More USA documents get released by Wikileaks

[Cacmypants]

Everyone believe what you want, as far as I'm concerned all governments are out to get us. Also, I wouldn't trust any news or media source on this topic in the US if I were you.

[Youmu]

The USA has finally learned something obvious, heh.

 

No matter how confidential and secret you want information to be, sooner or later this stuff WILL spread. And once it does, just let it go on. Once there is a leak, it's impossible to fix.

[Dupin]

I won't deny that Assange has a history of paranoia. While working on the documents, most of the team will get little sleep or food, and be constantly worried about the party van. They are rightfully so, however, because they've annoyed many more powerful organizations than just the US, many of which are less than legal.

 

I wish we could all just make a cake out of rainbow and eat it and eat it and eat it until we are all in love with each other.

There's a drug for that.

[Racheya]

Well if you're systematically making an enemy out of practically every government in the world, you're bound to be paranoid. You're also going to have a lot of smear campaigns and trumped up accusations thrown at you by handsomely paid-for people.

 

Apparently this is what happens if you try to tell the truth =/

[Skeptical]

Well if you're systematically making an enemy out of practically every government in the world, you're bound to be paranoid. You're also going to have a lot of smear campaigns and trumped up accusations thrown at you by handsomely paid-for people.

 

Apparently this is what happens if you try to tell the truth =/

 

It's what happens when you provide the truth and people don't like it.

 

My irritation with those who demand the banning or dismantling of WIkileaks is growing greater by the day. So far I've heard nothing but sensationalist and knee-jerk news reports about how Assange is helping the terrorists win. Funny that the only way that they can get anyone to cooperate anymore is by reminding them that they're working for the enemy. Never mind your own moral compass, because they're the scary enemy, and our government's behavior is far to complex for you, a mere mortal, to understand.

[Furah]

I wish we could all just make a cake out of rainbow and eat it and eat it and eat it until we are all in love with each other.

So do I, unfortunately various governments have made it illegal. Every drug I've tried and the governments say only does harm to you all just make me love the world and want there to be no fighting.

[sees_all1]

Wikileaks still gets no love.

[Skeptical]

Wikileaks still gets no love.

 

.... and the persecution continues.

 

Terrorists, fortunately, have not generally been very good at producing bombs. I'm far more worried about them perfecting the production of large-scale explosive devices to use against established infrastructure than I am about locations of vital infrastructure being posted online: if these organizations are even half-competent, then they will already be aware.

 

What, two(?) bombers on American soil in the past year that have failed to produce an actual explosion?

[Low C]

Wikileaks still gets no love.

 

.... and the persecution continues.

 

Terrorists, fortunately, have not generally been very good at producing bombs. I'm far more worried about them perfecting the production of large-scale explosive devices to use against established infrastructure than I am about locations of vital infrastructure being posted online: if these organizations are even half-competent, then they will already be aware.

 

What, two(?) bombers on American soil in the past year that have failed to produce an actual explosion?

 

Are you referring to the Oklahoma City Bombing which was done by a homegrown terrorist? As well as the World Trade Center Bombing in the early 90's?

 

Edit: They produced an explosion, the Oklahoma bombing killed quite a few children in a day care as well as workers.

[Bloodstain]

Oh, and the US never blocked wikileaks - no mechanism exists for the US government to censor the internet.

 

 

The US Government has censored access to websites through their domain name. Basically, ICANN is just a DNS service that lists the http://www.somethingawful.com instead of whatever IP address somethingawful has. Because of this you can still access websites through their IP address because you're not going through a domain name at all; however, most websites have taken down most of their content or have shut down their website entirely. These censorings, because the US controls ICANN, are happening for anyone trying to access these websites, regardless of whether they are in another country. ICANN was supposed to be "internationalized" a while ago.

We're not outraged enough. Maybe it's because most of you don't understand what just happened. A moment of your time, please.

 

Every hostname, like "www.reddit.com" is really "www.reddit.com." See that dot at the end? Try typing that in, it'll work. If you leave the dot out, your browser (that is, via your system's resolver libraries) inserts the dot at the end when trying to resolve the IP address.

 

So, what is this dot all about? The dot is the root. Every single internet DNS query starts with contacting the root servers[1]. In this case it would ask the root servers where to find the servers responsible for "com", then the servers responsible for "com" are asked who is responsible for "reddit.com", etc. The system is distributed. Reddit runs nameservers that give out IPs for 'www', and com runs nameservers that give out delegations for reddit, and the root runs nameservers that give out delegations for com.

 

Here's the horrifying part.

 

The root servers are controlled by ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, and this is literally a US Government entity. That means every single name that is looked up on the internet, from www.reddit.com. to cr.yp.to. and yes even the domains for North Korea (.kp) must pass through a system that is controlled completely by the US.

 

ICANN also happens to control ".com", ".net", and a few others, but theoretically ICANN can, since they control the root zone ".", kill resolutions for any hostname in the entire world, no matter what TLD they're under. In this story, they only killed domains under .com and .net, but the truth is they really can kill anything, and it while this kind of power has worried some policymakers the world over for a long time, the US has never used this power so it was nothing to write home about.

 

Well, today they used it. They crossed a line. This is no joke a declaration of war on freedom. The US is willing to tamper with the system on the behalf of special interests.

 

1. OK, not strictly every, there's a lot of caching going on but if this process stops working the name stops resolving eventually.

 

[obfuscator]

It's still possible to access wikileaks - if you know the IP address. It's largely impractical but if it's posted somewhere and people bookmark it its easy.

[Skeptical]

Wikileaks still gets no love.

 

.... and the persecution continues.

 

Terrorists, fortunately, have not generally been very good at producing bombs. I'm far more worried about them perfecting the production of large-scale explosive devices to use against established infrastructure than I am about locations of vital infrastructure being posted online: if these organizations are even half-competent, then they will already be aware.

 

What, two(?) bombers on American soil in the past year that have failed to produce an actual explosion?

 

Are you referring to the Oklahoma City Bombing which was done by a homegrown terrorist? As well as the World Trade Center Bombing in the early 90's?

 

Edit: They produced an explosion, the Oklahoma bombing killed quite a few children in a day care as well as workers.

[obfuscator]

Thought this was interesting: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/12/06/wikileaks-canada-infrastructure.html

 

Most of it seems like common sense, but it does seem like that information could definitely be useful to terrorists.

[Low C]

Wikileaks still gets no love.

 

.... and the persecution continues.

 

Terrorists, fortunately, have not generally been very good at producing bombs. I'm far more worried about them perfecting the production of large-scale explosive devices to use against established infrastructure than I am about locations of vital infrastructure being posted online: if these organizations are even half-competent, then they will already be aware.

 

What, two(?) bombers on American soil in the past year that have failed to produce an actual explosion?

 

Are you referring to the Oklahoma City Bombing which was done by a homegrown terrorist? As well as the World Trade Center Bombing in the early 90's?

 

Edit: They produced an explosion, the Oklahoma bombing killed quite a few children in a day care as well as workers.

 

Ah, didn't catch that. There was a bomb attempt this year at Times Square but it didn't work as intended. There was also a bomb attempt on a plane :ohnoes: . Those two stories were big news here in the states. Terrorists might not be good at producing bombs but with the resources they have they sure do well at terrorizing citizens of large countries.

[Skeptical]

[hide][/hide]

[Alg]

So, are all of the strawman arguments supposed to be ironic, or...

[Skeptical]

So, are all of the strawman arguments supposed to be ironic, or...

 

No, I just found it funny (a good part of the world does see him that way) and remarkably stupid: when the provision of information about your government's action obstructs justice, we have a serious error in our reasoning somewhere along the way.

 

EDIT:

 

[bleep] Language warning: Anon fighting for Assange https://uloadr.com/u/4.png

 

Assange's accuser: http://my.firedoglake.com/kirkmurphy/2010/12/04/assanges-chief-accuser-has-her-own-history-with-us-funded-anti-castro-groups-one-of-which-has-cia-ties/

 

http://www.swedishwire.com/component/content/article/1:companies/7519:wikileaks-servers-in-sweden-under-attack

 

I'm currently unable to access it, except through a mirror. I wonder what's happening with them in Canada.

[Danqazmlp]

Am I the only one finding it ironic that an anonymous group is trying to fight for somebody who likes to leak things? I wonder if they would stand so firm if he decided to reveal their information instead?

 

Again though, anonymous throw a hissy fit it seems, not thinking of the consequences of their actions. The media's hate for Assange is almost matched by the public hate for anonymous. Together, we can all hate them.

[Alg]

Not sure Anonymous the group is involved in this.

[SupaDavis]

Not sure Anonymous the group is involved in this.

 

Pretty sure Anonymous are involved. That poster vouch's for it.

[EarthySun]

It's still possible to access wikileaks - if you know the IP address. It's largely impractical but if it's posted somewhere and people bookmark it its easy.

 

Once again, in case anyone still can't find it and hasn't checked Page 11, it's found at either http://88.80.13.160 or http://wikileaks.ch/

[Bloodstain]

MasterCard is pulling the plug on payments to WikiLeaks, a move that will dry up another source of funds for the embattled document-sharing Web site, CNET has learned.

MasterCard logo

 

There are some things you can't buy with MasterCard.

 

"MasterCard is taking action to ensure that WikiLeaks can no longer accept MasterCard-branded products," a spokesman for MasterCard Worldwide said today.

 

That further limits the revenue sources for WikiLeaks, which has seen its finances systematically attacked in the last few days, as the Swiss authorities shut down a bank account used by editor Julian Assange, and PayPal permanently restricted the account used by the group. WikiLeaks has responded with an increasing number of fund-raising requests that urge supporters to "KEEP US STRONG."

 

Assuming that MasterCard blocks payments, the only easy way to donate electronically would be with a Visa credit card through a Web page hosted by Iceland-based DataCell.com. Representatives of Visa did not respond to requests for comment from CNET today. (WikiLeaks also solicits payments sent through the U.S. mail.)

 

MasterCard said it was cutting off payments because WikiLeaks is engaging in illegal activity. "MasterCard rules prohibit customers from directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal," spokesman Chris Monteiro said.

 

The move to cordon off WikiLeaks comes as a noose appears to be tightening around the neck of editor Julian Assange, who is the target of an arrest warrant issued today in the United Kingdom, according to a BBC report. He is expected to appear in a U.K. court tomorrow.

 

WikiLeaks previously was given the boot from its United States-based hosting services and domain name services. Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut said last Wednesday: "I call on any other company or organization that is hosting WikiLeaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them."

 

Since then, U.S. politicians have stepped up their criticism of the document-sharing site, which has posted only about 1,000 of 251,000 State Department dispatches it says it possesses and has shifted to the WikiLeaks.ch domain. "I think the man is a high-tech terrorist," Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said yesterday, referring to Assange. "He has done enormous damage to our country."

 

In addition, the incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee wants WikiLeaks listed as a "terrorist" organization, which would prohibit U.S. banks from processing payments and make it a felony for anyone else to provide "material support or resources" to the group. CNET reported earlier today that some U.S. government employees are being blocked from visiting WikiLeaks' Web site and the myriad mirror sites that have sprouted in the last few days.

 

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20024776-281.html#ixzz17OW0OonK

 

Welp, that's Master Card, Paypal, Amazon, and the Swedish Bank

[Furah]

Anonymous are with WikiLeaks on this one because of censorship. Both groups absolutely hate it.

 

It's still possible to access wikileaks - if you know the IP address. It's largely impractical but if it's posted somewhere and people bookmark it its easy.

 

Once again, in case anyone still can't find it and hasn't checked Page 11, it's found at either http://88.80.13.160 or http://wikileaks.ch/

That's not all, over 500 sites are currently mirroring the WikiLeaks site.

[Skeptical]

http://www.wikileaks.ch/about.html

 

I would strongly suggest reading; it's very informative.

[Epic]

My apologies for not reading all the posts, but there's nine pages of them, so if I say something already said, just roll your eyes at me.

 

 

The way I see it, Wikileaks should be allowed to operate in the states without harassment. There's this silly little thing called the "First Amendment" that should sort of protect them. As long as they remove any nformation that might compromise an espionage or military operation, I see no reason that the public cannot see what their government has in those cabinets. If the information won't cause deaths to people, and as I understand it Wikileaks avoids releasing information as such, then where is the problem occurring? I find the fact that the government(s) hide this information scary. They obviously have no trust in their citizens that I can see. You can't be trying to bring about peace, and prepare for war at the same time. It just doesn't work that way. There's many issues that overlap with this one, but I don't feel like writing a novel for you.

 

My thoughts, yes, Wikileaks is in the right, and any information released by them is something the government should have released first.

Ciao

Yeah, I'm that annoying guy who posted "Ciao" after all his posts before, and I'm lurking a bit now.