after all, laden is getting old. this guy is fresh, looks totally different, and if he is a bad guy (like, the whitest nerd type there is) ... everyone can be made one!
he is a perfect example for to make the people understand that we need more security, and that you should not be worried about arab guys with beards only.
i did not hear anything like it yet, but if they have not yet, they sure gonna create a new hype anti-word like "terrorist". maybe "cyber-terrorist"?
... ouh, ouh.. the potential is unlimited!!
what is gonna happen if they arrest or kill him?
is the nerd community gonna do something?
lets unite NOW! for our fellow nerd leader! lets threaten them with killing their servers, releasing their private live, digitally cutting them of their power, giving their money to the poor, ...
YES WE CAN!
YES WE CAN!
sieg HEIL!
In Nomine Patris Et Filii Et Wikileaks.
Assanche akbar!
lets shov em down the rabbit hole they made us dig.
.. i really would like some kind of attack in that manner, but who would take part?
... BD, got your EMP ready?
*tu turuuuu*
Wikileaks
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Wikileaks
Anybody else feel bad for the kid who originally leaked the stuff? Basically you he came to the decision to do the leaking after discovering and being party to horrible things (like the Afghani police arresting a bunch of liberal political protesters demainding accountability from the government, and the video of the helicopter attack) and then leaked all that stuff... and then tried to find somebody to confide in so he found an ex-hacker/journalist who sold him up the river.
Which isn't to say that the guy should get to keep his job or anything, but he'll be facing far worse punishments than the men who ran the USA into the dirt.
Which isn't to say that the guy should get to keep his job or anything, but he'll be facing far worse punishments than the men who ran the USA into the dirt.
Re: Wikileaks
You could recruit the 4chan crowd... Iirc they already have a habit of blasting RIAA et al with low orbit ion cannons.hoijui wrote:.. i really would like some kind of attack in that manner, but who would take part?
... BD, got your EMP ready?
Re: Wikileaks
4chan totaly...
How can 4chan ignore such a random troll like assanje??
I bet nobody just game them the idea yet..
How can 4chan ignore such a random troll like assanje??
I bet nobody just game them the idea yet..
Re: Wikileaks
4chan is too busy saving puppies nowadays.
I know how Anon think highly of himself, and they might indeed be good at trolling lone crazy teenage girls, but tbh, they stand zero chance against governements or any large organisation.
I remember when Anon was laying big plans for project Chanology... and then nothing happened.
I know how Anon think highly of himself, and they might indeed be good at trolling lone crazy teenage girls, but tbh, they stand zero chance against governements or any large organisation.
I remember when Anon was laying big plans for project Chanology... and then nothing happened.
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Re: Wikileaks
Ya, Anon's war on Scientology was fun, but it doesn't really compare to China's war on Falong Gung. Governments are massively so much better at screwing things up than semi-criminal internet organizations at this point in time.
Re: Wikileaks
The .org site is down for me, dunno about the rest of you. Here are some mirrors incase it does go down: http://wikileaks.info/
Re: Wikileaks
Site changed domain due to dDoS attacks.
Online interview with Assange here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/20 ... -wikileaks
Online interview with Assange here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/20 ... -wikileaks
Re: Wikileaks
Very nice interview, certainly cleared a few things up for me. Seems like he knows what he's doing, or at least, I hope he does.Licho wrote:Site changed domain due to dDoS attacks.
Online interview with Assange here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/20 ... -wikileaks
Re: Wikileaks
Wait, what? Did Assange just say the cables have references to UFO's? 
I think Wikileaks is desperate, they throw the UFO card in an attempt to pick the curiosity and make the public demand releasing the info. Plus they probably just won themselves a bunch of voulenteer servers from all kinds of nutjobs.
I think Wikileaks is desperate, they throw the UFO card in an attempt to pick the curiosity and make the public demand releasing the info. Plus they probably just won themselves a bunch of voulenteer servers from all kinds of nutjobs.
Re: Wikileaks
Whatever keeps it going..Teutooni wrote:Wait, what? Did Assange just say the cables have references to UFO's?
I think Wikileaks is desperate, they throw the UFO card in an attempt to pick the curiosity and make the public demand releasing the info. Plus they probably just won themselves a bunch of voulenteer servers from all kinds of nutjobs.
Re: Wikileaks
UFO = unidentified flying object
with 99.9xxx% certainty, the UFOs in the cables are either part of a joke, or more likely, human created aircraft/missiles. you know, when there is something on your radar, it is fast, and you don't know what it is, it is an UFO. the only reason he mentioned UFOs is to make people look stupid, when they do not THINK (of this).
of course he also knows, that as soon as such people hear that explanation, they will already have convinced them-selfs they were not stupid to only think on aliens, or they actually though of this explanation them-selfs.
"how many fingers am i holding up?"
"i do not know!"
this is real love!
with 99.9xxx% certainty, the UFOs in the cables are either part of a joke, or more likely, human created aircraft/missiles. you know, when there is something on your radar, it is fast, and you don't know what it is, it is an UFO. the only reason he mentioned UFOs is to make people look stupid, when they do not THINK (of this).
of course he also knows, that as soon as such people hear that explanation, they will already have convinced them-selfs they were not stupid to only think on aliens, or they actually though of this explanation them-selfs.
"how many fingers am i holding up?"
"i do not know!"
this is real love!
Last edited by hoijui on 04 Dec 2010, 12:28, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Wikileaks
Well said. It's a game within a game within a game.
-
FireStorm_
- Posts: 666
- Joined: 19 Aug 2009, 16:09
Re: Wikileaks
Captain subtext to the rescue!!!
JAnthony
'In my pseudonym I'll use a surname...'
Julian.
'...but to you I'll start condescending, okay?'
I am a former British diplomat. In the course of my former duties I helped to coordinate multilateral action against a brutal regime in the Balkans, impose sanctions on a renegade state threatening ethnic cleansing, and negotiate a debt relief programme for an impoverished nation.
'I'm quite the hero if I say so myself.'
None of this would have been possible without the security and secrecy of diplomatic correspondence, and the protection of that correspondence from publication under the laws of the UK and many other liberal and democratic states.
'But you'll have to take our word for it.'
An embassy which cannot securely offer advice or pass messages back to London is an embassy which cannot operate. Diplomacy cannot operate without discretion and the
protection of sources.
'Just take our word for it already.'
This applies to the UK and the UN as much as the US.
'Because we're the good guys, that's why.'
In publishing this massive volume of correspondence, Wikileaks is not highlighting specific cases of wrongdoing
'Now, we're not immoral in any way...'
but undermining the entire process of diplomacy.
'...but pointing that out is...'
If you can publish US cables then you can publish UK telegrams and UN emails.
(sometimes I just throw in a sentence)
My question to you is: why should we not hold you personally responsible when next an international crisis goes unresolved because diplomats cannot function.
'...so can't we just blame you for our own incompetence?'
Julian Assange
'I'll just use my full real name, okay?'
If you trim the vast editorial letter to the singular question actually asked, I would be happy to give it my attention.
[[scanning very evasive remark...]]
[[scanning complete]]
[[no subtext detected]]
Disclaimer: Extremely biased subtext is for amusement purposes only. Do not read if you are a human being, or other entity susceptible to fear.
JAnthony
'In my pseudonym I'll use a surname...'
Julian.
'...but to you I'll start condescending, okay?'
I am a former British diplomat. In the course of my former duties I helped to coordinate multilateral action against a brutal regime in the Balkans, impose sanctions on a renegade state threatening ethnic cleansing, and negotiate a debt relief programme for an impoverished nation.
'I'm quite the hero if I say so myself.'
None of this would have been possible without the security and secrecy of diplomatic correspondence, and the protection of that correspondence from publication under the laws of the UK and many other liberal and democratic states.
'But you'll have to take our word for it.'
An embassy which cannot securely offer advice or pass messages back to London is an embassy which cannot operate. Diplomacy cannot operate without discretion and the
protection of sources.
'Just take our word for it already.'
This applies to the UK and the UN as much as the US.
'Because we're the good guys, that's why.'
In publishing this massive volume of correspondence, Wikileaks is not highlighting specific cases of wrongdoing
'Now, we're not immoral in any way...'
but undermining the entire process of diplomacy.
'...but pointing that out is...'
If you can publish US cables then you can publish UK telegrams and UN emails.
(sometimes I just throw in a sentence)
My question to you is: why should we not hold you personally responsible when next an international crisis goes unresolved because diplomats cannot function.
'...so can't we just blame you for our own incompetence?'
Julian Assange
'I'll just use my full real name, okay?'
If you trim the vast editorial letter to the singular question actually asked, I would be happy to give it my attention.
[[scanning very evasive remark...]]
[[scanning complete]]
[[no subtext detected]]
Disclaimer: Extremely biased subtext is for amusement purposes only. Do not read if you are a human being, or other entity susceptible to fear.
Re: Wikileaks
Point is it's a dirty business. The rape scandal, DDoS's, Amazon getting pressured to terminate contract, etc. Wikileaks needs every cheap trick they can get. Abusing freedom of speech isn't enough I guess (as far as I understand, it only covers publishing your own creations freely, not someone elses work without their concent).
EDIT: hmm I guess I confused freedom of speech with freedom of press
EDIT: hmm I guess I confused freedom of speech with freedom of press
Last edited by Teutooni on 04 Dec 2010, 13:50, edited 1 time in total.
-
FireStorm_
- Posts: 666
- Joined: 19 Aug 2009, 16:09
Re: Wikileaks
I guess so. But plagiarism doesn't cover journalism, right?
Re: Wikileaks
Just watched this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVGqE726 ... re=related
I wonder if that audience still feel the same way about him. I hope so, because Julian, other Wikileaks assistants and the original sources aren't trying to express their own message or influence their own own opinion on others, but are simply helping people make their decisions based on truth rather than lies or inadequate information.
I wonder if that audience still feel the same way about him. I hope so, because Julian, other Wikileaks assistants and the original sources aren't trying to express their own message or influence their own own opinion on others, but are simply helping people make their decisions based on truth rather than lies or inadequate information.