"Wikileaks are terrorists - we need to take them out!"

[Matt Collins]

This is what the talking heads are screaming:
http://politics.nashvillepost.com/2010/11/29/thats-certainly-one-way-to-look-at-it/

[jclay2]

It will be fun to see how long Assange can stick around before a sudden car crash or imprisonment.

[Matt Collins]

It will be fun to see how long Assange can stick around before a sudden car crash or imprisonment.
Or heart attack, or "random mugging", or something similar :(

[Freedom 4 all]

Or heart attack, or "random mugging", or something similar :(

But he's got them by the balls, doesn't he? If anything happens to him, the decryption key will go out. I bet the insurance document has something extremely damaging on it, possibly about 9/11, or something conspiracy theorists haven't even thought of yet. And besides, he's a key member, but he's not the be all end all. Wikileaks can probably survive without him.

[Matt Collins]

But he's got them by the balls, doesn't he? If anything happens to him, the decryption key will go out. I bet the insurance document has something extremely damaging on it, possibly about 9/11, or something conspiracy theorists haven't even thought of yet. And besides, he's a key member, but he's not the be all end all. Wikileaks can probably survive without him.
What are you referring to? :confused:

[Vessol]

Honestly there really isn't anything that damning that has been released. It's just showing the non-public dirty scene that is international politics.

[jmhudak17]

What are you referring to? :confused:

He's talking about the Wikileaks insurance file. They told people to download it, and he'll give out the password if anything bad happens. There must be something really bad in it.

[Matt Collins]

He's talking about the Wikileaks insurance file. They told people to download it, and he'll give out the password if anything bad happens. There must be something really bad in it.
A dead-man's switch!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_man%27s_switch


Smart guy! :D:D:D:D

[heavenlyboy34]

Honestly there really isn't anything that damning that has been released. It's just showing the non-public dirty scene that is international politics.

qft. The big hub-ub about is rather silly, but the upside is that it brings attention to the criminal nature of the Regime.

[AdamT]

How dare you call out the Empire! Death!

[Freedom 4 all]

A dead-man's switch!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_man%27s_switch


Smart guy! :D:D:D:D

That's exactly what it is. And given the utterly criminal nature of the government, you can bet they have a huge list of things that would be devastating to them if released. They won't have the guts to assassinate him. Of course there's a possibility he's bluffing. He might have nothing at all and the file is full of lolcats, but given the things the gpvernment wants to keep quiet, they can't take that chance.

[RoamZero]

That's exactly what it is. And given the utterly criminal nature of the government, you can bet they have a huge list of things that would be devastating to them if released. They won't have the guts to assassinate him. Of course there's a possibility he's bluffing. He might have nothing at all and the file is full of lolcats, but given the things the gpvernment wants to keep quiet, they can't take that chance.

If Wikileaks has something devastating why wouldn't they release it anyway, especially if it would be a bombshell relating to 9/11 or something equivalent? The insurance file is probably nothing surprising: The original leaked US documents without the redaction of names. I'd bet money on it that it's something along those lines.

[Matt Collins]

My question is whether or not the NSA has decrypted the "insurance file" yet or not? :confused:

[lester1/2jr]

doubt it assange is a master encrypter

[VBRonPaulFan]

My question is whether or not the NSA has decrypted the "insurance file" yet or not? :confused:

the encryption used on it is not conceptually impossible to crack, it is physically impossible (as in the amount of computing time necessary to crack it makes it unreasonable to possibly crack in a lifetime).

[Freedom 4 all]

My question is whether or not the NSA has decrypted the "insurance file" yet or not? :confused:

Possibly, but if so it begs the question as to why Wikileaks guy is still alive. Either it's so immensely damaging they can't afford to have it released and are forced to allow him to continue publishing petty international gossip, or they haven't cracked it yet. Given the quality of the NSA hackers, supercomputers and code breakers, I'm actually more inclined to go with the former.

[Matt Collins]

the encryption used on it is not conceptually impossible to crack, it is physically impossible (as in the amount of computing time necessary to crack it makes it unreasonable to possibly crack in a lifetime).
I don't believe that. If there is a lock, there is a key. And if there is a key there is a way to hack it. If not by brute force, but by other methods.

Not to mention that the NSA's capabilities are largely unknown.

[jmdrake]

I don't believe that. If there is a lock, there is a key. And if there is a key there is a way to hack it. If not by brute force, but by other methods.


Not always. See the lock Harry Houdini couldn't pick. (http://www.truthandrepose.com/2009/07/02/the-hardest-lock-to-pick/) The Cliff Notes version is this. Harry Houdini tried for hours to pick a lock that wasn't even locked. Someone could create a truly random noise file and the NSA could try to decrypt it forever. They could never be 100% certain if the file contained noise, or if they just hadn't been able to decrypt it yet. Even brute force for 1 million years wouldn't necessarily "work" if the NSA didn't know the encryption algorithm.



Not to mention that the NSA's capabilities are largely unknown.

And the imagination of the worlds most clever encryptor is also an unknown. Partially because nobody knows who that is. ;)

[HOLLYWOOD]

Congress Lashes Out at Wikileaks, Senators Say Leakers May Have "Blood on their Hands"

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2010/11/29/image7099442_370x278.jpg

[/URL]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023964-503544.html (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023964-503544.html)

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, called the leak "nothing less than an attack on the national security of the United States."
"By disseminating these materials, Wikileaks is putting at risk the lives and the freedom of countless Americans and non-Americans around the world," he said in a statement. "It is an outrageous, reckless, and despicable action that will undermine the ability of our government and our partners to keep our people safe and to work together to defend our vital interests. Let there be no doubt: the individuals responsible are going to have blood on their hands."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) called the release of more than 250,000 classified State Department documents a "reckless action which jeopardizes lives by exposing raw, contemporaneous intelligence."

[URL]http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/11/28/statement-press-secretary

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 28, 2010


Statement by the Press Secretary
We anticipate the release of what are claimed to be several hundred thousand classified State department cables on Sunday night that detail private diplomatic discussions with foreign governments. By its very nature, field reporting to Washington is candid and often incomplete information. It is not an expression of policy, nor does it always shape final policy decisions. Nevertheless, these cables could compromise private discussions with foreign governments and opposition leaders, and when the substance of private conversations is printed on the front pages of newspapers across the world, it can deeply impact not only US foreign policy interests, but those of our allies and friends around the world. To be clear -- such disclosures put at risk our diplomats, intelligence professionals, and people around the world who come to the United States for assistance in promoting democracy and open government. These documents also may include named individuals who in many cases live and work under oppressive regimes and who are trying to create more open and free societies. President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal. By releasing stolen and classified documents, Wikileaks has put at risk not only the cause of human rights but also the lives and work of these individuals. We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.
YouTube - NIXON TAPES: Pentagon Papers (Henry Kissinger & John Mitchell) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NB3aZr3a-d8)

[BlackTerrel]

Or heart attack, or "random mugging", or something similar :(

I doubt it. Very little upside to that isn't it?

Let's say tomorrow Assange has a heart attack. Not saying real, not saying foul play. We don't know. But news comes out he has a heart attack.

Who benefits from that? Not the "wikileaks opponents" (for lack of a better term).

If anything they suffer more - more attention, more conspiracy theories etc...

[Sentient Void]

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Ron Paul

Ron Paul does it best.

[ChickenHawk]

That fact is that this guy leaked state secrets that may hurt the security of the US. That could be considered an act of war or sabotage. The only reason I'm not outraged about it is because the US government is so outrageous. The federal government, IMO, has an obligation to take this guy out. However, I hope they don't because under the circumstances I think he's doing the right thing.

[Sentient Void]

---- to Eric Bolling...
Sometimes, Bolling - I love your show, I love your advocation of capitalism and free trade, fighting the protectionists, the liberals, and the statists and love your advocation and support of Gold... in so many ways - you are a true supporter of limited government...

Then you switch gears and go all schizophrenic and support massive state intervention and advocation of the wars, an imperial, destructive and unsustainable foreign policy, trying to find some way to rationalize (or supporting those rationalizing) WikiLeaks and Julian Assange of being like a terrorist organization (which is utterly ridiculous), and trying to rationalize your support of keeping government corruption, lies, and war crimes hidden from the public and unaccountable.

Any american or civilian blood that comes from this is on the US government's hands due to their coercive involvement overseas, not because WikiLeaks exposed their lies, corruption and war crimes.
58 minutes ago · Like · Comment

Eric Bolling: they hate America... working behind the scenes to undermine us.. hide behind the Constitution to take us down// I sleep with one eye open for a reason
53 minutes ago · Like ·

----: They don't hate America - that detracts from the whole point. They hate the US Govt's (and 'America' is not the US Govt - those should be understood as two different entities) foreign policy - and for good reason. Our Govt's foreign policy is not only destructive to us domestically - to our economy, to our civil liberties, to our reputation as a people and a nation, but also very destructive overseas.

If anything ends up 'taking us down' it'll be due to the consequences of our own government's actions. If others (ie, WikiLeaks) expose to us and the world the destructive nature of our policies - we should be thankful to them, and change our government because of it, not lash out at them.

WikiLeaks is doing the world and us a service. We are and have been doing ourselves a massive disservice.
47 minutes ago · Like

Eric Bolling: Pretty sure the planes that slammed into WTC killed 3,000 Americans not Govt.
44 minutes ago · Like ·

-----: I don't see what this has to do with anything... this is a complete red herring and is intellectually dishonest. I expected better from you in this discussion, Eric.

WikiLeaks did not smash 2 planes into the WTC. A small group of criminal scumbags did, who are a part of a small radical group - of which there are plenty around the world (who aren't all muslim, btw).

9/11 was a disgusting unintended consequence (what the CIA calls 'blowback') of our ridiculous and destructive foreign policy.

You want to label WikiLeaks as terrorist because the information they disseminate to the free press may lead to crimes. Well, logically speaking, being a black teen leads to a higher probability of committing crime - should we pre-emptively put all blacks into jail for a period of time to prevent crime? Driving a car leads to accidents happening - should we ban cars? What other tyrannical slippery slopes can we think up if we follow such fallacious logic?

Ultimately, if you ask me - for a lonnnng time now, in order to be 'for America' we must be against our destructive national government. The national government (I refuse to call it a 'federal government' nowadays, since there's nothing 'federal' about it) has been destructive to our economy and civil liberties for many decades now. :(
36 minutes ago · Like

Joette Harkins: Oy. Another one.
31 minutes ago · Like ·

Tim Hillman: well said steve...some of these ppl can't grab the concept that the global bankers..Rothchilds, Rockefellers, J P Morgan families have control of the governments of the world. They have created a global empire and forced our president throughout the decades and congress to do their bidding. pushing us into a new world order. 9/11 was done by the govt. the so called hijackers were Saudi's not Iraqi's ...they forced pres. wilson to create the federal reserve and military industrial complex which enslaves us americans. the fed prints money then gives it to the global offshore banks..
25 minutes ago · Like ·

-----: Meh. That's all pretty speculative, Tim... I don't adhere to anything there's not much real evidence for... and I don't see what any of that has to do with the discussion at hand...

In the end... it was said best by a *true conservative*... and it's *quite relative* in the context of the WikiLeaks and Julian Assange situation and everyone's call for treason and executions and labeling them a terrorist organization...

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies."

+50 pts. to whoever knows who said it!
14 minutes ago · Like

Tim Hillman: lol @ no evidence

Grrr... see, this is what I'm talking about - I had a good solid, logical discussion going... then some conspiracy theorist dude had to come in and fuck it all up, and discredit me merely by agreeing with me and completely derailing the discussion... guilt by association FTL...

Trust me, I feel there are a lot of unanswered questions abotu 911... but I feel it's prudent to avoid any speculative conspiracy theorizing while trying to engage conservatives, liberals, centrists, etc in a logical discussion, especially in front of an audience.

Please spare the speculative conspiracy theories... even if there is some evidence for some of them... it just turns people off automatically and shuts them down.

[Matt Collins]

That fact is that this guy leaked state secrets that may hurt the security of the US. That could be considered an act of war or sabotage. The only reason I'm not outraged about it is because the US government is so outrageous. The federal government, IMO, has an obligation to take this guy out. However, I hope they don't because under the circumstances I think he's doing the right thing.
According to the Judge, only the guy who leaked them to the media is culpable. The media publishing them once in their possession is not.

[ChickenHawk]

According to the Judge, only the guy who leaked them to the media is culpable. The media publishing them once in their possession is not.

That makes sense. They would have to prove that Wikileaks was working with the leaker to obtain information. I suppose that is possible if not likely.

[heavenlyboy34]

That fact is that this guy leaked state secrets that may hurt the security of the US. That could be considered an act of war or sabotage. The only reason I'm not outraged about it is because the US government is so outrageous. The federal government, IMO, has an obligation to take this guy out. However, I hope they don't because under the circumstances I think he's doing the right thing.

What "state secrets"? None of the wikileaks have been especially revelatory (to my knowledge)-they simply provide some hard evidence that the war hawks don't want to face. The documents I've looked at even had some redactions to protect the innocent.

[ChickenHawk]

What "state secrets"? None of the wikileaks have been especially revelatory (to my knowledge)-they simply provide some hard evidence that the war hawks don't want to face. The documents I've looked at even had some redactions to protect the innocent.

I don't know, every article about this I've read indicated that there was all sorts of classified info. I guess it wouldn't be the first time the media exaggerate something.

[RM918]

'State Secrets' my ass. The government calls anything that will embarrass them a 'State Secret'. All this shit about, 'Oh no, it could potentially maybe harm somebody!' when it's the government's fault they're in that situation in the first place is total manipulation on their part and it's disappointing to see so many people falling it.

It's hilarious that the government, who'll see children slaughtered without batting an eye for the 'greater good', is all of a sudden wringing their hands about a soldier potentially being harmed. Because, as usual, soldiers are little more than pawns for them, fit to be either thrown into the fire or praised when it suits them.

[Pauls' Revere]

Obama = ASSHAT

YouTube - Barack Obama on Government Transparency (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU)

[tremendoustie]

Wow, "terrorist" just means anyone the regime doesn't like at this point, doesn't it.

Kind of like how "freedom" means enforcing a hegemony on most of the world.

They just love to redefine words.

[Lucille]

Some neoclown Statists at hotair called me nuts and told me to DIAF for defending wikileaks. They sure do love their authoritarian government, and death! They can't get enough death.

[RM918]

Some neoclown Statists at hotair called me nuts and told me to DIAF for defending wikileaks. They sure do love their authoritarian government, and death! They can't get enough death.

Typical. They just love Sarah Palin over there, so that's not terribly surprising.

[HOLLYWOOD]

'State Secrets' my ass. The government calls anything that will embarrass them a 'State Secret'. All this shit about, 'Oh no, it could potentially maybe harm somebody!' when it's the government's fault they're in that situation in the first place is total manipulation on their part and it's disappointing to see so many people falling it.

It's hilarious that the government, who'll see children slaughtered without batting an eye for the 'greater good', is all of a sudden wringing their hands about a soldier potentially being harmed. Because, as usual, soldiers are little more than pawns for them, fit to be either thrown into the fire or praised when it suits them.


Yeah, ain't dat the truth.

Anyway, the REAL state secrets are at the LIMDIS/EXDIS "TOP SECRET EYES ONLY" NOFORN documents.

If people here were to access that level... you would really be up-hauled at paranoia and true motives of this centralized government. When I read this stuff I was like, Wow, their train of thought is beyond consciousness." Every bit as Communist/Fascist, just very well polished and tailored to fool the masses.

[reduen]

I posted this below in another place and it seemed to help some...

"It is the actions that are exposed themselves and the people that do them that put people at risk if anything. Let me try to be very simple here for those who are in need.

If you are speeding down the road, (going over the established speed... law…) you are in fact breaking the law and potentially putting someone else in danger. Some of us seem to think that it is only breaking the law if you get caught and are fined for it…

Likewise, if these people would not have been doing the things that they were doing, there would be no repercussions over their actions being exposed. It really is a simple concept if you think about it. Blame those who deserve the blame if people are in danger because of this…."

:)

[RM918]

The comments around on this issue are even worse than usual. I made TWO posts on some Breitbart things standing up for WikiLeaks and my ID score went from 55 to -41. I'm as proud as I am disappointed, since everyone else there was screaming for blood little better than the terrorists they hate so much.

[HOLLYWOOD]

For those that have asked... I included a link to security classifications and descriptives, so you understand what the acronyms and hierarchical levels. If there's something in the pdf you don't understand, just GOOGLE it, you'll get your answer

The highest I have reviewed from Wikileaks is: SECRET/NOFORN

www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/af053006.pdf