider that it makes the whole thing even more unlikely. Assange may be somewhat suicidal with how he has crossed the US Military (they will get their revenge), but he would not be so stupid as to rape, not just one, but two women while being actively hunted by the CIA etc. I have little doubt that very soon Assange is going to be in an unfortunate accident. His plane will crash or he will be in a fatal car accident with a blood alcohol level off the charts and lots of illicit drugs in his system. Maybe there will also be a kilo of heroin in his glove compartment and a stack of kiddie porn and bomb making equipment in his trunk.
It had to be said. You can try to control information, but it will slip through your fingers. That is in the very nature of information. It is a property inherent to it. If you want to keep something secret you have to take extreme precautions. Especially if a leak will cost lives. The US military is responsible for this leak for not keeping that information secure. And that's the bottom line. Maybe they shouldn't have even stored it in written form if it was so sensitive. They were relying on security through obscurity. Of course, if the military had brought those murderers to justice themselves and even released honest information on the massacre themselves maybe Bradley Manning wouldn't have felt it necessary to release that video. But the military chose to ignore the heinous murders and not every soldier is without a conscience. In the end one safety against military massacres is the consciences of the soldiers themselves. I do think that soldiers usually are of a higher moral fabric than police for instance. On certain slashdot threads in the past about a hypothetical scenario of the US military being ordered to attack US civilians several soldiers posted that they wouldn't do it. Or even that they would switch sides in any such battle. That's what happens in a revolution. That's how the vastly outnumbered and outgunned Fidel Castro managed to overthrow Batista. He won over the government soldiers themselves.
If they were all killed how do you know the story in such detail? Isn't that kind of information classified anyway? And it took an hour for "hundreds" of Taliban to kill just 4 US soldiers even though they were "surrounded"? I can't picture that. Were they armed with toothpicks or something? Why am I not buying this story? Do you have a source? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I think if we were really at war with Russia or China a list of Afghan informants would be the least of our worries.
Why would the Mossad care? This has nothing to do with them. You think the Israeli government cares about what happens in Afghanistan? And you think the CIA would actually consult them even if they did care? If you think that you are seriously delusional. CIA assassins are probably right now preparing to kill everyone having any involvement with wikileaks whatsoever. And probably friends and relatives of said people as well since they don't know who exactly is holding the AES key. More likely they will torture the first few victims to find out everyone who has a copy of the AES key and then eliminate those people.
Okay. I'll bite. Where are these full names, locations, and GPS coordinates? You say they were released, right? So let's have them.
Actually FreeNet is only meant for plausible deniability. It was intended to help you in a trial kind of situation. So that they can't prove it was you. It was not intended to be robust enough to protect you from large governments who want you dead. If it were my life on the line, I would publish on freenet, but I would do it from a busy internet cafe in a country with no diplomatic relations or extradition treaty with the US and where most people don't speak English or any language that is commonly spoken as a second language in the US. And I would use Tor and maybe a short chain of anonymous proxies. Or as someone else said you could just use some poor soon-to-be-dead SOB's wifi connection, preferably by cracking his WEP key as opposed to using one that is unsecured. Ideally some kind of LEO or politician or just someone you don't like. Although it would be safer to use a wifi connection in a foreign country. Frankly, if any of the wikileak principles really wanted to stay alive they would have taken great pains to stay truly anonymous. You can't release embarrassing/damaging information about major governments and not expect said governments to come after you and kill you. Probably after they torture you to try to get any information they want from you. I don't think I would sleep well at night knowing that an endless stream of CIA assassins are going to be coming after me until I am dead.
The danger is not revealing cover-ups. The danger is some of the ancillary information also revealed.
This "ancillary information". Have you seen it for yourself? Because it is awfully convenient that the same release of information on the cover-up of a heinous multiple murder, including the injury and attempted murder of young children, also happens to have information dangerous to the lives of friendlies on the ground. Very convenient for the US government, wouldn't you say? I mean they would look like monsters trying to nail the people responsible for leaking information on their little war crime and its cover-up. Boy were they lucky! Sorry, but I don't buy it. How about some evidence of these people who have been killed by the opposite side due to the release of this information? Haven't seen any of that. Not that I think the US military couldn't manufacture some. All of this is a red herring to distract people from the US military war crime so clearly shown on that video. And it seems to be doing an excellent job.
If it were released on video complete with comments from the soldier murderers (in your example it would be the ones controlling the drone) that clearly show a disregard for civilian casualties including children, then yes I think most Americans (who aren't brainwashed neocon fascists) would give a damn. Obviously the US government agrees with that. Otherwise they wouldn't be going on witch hunts to try to nail those responsible for uncovering the cover-up.
Wow. You are the first neocon to even admit or mention the fact that the names were blacked out. So can you cite an example of a name that wasn't blacked out? Or a single example of an afghan who was outed and killed? Please, do tell.
Your wikipedia link mentions nothing about a 24 hour period. That is *not* the standard in the US. It is the standard in the UK however. So much for it being the "shortest time in the western world". If they had enough evidence for an arrest then they should have arrested him, but indefinite detention without cause is a violation of international law and human rights. They didn't arrest him because they had no evidence against him whatsoever. They were just going on a fishing expedition and harassing him. Abusing their powers.