57
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:27 am
@JPB,
People who have worked with him described him as somewhat paranoid. Assange described himself as "somewhere on the autism spectrum."

Of course, claiming "politics" is a typical legal strategy for public figures accused of a crime.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:29 am
@wandeljw,
Does that mean you dismiss his position?
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:31 am
@JPB,
That he is being railroaded? Yes.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:39 am
@msolga,
Quote:
Well we will have to agree to disagree, Bill.
I was simply trying to clarify a post of mine you'd apparently had some difficulty understanding.


Oh, don't get me wrong - I agree with 90% of the post, and I like your clarification. It is a good point of discussion and is based on probability of outcome. I fully recognize that my belief of outcome has a very small chance of occurring; and wouldn't completely anyways. Wink Thanks!
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:44 am
@msolga,
Quote:
Bill, I've just noticed this, re-reading your post.
I have not said, nor implied, any such thing.
Those are your words.
I have also made no comment what-so-ever about which would be the "best country" for Julian Assange to be in.
How would I know?
I have said that he is an Australian citizen who has broken no Australian laws, therefore should have the right to return here if he wants to. (Despite our attorney-general's earlier suggestions to the contrary.)


Oh, definitely those are my words. As far as the best country for him, I guess he can no pick and choose which ever on he wants!
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:46 am
@wandeljw,
Why this character assassination, wandel, and who are the people who describe him as such? I have not read that and I am reading a lot about Assange.

Again: he is not accused of a crime, as there is no evidence of a crime. He is subject to questioning by Swedish authorities. Senior prosecutors in Sweden let him go after he's made himself available to Swedish authorities for 40 days after two women reported an alleged sexual misconduct. Due to the absence of evidence, Swedish prosecutors let him leave the country.


I highlighted this in red, as it has been written over and over again and these
are facts - facts that are proven!

Why such a lynch mob mentality? I guess "innocent until proven guilty"
is a very subjective phrase, isn't it?
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 10:57 am
@CalamityJane,
The attitude here is very strange with regard to the allegations in Sweden. I see no reason to assume that the charges are politically motivated, and i also don't see any reason to assume that the women concerned are being intimidated. No one on either side of this partiuclar debate have provided any supporting evidence.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 11:02 am
@Setanta,
Right. It's all opinion, so far as having any evidence goes. That's never stopped anyone here from expressing said opinion as evidence though.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 11:07 am
@JPB,
I don't have a problem with opinion, just the attempt to mascarade opinion as something more substantive--as you put it, opinion as evidence.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 11:27 am
@Setanta,
OTOH, between the timing of the "manhunt" and Interpol involvement, the failure of the court in the UK to grant bail initially, the nearly simultaneous dumping and denial of service by google, visa, mastercard, etc., to Assange and/or wikileaks all give credence to a claim of being railroaded.

Wandel's assertion that he's purported to be somewhat paranoid and has described himself as "somewhere on the autism spectrum" sounds like muck-raking to me.

I don't "know" if he's being railroaded, or not. If I was sitting on a jury of a mock court and that question was put to me to come down on side or the other, I'd probably come down on the side of the train.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 11:45 am
@JPB,
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there is evidence that an attempt is being made to railroad him. That is quite a bit different, however, from stating that he is being railroaded, and providing to evidence to that effect. That's my only beef here. Except for a brief response to Finn, i've just been reading along. I put my oar in at the point at which i became tired of ridiculous assertions which are not being offered as opinions, but which also aren't substantiated.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 11:54 am
@CalamityJane,
CalamityJane wrote:

Why this character assassination, wandel, and who are the people who describe him as such? I have not read that and I am reading a lot about Assange.

Again: he is not accused of a crime, as there is no evidence of a crime. He is subject to questioning by Swedish authorities. Senior prosecutors in Sweden let him go after he's made himself available to Swedish authorities for 40 days after two women reported an alleged sexual misconduct. Due to the absence of evidence, Swedish prosecutors let him leave the country.


I highlighted this in red, as it has been written over and over again and these
are facts - facts that are proven!

Why such a lynch mob mentality? I guess "innocent until proven guilty"
is a very subjective phrase, isn't it?



People who have worked for Wikileaks have described him as paranoid.

I don't believe he his being railroaded. However, I would not use terms such as "evidence" and "facts" casually, merely to support my opinion. I believe some details may be made public at the extradition hearing. To me it sounds like a sex offense occurred, but how serious it was I do not know at this time. Actually, it is in the interest of both Assange and his accuser that a hearing in court clears up the matter.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 12:08 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
Women do not experience feelings of intimidation bringing forth sexual allegations. A public situation would never add to that feeling intimidation. All foolish assumptions.


I think some women have a great liking, even a fondness, for bringing forth sexual allegations. There are a number of advantages they might derive from doing so.

1--They become a theatre, large or small, of attention and it is an obvious fact of life that many women crave attention. It relieves the boredom of inattention.

2--They signal to their competitors that their charms are of such irresistable dimensions that some men, preferably of higher stations in life, will risk the wrath of the law to experience them and will undergo degrees of suffering to have done so. It is well known in evolution the suffering the male is required to submit to in order to be chosen by the female. There are even operas on that score.

3--There is a chance of making money in some cases.

4--They get to act the wronged and victimised little angel of respectabilty whose tender innocence has been taken advantage of by a brute and, in the type of rape or molestation being discussed in this case, have not foregone the experience which one might easily presume they were dressed and generally got up to stimulate in the preliminaries.

5--They are enabled to keep the events at the forefront of their minds and even develop, with reflection, some additional variations.

6--It is self evident that they are not ashamed of what they allege took place because few people will speak openly of things they are ashamed of.

The "intimidation" to which these victims are subjected to, a form of pre-trial cross-examination, is because the police need to be sure the allegations are substantial as they are loathe to go into court and be made monkeys of by a defence counsel.

The victims of real rape are betrayed by frivolous allegations of the sort we are being asked to believe in the Assange case and which the police, as I know from experience, have to regularly deal with and which they see as "grandstanding opportunities". The police know the real thing when they see it and are vigilant in the prosecution of such cases.

One of the conspiracies I referred to earlier is to pretend that the points I made above are ignorable and that every allegation is to be treated as if the puported victim is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that she will not face cross-examination by a skilled and experienced barrister when push comes to shove and the bloke's fate is on the line.

One of the key modern methods of crime control is to reduce opportunities and temptations to criminality. It thus can be argued that those who support the right of women to be out and about late at night unchaperoned and in fetching attire, and often giddy with free drink or other drugs, are encouraging rape.

0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 12:10 pm
@wandeljw,
Well, if the UK authorities wanted to give any semblance of an appearance against his being railroaded and a marked man they might have decided on something other than solitary confinement in a basement cell of an old Victorian prison. How can that be perceived as anything other than giving him a lesson he won't soon forget? Unfortunately, for those who I think had a particular lesson in mind, I think it's going to backfire and gain him more supporters, not less.

Perceptions aren't evidence in the legal sense of the word, but they do add up to support opinions of wrong-doing. Your perceptions have resulted in an opinion of wrong-doing on Assange's part. Others are taking what they perceive as evidence of wrong-doing on the part of assorted government and business entities and coming down on the side of the argument that he is being railroaded.

No one has said that he shouldn't be appropriately charged, tried, and convicted of a sex crime if a sex crime occurred. OTOH, he isn't being treated as a person of interest in a sex-related case by the UKG, certain members of the USG, or the corporations who dropped him like a.... USG most wanted man.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 12:51 pm
@wandeljw,
You don't know what disgruntled employees call me Very Happy

Wandel, it's not my opinion that he was questioned by the Swedish prosecutor and was held for questioning for 40 days and thereafter was allowed to leave the country. These are proven facts, even the Swedes admitted to that.

It is my opinion however, that he's cleared his name already after the
Swedish senior prosecutor let him go as he found no evidence to convict
him. Is he railroaded? Yes I believe so!

Wandel, I still like you, and actually I admire your blind faith towards your
government. In Germany, people mostly criticize and question its government, regardless which party is in power. Very Happy
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 01:09 pm
@CalamityJane,
That's evolution Cal. Not criticising and questioning the government proved non-adaptable in modern conditions.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 01:16 pm
My views are still substantially the same as JMP's, including the I don't know part; this includes, at least in my view, the possibility that a sexual offense occurred. Also agree with her OTOH post.
One matter I want to look up is High Seas' reference re Anna Ardin here.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 01:21 pm
@CalamityJane,
CJ - A point of clarification and a note.

The warrant issued by Sweden was issued by a second prosecutor. It wasn't the same person who issued the first warrant for Assange. I'm not sure if it's been pointed out that it's a different person leading investigation.

The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for Assange was issued on Dec 7 (time unknown, timezone CEST?). This is probably why Assange turned himself in. If a person surrenders themselves the State has only 10 days to decide whether to extradite the person. If arrested, the State has 90 days. At the close of today, it will have been 10 days. Assange will either be extradited to Sweden in the next ~4hrs (~5hrs if by GMT) or the EAW expires. I'm not sure what the limits are on re-filing for a EAW are or if Sweden can. It looks less and less like Assange will be going to Sweden.

A
R
T
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 01:26 pm
@CalamityJane,
Thanks for the kind words, CJane.

You have a good point that a description given by former employees may not have much value.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2010 01:37 pm
@wandeljw,
wandeljw wrote:
Actually, it is in the interest of both Assange and his accuser that a hearing in court clears up the matter.

For sure. To Assange's credit (and perhaps to his lawyer's credit) he has done well not to name the women.

Despite some claims that nobody is trying to intimidate Assange's accusors, it appears that groups of Assange's supporters are aiming to do exactly that. I doubt Assange would want this, so it's good he's not publicaly named Ms A and Ms W.

NYT wrote:
Hackers Attack Those Seen as WikiLeaks Enemies
By JOHN F. BURNS and RAVI SOMAIYA


LONDON — In a campaign that had some declaring the start of a “cyberwar,” hundreds of Internet activists mounted retaliatory attacks on Wednesday on the Web sites of multinational companies and other organizations they deemed hostile to the WikiLeaks antisecrecy organization and its jailed founder, Julian Assange.

Within 12 hours of a British judge’s decision on Tuesday to deny Mr. Assange bail in a Swedish extradition case, attacks on the Web sites of WikiLeaks’s “enemies,” as defined by the organization’s impassioned supporters around the world, caused several corporate Web sites to become inaccessible or slow down markedly.

Targets of the attacks, in which activists overwhelmed the sites with traffic, included the Web site of MasterCard, which had stopped processing donations for WikiLeaks; Amazon.com, which revoked the use of its computer servers; and PayPal, which stopped accepting donations for Mr. Assange’s group. Visa.com was also affected by the attacks, as were the Web sites of the Swedish prosecutor’s office and the lawyer representing the two women whose allegations of sexual misconduct are the basis of Sweden’s extradition bid.

The Internet assaults underlined the growing reach of self-described “cyberanarchists,” antigovernment and anticorporate activists who have made an icon of Mr. Assange, a 39-year-old Australian.

The speed and range of the attacks also appeared to show the resilience of the backing among computer activists for Mr. Assange, who has appeared increasingly isolated in recent months amid the furor stoked by WikiLeaks’s Web site posting of hundreds of thousands of secret Pentagon documents on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Assange has come under renewed attack in the past two weeks for posting the first tranche of a trove of 250,000 secret State Department cables that have exposed American diplomats’ frank assessments of relations with many countries, forcing Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to express regret to world leaders and raising fears that they and other sources would become more reticent.

The New York Times and four other news organizations last week began publishing articles based on the archive of cables made available to them.

In recent months, some of Mr. Assange’s closest associates in WikiLeaks abandoned him, calling him autocratic and capricious and accusing him of reneging on WikiLeaks’s original pledge of impartiality to launch a concerted attack on the United States. He has been simultaneously fighting a remote battle with the Swedish prosecutors, who have sought his extradition for questioning on accusations of “rape, sexual molestation and forceful coercion” made by the Swedish women. Mr. Assange has denied any wrongdoing in the cases.

American officials have repeatedly said that they are reviewing possible criminal charges against Mr. Assange, a step that could lead to a bid to extradite him to the United States and confront him with having to fight for his freedom on two fronts.

The cyberattacks in Mr. Assange’s defense appear to have been coordinated by Anonymous, a loosely affiliated group of activist computer hackers who have singled out other groups before, including the Church of Scientology. Last weekend, members of Anonymous vowed in two online manifestos to take revenge on any organization that lined up against WikiLeaks.

Anonymous claimed responsibility for the MasterCard attack in Web messages and, according to one activist associated with the group, conducted waves of attacks on other companies during the day. The group said the actions were part of an effort called Operation Payback, which began as a way of punishing companies that attempted to stop Internet file-sharing and movie downloads.

The activist, Gregg Housh, who disavows a personal role in any illegal online activity, said that 1,500 supporters had been in online forums and chat rooms organizing the mass “denial of service” attacks. His account was confirmed by Jose Nazario, a senior security researcher at Arbor Networks, a Chelmsford, Mass., firm that tracks malicious activity on computer networks.

Most of the corporations whose sites were targeted did not explain why they severed ties with WikiLeaks. But PayPal issued statements saying its decision was based on “a violation” of its policy on promoting illegal activities.

Almost all the corporate Web sites that were attacked appeared to be operating normally later on Wednesday, suggesting that any economic impact was limited. But the sense of an Internet war was reinforced when Netcraft, a British Internet monitoring firm, reported that the Web site being used by the hackers to distribute denial-of-service software had been suspended by a Dutch hosting firm, Leaseweb.

A sense of the belligerent mood among activists was given when one contributor to a forum the group uses, WhyWeProtest.net, wrote of the attacks: “The war is on. And everyone ought to spend some time thinking about it, discussing it with others, preparing yourselves so you know how to act if something compels you to make a decision. Be very careful not to err on the side of inaction.”

Mr. Housh acknowledged that there had been online talk among the hackers of a possible Internet campaign against the two women who have been Mr. Assange’s accusers in the Swedish case, but he said that “a lot of people don’t want to be involved.”

A Web search showed new blog posts in recent days in which the two women, identified by the Swedish prosecutors only as Ms. A. and Ms. W., were named, but it was not clear whether there was any link to Anonymous. The women have said that consensual sexual encounters with Mr. Assange became nonconsensual when condoms were no longer in use.

The cyberattacks on corporations Wednesday were seen by many supporters as a counterstrike against the United States. Mr. Assange’s online supporters have widely condemned the Obama administration as the unseen hand coordinating efforts to choke off WikiLeaks by denying it financing and suppressing its network of computer servers.

Mr. Housh described Mr. Assange in an interview as “a political prisoner,” a common view among WikiLeaks supporters who have joined Mr. Assange in condemning the sexual abuse accusations as part of an American-inspired “smear campaign.”

Another activist used the analogy of the civil rights struggle for the cyberattacks.

“Are they disrupting business?” a contributor using the name Moryath wrote in a comment on the slashdot.org technology Web site. “Perhaps, but no worse than the lunch counter sit-ins did.”

John Markoff and Ashlee Vance contributed reporting from San Francisco.

source

I doubt that this is what msolga meant when she said "backlash." But "payback" is often an effective motivator to manipulate. Fear of retribution is.... well... intimidating.

I'm not sure there have been many threads on A2K about Anonymous and it's activities. When coordinated, they are pretty much invincible. I'd not want Anon to target me.

A
R
T
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 02/27/2025 at 07:52:14