Wikileaks under dos attack

[spartacus]

It appears that Virgin Media has blocked Wikileaks from its server.

 

This is censorship and breaches its contract with the customer.

 

I'm disgusted by this and intend to write to Virgin to complain. I urge Virgin customers to complain also.

 

Freedom of information is the most effective way to prevent Totalitarianism, Stalinism, Nazism.

[Phanerothyme]

It appears that Virgin Media has blocked Wikileaks from its server.

 

Can you link to a story of some kind? What do you mean "blocked Wikileaks"?

 

Just curious.

[andygardener]

It appears that Virgin Media has blocked Wikileaks from its server.

 

This is censorship and breaches its contract with the customer.

 

I'm disgusted by this and intend to write to Virgin to complain. I urge Virgin customers to complain also.

 

Freedom of information is the most effective way to prevent Totalitarianism, Stalinism, Nazism.

 

wikileaks registrar pulled their domain name so if you're trying to access the site on it's old url you'll get a site not found regardless of your isp.

[TeaFan]

The treatment that wikileaks is getting from various governments and corporations should serve as a lesson to anyone naive enough to think that those in power will concede any of that power willingly. It amounts to an all-out war on the truth to protect vested interests. As the saying goes, if voting changed anything they'd ban it. If we want a society that works for us rather than them, boy do we have to fight for it.

[Phanerothyme]

if anyone can't find it, http://www.wikileaks.ch

[andygardener]

The treatment that wikileaks is getting from various governments and corporations should serve as a lesson to anyone naive enough to think that those in power will concede any of that power willingly. It amounts to an all-out war on the truth to protect vested interests. As the saying goes, if voting changed anything they'd ban it. If we want a society that works for us rather than them, boy do we have to fight for it.

 

It's interesting that for some people theft becomes liberation of documents, criminal intrusion into private correspondance becomes the exposure of truth.

 

I take it you have no objection to your own private correspondance being stolen and published in the highminded pursuit of the ideal that nothing anywhere is ever confidential?

[TeaFan]

It's interesting that for some people theft becomes liberation of documents, criminal intrusion into private correspondance becomes the exposure of truth.

 

I take it you have no objection to your own private correspondance being stolen and published in the highminded pursuit of the ideal that nothing anywhere is ever confidential?

 

You've managed to massively miss the point, well done. The people whose thoughts and notes are currently being leaked are either employed as agents of the state or elected as representatives of the people of that country. The philosophical and political gulf between them and private individuals is huge, yet you have failed to spot it.

[Phanerothyme]

It's interesting that for some people theft becomes liberation of documents, criminal intrusion into private correspondance becomes the exposure of truth.

And vice versa, it's true.

 

It's glib but it depends which side you are on.

 

Compare and contrast individual punditocrat reactions to the theft of UEA emails and to the theft of US diplomatic 'cables'.

 

I take it you have no objection to your own private correspondance being stolen and published in the highminded pursuit of the ideal that nothing anywhere is ever confidential?

 

This has been an object lesson in data security for everyone. If you want to keep it secret, don't put it on the internet! That includes email, twitter, facebook, webmail, the web, gopher, ftp, everything.

 

You'll hear it on this forum now and again - "if you haven't done anything, you've nothing to hide".

 

Cojones to that. I'd encrypt all my email with the strongest possible encryption as a matter of course if any of my contacts would take the time to make it possible.

[andygardener]

You've managed to massively miss the point, well done. The people whose thoughts and notes are currently being leaked are either employed as agents of the state or elected as representatives of the people of that country. The philosophical and political gulf between them and private individuals is huge, yet you have failed to spot it.

 

The gulf is indeed huge, as agents of the state they are entrusted with conducting diplomatic negotiations with a myriad of friendly and not so friendly countries on which efforts huge economic and other potentially much more serious outcomes hinge. So plastering them all over the internet can do much more harm than revealing whatever trivial secret opinions that you may hold. But you consider your private correspondance being kept private to be a matter of upmost importance and their correspondance a matter of public interest to steal and disemminate.

 

If a death resulted from this theft would you consider it a fair price for "the truth being revealed? If 10 deaths? If a war resulting in thousands of deaths?

 

What makes you think you have the right to read private classified correspondance while claiming your own private correspondance should be respected and protected?

[TeaFan]

The gulf is indeed huge, as agents of the state they are entrusted with conducting diplomatic negotiations with a myriad of friendly and not so friendly countries on which efforts huge economic and other potentially much more serious outcomes hinge. So plastering them all over the internet can do much more harm than revealing whatever trivial secret opinions that you may hold. But you consider your private correspondance being kept private to be a matter of upmost importance and their correspondance a matter of public interest to steal and disemminate.

 

If a death resulted from this theft would you consider it a fair price for "the truth being revealed? If 10 deaths? If a war resulting in thousands of deaths?

 

What makes you think you have the right to read private classified correspondance while claiming your own private correspondance should be respected and protected?

 

I think I have a much lesser right to see them than US citizens. I think US citizens have an absolute right to see them.

 

Don't make me laugh about deaths. How many civilian deaths in Iraq, caused by US foreign policy based on greed? You think a few potential deaths of US agents on top of the extant death toll really matters? Hundreds of thousands killed for profits and you whine about the safety of people employed to carry that out? <REMOVED>

 

I'll try explaining this to you once, though I won't hold my breath since you're not the sharpest tool in the box: the US government purports to operate representative government, i.e. the electorate vote for people who are then meant to represent them, both at home and abroad. If those people then lie to or keep significant information from the electorate or employ people to do the same, then it is not truly representative democracy. The panic at the top is exposing just what a sham this supposed representation is.

 

I, on the other hand (and most US citizens, more to the point) am not paid by and put in a position of power by people on the promise or understanding that I will represent them. Hence my correspondence is not in the public interest. If I was, it would be. Understand?