Let's put the personal jabs aside and get back to the topic, gang.
Aaw Diemen, I was just meaning to ask financeguy how Irish folks feel taking billions of bail-out from Nazis to support their ongoing turbo-capitalism game. But I appreciate you step in, alright, back to the topic.. let´s post some newsworthy question:
btw, I haven´t seen any leaks from Irish embassy.
It's tempting to think of Julian Assange as an enigmatic international criminal mastermind. Romantic, even. And he certainly cultivates that image himself, with the wild hair and the comedy sunglasses. But Assange is no mastermind: his vanity, his hubris and his insatiable desire to see the world burn have led him to make a fatal, final error. As a result, the Wikileaks project is doomed.
At the tail-end of last month, Assange indicated to a journalist that he had information about a major US bank that would cause a scandal to rival Enron. That was a catastrophic misjudgment. Because now, one by one, every financial institution connected to Assange is severing his ability to finance Wikileaks. Each is giving very slightly different reasons - usually connected to terms of service and "illegal activity" - but all of their motivations are the same: in the middle of a recession, it would be disastrous to their own businesses should Assange attempt to take out a major bank.
For all the mirrors around the internet replicating Wikileaks's content, the organisation will fall without the financial resources to continue sifting through its vast repository of documents.
Corporate America has swung into action against Wikileaks, acting swiftly and brutally. PayPal and MasterCard have now withdrawn their services and Assange's Swiss bank account has been frozen. The cost to Wikileaks in lost donations is already significant. And while this isn't the first time Wikileaks has had its income threatened - Moneybookers, a British payments company, shut down its account back in October - this time the financial services companies are acting as one. That spells disaster for a site that operates on donations from the public.
Banks and payment services aren't the only ones gunning for Assange, of course: besides Amazon, which withdrew Wikileaks's hosting service, even Twitter has been accused of censoring their trending topics so that Wikileaks does not appear as one of the most popular current subjects of discussion. (If true, that will disappoint and annoy its most vocal fans, who tend to towards a Left-leaning, utopian vision of the internet that approves of Assange's version of terrorism.) But it's the financial services companies that will take him out.
Assange has a strange, naive understanding of the word "transparency" that seems to mean "absolutely everything out in the open". But government and business cannot function without a healthy level of obfuscation and euphemism - a truth so obvious it should not need to be stated. In truth, Wikileaks was always an unsustainable project. In a capitalist democracy, leaks are supposed to act as checks and balances; they're not supposed to be the mechanism by which the whole system operates, nor the system in fear of which it is held back from progress and profit.
But then, Julian Assange cannot be judged by usual rational standards, because he's a clearly a much more dangerous kind of whistleblower than your usual here's-a-DVD-for-a-few-grand disgruntled ex-employee. Assange is an ideologue who thinks he can remould the world as he imagines it ought to be. Worryingly, given the power of the internet, he's almost right. But fortunately, given the level of his self-delusion, he's making mistakes enough that the powers that be have a pretext to stamp on him.
Now that he's alienated the government, big business and, increasingly, the public, Assange will fade rapidly into obscurity. But we can't afford to get smug just yet: Assange was arrested in London this morning, but should he be found guilty of rape and incarcerated, more super-leakers will rise in his place, emboldened by his achievements and hungry for the same kind of counter-cultural fame.
It will take a truly Herculean - and harmonious - effort by government and businesses to keep these dangerous extremists in check. But at least now we know how to go about it. Follow the money.
Milo Yiannopoulos will be interviewing PayPal's vice president of product development on stage tomorrow at the LeWeb conference in Paris. You can watch the interview, which will include questions about PayPal's decision to suspend Wikileaks's account, here at 11:55 UK time.
Whether he raped anyone or not, the issue is that at least in interviews I've seen, Assange has stated that he puts himself out in public as the face of WikiLeaks to take the heat off the site and to draw all the fire for it. Ego complex aside, he's been very good at doing the direct opposite recently.
well Earnie, what do you think about President Sarkozy cuddling with Lula from Brazil, about spying on the UN, and about Sudan and the strategy of keeping the Nato stuff in Poland secret (Clinton including the "right replies" to journalists requests in her cable)?
My opinion is Russia found it all out pretty soon, they got a secret service too.
oh there's been plenty of lives lost, but not due to Wikileaks
WikiLeaks released a dozen new diplomatic cables, its first publication in more than 24 hours, including the details of a NATO defense plan for Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania that prompted an indignant response from the Russian envoy to the alliance.
Attorney Gemma Lindfield, acting on behalf of the Swedish authorities, outlined one allegation of rape, two allegations of molestation and one of unlawful coercion stemming from Assange's separate sexual encounters in August with two women in Sweden.
Lindfield said one woman accused Assange of pinning her down and refusing to use a condom on the night of Aug. 14 in Stockholm. That woman also accused of Assange of molesting her in a way "designed to violate her sexual integrity" several days later.
A second woman accused Assange of having sex with her without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.
Assange's lawyers have claimed the accusations stem from a "dispute over consensual but unprotected sex" and say the women only made the claims after finding out about each other's relationships with Assange. WikiLeaks lawyer Mark Stephens says the case has taken on political overtones — a claim Swedish officials have rejected.
Also, I actually don't think the charges against him have anything to do with Wikileaks.
[/url]
No, nothing to do with WikiLeaks whatsoever (unless you love jumping to a good conspiracy.) They look like they could well be bullshit though, on the limited information given anyway. I've seen a few US news articles/sites that do seem to (likely, deliberately) blur the reporting though.
I loved whoever it was (Fox?) saying that "the international manhunt for Julian Assange is now over". What? Everyone has known exactly where he is this whole time. No-one was looking for him. There was no "manhunt".
11.10 am The cyberwar over WikiLeaks shows every sign of escalating further. My colleague Josh Halliday has more on the attack on MasterCard:
Mastercard, the multinational payments network which yesterday throttled money transfers to WikiLeaks, was this morning brought offline following an attack by internet avengers, Anonymous.
The website of Mastercard would not load just before 10am on Wednesday; an error page cited a "DNS fail". (Here's some technical background)
Anonymous, the group of "hacktivists" vaguely linked to the influential internet messageboard 4Chan, has been targeting companies that have severed ties with Assange or WikiLeaks with so-called "distributed denial of service attacks" (DDoS). Such attacks are illegal and have become something of a subplot in WikiLeaks ongoing release of US embassy cables.
10.57am: Operation Payback, a hacking group that claimed credit for
taking down the website of a Swiss Bank that cut off funds to Julian Assange, appears to have struck again.
MasterCard's website is currently unavailable after a similar attack in protest at its decision to cut payments to WikiLeaks, according Business Insider.
Mastercard.com is down, and Anon_operation just tweeted that it's due to a DDOS attack. Of course, Mastercard is one of the payment services that cut off the ability to donate to Wikileaks.
Absolutely, in fact that person might just edge out O'Reiley as her #1 hero.And of course if this were some Iranian soldier/website combo leaking 250,000 cables detailing evidence of nuclear progress, terrorism support, election corruption etc, those people would be universally hailed as heroes, with AchtungBono leading the charge.
Agree 100%Still haven't made my mind up on exactly where I really sit, overall, but the two extreme sides of the argument, as usual, need to sit down and shut up. Julian Assange is not a terrorist who needs to be shot. And indiscriminate public flooding of private government documents is not some holy act ushering in a new age of brilliant transparency.
I think that these are all example of realpolitik, not particularly surprising and hardly shocking or anything of that nature. It's how the world works, and rightly so.