icey otm
― k3vin k., Monday, 6 December 2010 12:45 (thirteen years ago) link
if we or Australia or whoever bend the rules to nail him then we'll basically be admitting that we were kidding about this whole democracy thing from the get go
well, that and the torture and the secret overseas prisons and the detention with no trial..
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 6 December 2010 12:59 (thirteen years ago) link
I had another thought about all this. Basically, the diplomatic cables database was accessible by something like 3,000,000 people. Being realistic, at least one of those must be in the pay of some evil foreign power, which means that non-US intelligence services almost certainly already have the juicy information from them. So all this flap is not about the enemies of America having the information, it's about members of the public knowing what their governments are getting up to.
― The New Dirty Vicar, Monday, 6 December 2010 15:43 (thirteen years ago) link
No, gbx, my main thing is the whole circumstance seems really really sketchy surrounding Manning. Why on earth would you tell a random stranger you met in a chat room that you had tons of secret files you were about to leak? It's like robbing a bank, skipping town, getting lost, and telling your entire story to someone you stop to ask for directions, who just happens to be an undercover cop. Just all seems really fishy.
― Telephoneface (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 6 December 2010 15:51 (thirteen years ago) link
http://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/status/9251635779866625
Inexplicable: I recently won in court to stop my book "America by Heart" from being leaked,but US Govt can't stop Wikileaks' treasonous act?9:25 AM Nov 29th via Twitter for BlackBerry®
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 15:53 (thirteen years ago) link
If dude is really guilty, he should pay the price. Also Im not on Wikileaks's d**k. It just seems dumb to wholeheartedly take the gov'ts side when there are members of congress saying that we should execute an Australian for "treason" against the US.
― Telephoneface (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 6 December 2010 15:57 (thirteen years ago) link
all this flap is not about the enemies of America having the information, it's about members of the public knowing what their governments are getting up to.
THANK YOU. EXACTLY.
"as long as powerful people have information, then i personally don't need to know that information"
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:05 (thirteen years ago) link
lol sarah palin really just does not understand anything ever
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:06 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.interpol.int/public/data/wanted/notices/data/2010/86/2010_52486.asp
― Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:06 (thirteen years ago) link
who gives a good goddamn about sarah palin. seriously.
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:07 (thirteen years ago) link
o come on u know u luv her
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:07 (thirteen years ago) link
u betcha
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:08 (thirteen years ago) link
http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/11726665294020608
RT @sarahpalinusa "I can see Julian Assange from my house" #wikileaksabout 6 hours ago via web
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:09 (thirteen years ago) link
AB---yr analogy doesn't quite work. Lamo wasn't "a stranger who happens to be an undercover cop." He was a guy that Manning allegedly sought out, specifically, because he figured he might be sympathetic/impressed/helpful/whatever. At least that's the story, right? So, for me, it comes down to which is more plausible---govt spends two years setting up an elaborate hoax in which it deliberately feeds stuff to Manning, knowing that he's likely to blow the whistle, and then arranges things so that he's in a position to brag to Lamo. OR: Manning had nothing to do with it, and a gov't operative bragged to Lamo. Or...I dunno.
Seems way more plausible to me that a 22yo guy who had done something kinda major might eventually crack under the pressure of keeping it secret. I mean, criminals do this all the time. Cops routinely get leads because someone got drunk and started braggin in a bar or w/e, it's not at all uncommon.
Also, Vicar's point is a good one: the issue here really does seem to be tipping more towards gov't keeping things from the electorate, not from foreign powers (who, duh, have intelligence agencies of their very own).
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:09 (thirteen years ago) link
glad she stopped people from blowing the whistle on her book ;)
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:10 (thirteen years ago) link
wikileaks twitter on fire
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:11 (thirteen years ago) link
xps, obv
and AB if you think i'm "whole-heartedly taking the government's side" then you evidently haven't read a single word i've written on this thread. tho, apologies if i've mischaracterized yr position w/r/t WL's dick.
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:11 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/7bg5kc
this is sorta crazy
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:18 (thirteen years ago) link
this dude is napster so hes going down, yet
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:21 (thirteen years ago) link
Accepted, gbx. And yeah, I apologize for saying that about you as well. This whole thing seems to get polarized, lot of attacks on ppl in this thread (and all over the interwebs) for being in love w Wikileaks/Assange. We should be able to discuss official/media response wo instantly being labeled a Wikileaks/Ron Paul nut.
He was a guy that Manning allegedly sought out, specifically, because he figured he might be sympathetic/impressed/helpful/whatever. At least that's the story, right?
The story is that he contacted Lamo after he leaked the information to Wikileaks, and that he basically contacted him to boast about it. Also, according to Lamo, Manning found him by searching for the word "Wikileaks" on Twitter, which led him to a tweet Lamo had written that included the word "WikiLeaks." I don't have any theories about 'what really happened' or whatever, just saying the whole story sounded weird from the get go.
― Telephoneface (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:22 (thirteen years ago) link
yes, exactly, that IS where he slipped up. dude i know you're all up on WL's dick or w/e, but the fact that manning was a g-d intelligence analyst in the fucking army means that it is actually against the rules that he knew about to leak classified documents. you can think he's a hero, you can think that the sentence he's facing is unjust or immoral, but you can't pretend that it's anything other than exactly what you'd expect to happen. that greenwald piece (tl;dr) suggests, very briefly, that he's a fall guy who likely couldn't have had access to that sort of intel (200k documents is a lot, tbh) and that this whooooooole thing is some elaborate way of dissuading future informants by making an example. maybe. but it seems like greenwald settles on manning being a hero, though, and the rest of that column is about lamo being a dick. fine. agreed. whatever.
the fact remains: if a private in the US army disseminates classified intel, he can be held accountable for his actions. those are the rules. so he got sold out by someone he thought was a journalist. monstrous, sure, but he's still accountable. how is this so hard to understand.
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, December 6, 2010 1:05 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark
heh i thought AB was being serious, because... that IS a thing that you shouldn't do if you leak a million secret documents, right?
― Princess TamTam, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:29 (thirteen years ago) link
agreed it might be weird, but its also hella incomplete, according to greenwald. i just think that the simpler explanation ("22yo cracks under pressure") is more plausible than the alternative ("US govt orchestrates a plan wherein, by intentionally 'leaking' secret documents and causing a furor, it can justify neutralizing WL as threat and dissuade future informants from going to the press"). the morbsian in me thinks that the conspiracy theory isn't actually ~that~ implausible, but the potential for it to backfire seems big enough that i highly doubt that what we're watching unfold is anything that was planned out in advance.
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:29 (thirteen years ago) link
if there's any general lesson to be learned from these cables it's that united states intelligence agencies are totally incapable of engineering anything as clever as that
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:31 (thirteen years ago) link
unless that's what they WANT you to believe
― Yeezy reupholstered my pussy (DJP), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:32 (thirteen years ago) link
tamtam, ha, yeah, exactly, you shouldn't do that. but you also shouldn't brag about crimes in general and criminals get caught that way all the dang time. that this dude would do it over IRC with a guy he presumably knew to be a hacker/supporter of WL makes it even more likely
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:33 (thirteen years ago) link
yes DJP actually it is brilliant. do your work with bumbling ineptitude in case anyone is listening in - this will fool them that you are actually inept
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 6 December 2010 16:37 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034
― not_goodwin, Monday, 6 December 2010 16:55 (thirteen years ago) link
wau, the entire world hates this dude
― Yeezy reupholstered my pussy (DJP), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:02 (thirteen years ago) link
what is the point of this
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:02 (thirteen years ago) link
the leaker kid just seems not that swift
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:03 (thirteen years ago) link
coming soon: ufo cables!?
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:04 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40491489/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:06 (thirteen years ago) link
what is the point of this― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, December 6, 2010 11:02 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, December 6, 2010 11:02 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
piss ppl off i dunno. while i'm sure some of it will be news to potential terrorists, i'm guessing most of it is like 'yeah duh'
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:06 (thirteen years ago) link
feel like in the post wikileaks future you could see leak dumps just posted to bittorrent or whatever and the government will be pining for the days of redactions and a public figure to blame
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:07 (thirteen years ago) link
^^^yeah. Assange's cult of personality routine is their biggest weakness
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:07 (thirteen years ago) link
and liability, etc.
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:08 (thirteen years ago) link
this media storm is basically acting as a proof of concept to potential future leakers
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:08 (thirteen years ago) link
internet payment giant PayPal
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:08 (thirteen years ago) link
The national security sites thing is just a dumb move, it's not even that interesting/surprising by and large, and will only be interpreted as "checklist of terrorist bomb targets". Public opinion is still kinda confused when it comes to Wikileaks but this is the sort of thing that turns it against you. It looks like posturing, basically.
― Matt DC, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:08 (thirteen years ago) link
piss ppl off
I think he already had this covered lol. at this point it's hard not to assume that Assange is a glutton for punishment/pining for martyrdom
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:09 (thirteen years ago) link
put secret shit on the internet and people will take notice
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:09 (thirteen years ago) link
feel like in the post wikileaks future you could see leak dumps just posted to bittorrent or whatever and the government will be pining for the days of redactions and a public figure to blame― ice cr?m, Monday, December 6, 2010 11:07 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark
― ice cr?m, Monday, December 6, 2010 11:07 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark
yup. which is sorta already the case, now that there's tons of mirrors up. plus, his 'nuclear option'
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:09 (thirteen years ago) link
morbsian prediction: site on list gets bombed in US false-flag operation, assange gets brought up on some kind of terrorist-y charges, thrown down the memory hole
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:11 (thirteen years ago) link
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, December 6, 2010 11:29 AM (35 minutes ago)
fwiw i have not read a single person who has suggested the govt was involved in the leaking at all.
― k3vin k., Monday, 6 December 2010 17:11 (thirteen years ago) link
coverup!
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:13 (thirteen years ago) link
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, December 6, 2010 12:11 PM
i think the u.s. can easily spin that leak as terrorist-y without a bombing
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:14 (thirteen years ago) link
Couldn't any idiot with a library card find out where ports, dams, mining operations, and a communications hub are? The first three are on maps, and the fouth, well, any "hub" of ANYTHING needs employees -- a location of national importance probably employs the population of a small Southwestern city.
OH NOES THE PANAMA CANAL IS OF STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE, DON'T PASS IT ON!
― I've got ten bucks. SURPRISE ME. (Laurel), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:14 (thirteen years ago) link
sarah should feed him to grizzlies on her tv show
― ice cr?m, Monday, 6 December 2010 17:15 (thirteen years ago) link
fwiw i have not read a single person who has suggested the govt was involved in the leaking at all.― k3vin k., Monday, December 6, 2010 11:11 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
― k3vin k., Monday, December 6, 2010 11:11 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
did you read the greenwald article that AB linked? he at least suggests it as a possibility
― kanellos (gbx), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:15 (thirteen years ago) link
Couldn't any idiot with a library card find out where ports, dams, mining operations, and a communications hub are?
I would say no, otherwise the State Dept would have just gone to the library
― goat, camel, horse, and water buffalo (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 6 December 2010 17:17 (thirteen years ago) link