Wikileaks under dos attack

[andygardener]

Re my bold.

 

With the greatest of respect to you I cannot take you seriously after a comment like that...and the last line of your post just confirms it.

 

Well perhaps you could inform me of this crime of the century that the cable release has uncovered? Lot's of emarassing things which having been made public strain diplomatic relations but what great crime has been unearthed?

[Lotusflower]

Perhaps just as well it did. When I read the bit about 'DOS attacks' my first reaction was: "didn't they scrap DOS some time ago?" I'm not a computer expert. If the thread was confined to computer technicalities, then perhaps it should have been moved to the computer part of the forum.

 

 

 

Wikileaks seems to be about causing embarrassment. Nothing more. It's not mischievous, it's malicious.

 

 

 

I agree. As a private individual I have a right to privacy (human rights act?)

 

Individuals have a right to privacy.

Companies have a right to privacy (Industrial Espionage is punishable in most countries.)

 

I've heard people talking about an inviolable right to freedom of information. Where is that right defined?

 

If individuals and companies and other organisations have a right to expect a degree of privacy, why shouldn't governments enjoy the same rights?

 

Some of the stuff on Wikileaks is embarrassing. Why was it leaked? was the reason for the leak:

 

(a) "To provide valuable information to people who need this information to allow them to live without being subjected to repression?"

 

Or was it:

 

(b) "To cause embarrassment to so-and-so because I don't like them and I think I can get away with it?"

 

If I managed to get hold of details of your bank account (not a secret, but private) or your medical records, or details of some sort of smutty extra-marital affair you were having, or details of your (albeit legal) sexual predilections and if I was to publish them, would you consider that to fall under the protection of some sort of 'inviolable right to freedom of information' or would you think I was behaving maliciously?

 

<REMOVED> hasn't attempted to provide any real justification for his leaks. It appears he is publishing the information because he thinks he can.

 

The Americans seem to be annoyed. Perhaps they're not the only country to be annoyed.

 

As far as I'm aware, the US does not authorise assassination of people who irritate it; indeed, such acts are forbidden by US law. If the Americans got their hands on him, <REMOVED> might end up in a Supermax for the next 3000 years, but they wouldn't kill him.

 

Other countries aren't always as mindful of human rights.

 

Does anybody remember Georgi Markov? (Ricin from a spring-loaded hypodermic in an umbrella?)

 

How about Alexandr Litvinenko? (Polonium-flavoured coffee, anybody?)

 

I wonder how many governments are upset with the founder of Wikileaks?

 

The Americans are annoyed, the UK government can't be too happy, The Saudis are embarrassed, the Afghanistanis are probably concerned that the leak might reduce the amount of money the UK is prepared to spend on them and the Russians may well be somewhat upset.

 

There are probably many more. After all; you can't release a quarter of a milllion secret documents and only upset 3 or 4 people.

 

Perhaps it would be a good idea to send him to Sweden. Let them be responsible for him. (Markov and Litvinenko were both killed in the UK; If I was <REMOVED>, I think I would rather be somewhere a little safer.

 

Grow up!

[Phanerothyme]

How do you come to that conclusion? Have you been following the story?

 

If he's convicted of rape, he will be imprisoned in Sweden. No question.

[Lotusflower]

If he's convicted of rape, he will be imprisoned in Sweden. No question.

 

Of course he will.

 

Re my bold.

There is,however,a question about the nature of these charges in so far as they are the same charges that were thrown out and described as ridiculous by the Chief State Prosecutor in Sweden earlier this year. Why?

Are you not even a wee bit curious about that?

[quisquose]

But this thread seems to only be frequented by a select few, so...

 

... I thought I'd better start frequenting.

 

 

Meanwhile Assange awaits extradition to Sweden, possibly a lengthy prison sentence and the loving ministrations of some big Swedish queen if he ends up a guest of the Swedish government.

 

Anybody that thinks that Assange might end up doing time as a result of the "rape" charges should read this interesting article:

 

http://radsoft.net/news/20101001,01.shtml

[Phanerothyme]

Of course he will.

 

Re my bold.

There is,however,a question about the nature of these charges in so far as they are the same charges that were thrown out and described as ridiculous by the Chief State Prosecutor in Sweden earlier this year. Why?

Are you not even a wee bit curious about that?

 

Yes I am, but to have a public discussion about allegations that are sub judice (maybe not technically, but they will be soon) is literally prejudice.

 

Assange should be left to clear his name (or be found guilty) and his accusers should be afforded the same privileges accorded to them under Swedish law that any other person alleging they are the victim of a sex crime. .

 

There is clearly an effort to conflate the illegality of rape, and what wikileaks is doing, and to hold Assange jointly responsible for raping two women, and fisting the US administration.

 

The arguments need to be kept completely separate. Wikileaks has nothing to do with the rape allegations or the prosecution currently being constructed in Sweden.

 

If Assange is innocent, he should not resist extradition and he should be permitted a full, fair and open trial free from Government intervention. Until the verdict is delivered, I don't think speculating on the details and backgrounds of the two accusers is helpful or constructive if you support the "idea" of wikileaks.

[spooky3]

Now for a conspiracy theory...

 

What if they brainwash or replace him with a double and take down wikileaks that way? Or, they just get that password!

 

LOL, LOL, LOL

[Phanerothyme]

... I thought I'd better start frequenting.

 

 

 

 

Anybody that thinks that Assange might end up doing time as a result of the "rape" charges should read this interesting article:

 

http://radsoft.net/news/20101001,01.shtml

 

That's kind of what I mean.

 

By doing this, a fair trial becomes almost impossible. Which is not a good thing for Assange, two possible rape victims, justice or much else. You've seen it happen before in this country.

 

A fair trial, in a Swedish civil court, could on the other hand expose many interesting facts.

[spooky3]

...

The arguments need to be kept completely separate. Wikileaks has nothing to do with the rape allegations or the prosecution currently being constructed in Sweden.

...

 

Technically he is the face of wikileaks. If it was a big business he'd have been forced to resign by now. So it's a slur on his character (true or not).

[Lotusflower]

Yes I am, but to have a public discussion about allegations that are sub judice (maybe not technically, but they will be soon) is literally prejudice.

 

Assange should be left to clear his name (or be found guilty) and his accusers should be afforded the same privileges accorded to them under Swedish law that any other person alleging they are the victim of a sex crime. .

 

There is clearly an effort to conflate the illegality of rape, and what wikileaks is doing, and to hold Assange jointly responsible for raping two women, and fisting the US administration.

 

The arguments need to be kept completely separate. Wikileaks has nothing to do with the rape allegations or the prosecution currently being constructed in Sweden.

 

If Assange is innocent, he should not resist extradition and he should be permitted a full, fair and open trial free from Government intervention. Until the verdict is delivered, I don't think speculating on the details and backgrounds of the two accusers is helpful or constructive if you support the "idea" of wikileaks.

 

Some might say that it is "government intervention" that has seen the case reopened. This whole business stinks to high heaven IMO.

I lived in Sweden for 7 years and I know how the judicial system operates. When a chief prosecutor throws a case out and publicly declares the charges "ridiculous" my suspicions are strongly aroused.

Have you asked yourself why Assange was denied bail with the judge expressing the opinion that he was likely to do a runner?

He walked into a police station of his own accord!