Jump to content
The Corroboree
Sola

Wikileaks media coverage

Recommended Posts

Thanks very much synchro, that info is ver helpful. I'm not very computer savvy, only started using it more to use this site.

I like the idea of personal privacy and hence anonymity whilst using the net as I understand every search that is ever done is

recorded against the person who's logged in and therefore if someone had the desire to build a profile of your interests/ thoughts/ character all they would have

to do is hack into or have access to Google's database of info, as well as many others I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to check in 2moro, you've lost me :wacko:

Edited by Sola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said that the guy in the magazine was trying to give people access to Tor, right? Well, I was simply showing that they can get the access themselves...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, now I see, don't know enough about Tor to use it poorly but it does seem like a good idea, just on principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of personal privacy and hence anonymity whilst using the net as I understand every search that is ever done is

recorded against the person who's logged in and therefore if someone had the desire to build a profile of your interests/ thoughts/ character all they would have

to do is hack into or have access to Google's database of info, as well as many others I'm sure.

Exactly. And if enough of that sort of profiling happened, we would basically end up with a society of assumption. Oh, hang on, that's what we have already got isn't it... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of personal privacy and hence anonymity whilst using the net as I understand every search that is ever done is

recorded against the person who's logged in and therefore if someone had the desire to build a profile of your interests/ thoughts/ character all they would have

to do is hack into or have access to Google's database of info, as well as many others I'm sure.

I wonder how my profile appears as I sit here and type Nazi lesbian nuns into the search engine.

Would that make me look anti Semitic, perverted or heathen ?

Wouldn't the use of TOR be cause for suspicion from a suspicious mind ?

The innocent man shot by secret service agents after the London bombings was said to have used counter surveillance techniques (he was worried someone was following him so he changed buses or something like that) and that's what sent the pigs into a frenzy and open fire on him. People like that are paranoid and delusional by nature and trying to thwart their efforts to spy on you is deemed as suspicious, so I can't see why they wouldn't see TOR as any different to other counter surveillance techniques.

How do you know TOR wasn't set up by security agencies under some guise anyway ?

I don't know much about it but Sola mentioned the US military had some hand in it - that's enough for me not to trust it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The innocent man shot by secret service agents after the London bombings was said to have used counter surveillance techniques (he was worried someone was following him so he changed buses or something like that) and that's what sent the pigs into a frenzy and open fire on him.

Justifiable... :rolleyes: Was that the same guy who got shot something like 10 times?

People like that are paranoid and delusional by nature and trying to thwart their efforts to spy on you is deemed as suspicious, so I can't see why they wouldn't see TOR as any different to other counter surveillance techniques.

Anonymity is still safer than being spied on IMO. Especially considering that almost everything is considered a terrorist act now.

Now anti-terror police stop children's TV stars... for carrying glittery hairdryers

How do you know TOR wasn't set up by security agencies under some guise anyway ?

I don't know much about it but Sola mentioned the US military had some hand in it - that's enough for me not to trust it.

Well, what about the Internet then? They don't call it the Web for nothing. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Tor could quite possibly have different user levels. While your actions on the web may be harder to track for some at different levels

they may still track it easily. Could conceivably be used to flush out the kinds of people they have an interest in finding.

I really don't know enough about it. Initially when the US defence deprtment allowed civilian use of GPS technology they had inbuilt inaccuracy

to stop people turning their own technology against them. It still does but nowhere hear the same amount. Now however all you have to do is

carry a receiver, (mobile phone with GPS, car GPS etc.), and they can pinpoint you anywhere on the planet as most receivers are registered to

a specific user. A lot of technology used widely today started out in the same way.

I wouldn't be surprised if mobile phones were another little gift from the defence force.

Does anyone know much about Tor? I saw mention of it in the site & forum matters and it seems to me only necessary for people working for covert agencies

such as Wikileaks, the C.I.A. and counterparts around the world.

I'm very interested to see what the next round of Wikileaks releases includes, as is so often done people leave the best for last, often to still gain exposure as short

attention spans glance to something else. Could be very interesting, that's if the monopolised media will still report it, (for the broader population).

Should still find it on the web though.

Edited by Sola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justifiable... :rolleyes: Was that the same guy who got shot something like 10 times?

Yeah Synchro I think they shot him about 8 or 10 times, I think he did a runner too. So I suppose it was his fault - running from a pack of dogs is a sure fire way to trigger an attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I remember he had headphones on and was simply running or even only jogging to catch his train. A travesty of justice anyway you look at it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Armed police officers under the control of “Common Purpose “ Agent Cressida Dick fired at Jean Charles de Menezes for over 30 seconds when they killed him at Stockwell tube station, according to a witness statement made to independent investigators and obtained by the Guardian Newspaper.
Much of the immediate eyewitness evidence after the shooting was covered up by the police except the fact that 7 shots were fired into the head of De Menezes – a fact which was not made public at the time.

The account from Sue Thomason, a freelance journalist from south London, gives new detail of the police “Common Purpose” murder of De Menezes:

In her statement she says: “The shots were evenly spaced with about three seconds between the shots, for the first few shots, then a gap of a little longer, then the shots were evenly spaced again.”

Her statement to the IPCC says: “When the tube was stationary at the platform at Stockwell I recall shouting, it was a male’s voice, it may have come from more than one male. People then started to get out of their seats and look in the direction where the shouting was coming from.

“I recall hearing gunshots… The shooting was coming from the carriage to the left of me. When I heard the gunshots I thought it was terrorists firing into the crowd. I thought about getting behind a seat… After the initial first shots… I left the carriage.”

She and other commuters started running along the platform to leave the station.

Her statement continues: “While I was making my way to the escalator I remember hearing more shots coming from behind me. I thought that I would be shot in the back… Half way up the escalator I remember looking behind me and hearing two more shots… Once I got outside the station my legs went. I would say there was 10 or 11 shots fired. The shots were … evenly spaced out (time wise).”

She says two IPCC investigators who interviewed her were equipped with a map of Stockwell tube, which had key features in the wrong place. This initially led them wrongly to challenge her account.

In an email of complaint to the IPCC she wrote: “If the people investigating such a serious matter… can’t even get the plan of the station correct for interviewees to point out where they were, then what chance does the rest of the case have?”

She also says a key detail she gave of the number of shots and the interval between them was deliberately missed out from her final statement until she insisted it be included: “I’m not anti the IPCC, I just want them to get it right.”

CCTV footage is said to show De Menezes walking at normal pace into the station, picking up a copy of a free newspaper and apparently passing through the barriers legitimately before descending the escalator to the platform and running to catch a train.

De Menezes boarded the tube train, paused, looking left and right, and sat in a seat facing the platform.

http://rinf.com/alt-news/latest-news/de-menezes-shot-for-30-seconds-to-silence-him-why/1583/

Nothing suss... 'Tube cop's gun malfunctioned' Nothing suss at all...

Edited by synchromesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That poor bastard, itchy trigger fingers and a population worked into a frenzy has resulted in many innocent people dying.

Pretty amazing how quickly it all gets swept under the carpet. Has to be seen as excessive in any stretch of the imagination.

If the gun malfunctioned and the highly trained man couldn't point his weapon to the roof or somewhere else safe he shouldn't have it in the firstb place.

I know anyone with any firearm training would do this instinctively unless they'd been told to do otherwise.

Best not do draw suspicion, I agree.

:unsure::angry::uzi::huh::excl::crux:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was doing a little diggging into what was going on with Wikileaks and Julian Assange atm and found the US had used it's 9/11

policies that were hurried through as a way of neutralising Julian. People at the time were worried about losing civil rights and freedoms

and this has been a perfect example of how the US government is prepared to use it. When any organisation/ country is deemed to be

a threat to the US they can freeze all assets held in the US or multi-national corporations over which they have control.

Visa, American Express and Mastercad froze all Julian's funds shortly before the legal bills started really mounting up.

Of course when these laws were passed the public was told the government would use these new powers judisciously and not invade people's

civil rights, such as freedom of speech. I personally was under no illusion that what the government was actually saying was the truth, nor

did I think it would just effect US citizens. This financial attack and apparently advising media monopolies to ignore this area of reportable events

leaves Julian Assange effectively isolated with little means of effectively persuing his real opponents.

I've seen this series of chess moves before....when the US military attacked Iraq, (Bush 1 & 2), they tried to cut off the country by bombing their

utilities and governing areas, froze all assets they could just before and then waged war. The US don't seem to have many different tactics,

possibly because the President has no 'real' power. It seems the military have been in power for some time, I suspect a not so 'secret' coup occurred

when Kennedy was shot and the country's been hanging out an old sign with; "BUSINESS AS USUAL" written on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw in another thread a government official was quoted in a media publication as saying conspiracy theories and theorists

may need to be outlawed for some reason. I'll definitely be on some watched list if this does happen but I think it's not likely as

many conspiracy theories actually work for the governments and the ruling elite.

I'd always speak my mind and encourage others to do the same. I'm sure in another time and place I would have been killed by the inquisition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as we are vigilant and discreet, I see no reason why we shouldn't make our voices heard. I mean, what is the alternative anyway? To watch our worlds get smaller and smaller until we can barely feel, think, or move? No, thanks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as we are vigilant and discreet, I see no reason why we shouldn't make our voices heard. I mean, what is the alternative anyway? To watch our worlds get smaller and smaller until we can barely feel, think, or move? No, thanks...

Once such restrictions are in place, want to form a society of renegades that invoke freedom and form conspiracy theories?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO it's a shame we have to be vigilant and discreet when we live in a 'democratic' society that is supposed to allow people freedom of speech.

I think this forum would be considered by some to already be a group of renegades, invoking freedom and commenting on conspiracy theories.

So in answer to your question; yes, I made that decision on the 30th of April last year and I still stand by it as a good decision.

Wouldn't it be good if we could log on in a secure way once a month, proving your identity at the library say for example and have a referendum type set up

where all current decisions needing to be made could be voted on by the individual. No politicians, we could simply have a true democracy where each

and every decision was voted upon by the people it will effect. I have a hunch that we would see the removal of bans on plants as it's really only pressure from

companies that profit enormously from having sole access rights, everyday citizens don't care. We could save a lot of money that elected representatives

currently get as well as perks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikileaks and Assange back on the news but only on ABC and SBS, it seems the other channels have decided or been told not to run stories.

This is a worrying trend, similar to Long Cheng in Laos during the Vietnam war. That didn't 'happen' in the news for a long time after the events had gone on.

I can't say I'm surprised with the latest wikileaks release, purportedly showing wealthy business people, politicians, countries and corporations tax dodging techniques.

This may be to appease the government and some of the public, showing that they are a useful organisation for free access to all types of information, including

helping the government with collecting tax. But depending on how high up the ladder these tax dodgers are the government may say it's not in the public interest

to persue these high profile cases. So trying to show that there is nothing good about wikileaks as governments and corporations are some of the major holders

of secret information.

Apparently wikileaks have more delicate material on the way that shows mass surveillance of some kind. Now obviously we know about much of the surveillance

techniques but I believe this material will easily explain to the world population why they are not the wealthiest and most powerful.

Edited by Sola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Julian Assange has called for an appology from PM Julia Gillard, I thought she jumped the gun and commented on that matter before

there was time for other people to even determine if there was a law in place that had been broken. As it turns out there isn't in Australia

as the Federal Police indicated after an investigation. I personally think she should appologise as it's inappropriate for any official to

comment on matters that are still to be tried or in this instance maybe not tried at all. US officials did a similar investigation to determine

if Wikileaks/ Julian Assange had committed any crime in the US as it turns out some officials said if there isn't a law, we'll make one. Worrying indeed.

As far as I can tell he has committed no crime in the US either and is actually protected under the precedent set by the ruling in the Pentagon Papers

where an official had leaked information to the media to put an end to illegal behaviour within the government. A court ruling has protected people

in this position to allow whistle blowers room to inform the greater community of unlawful behaviour, such as that presented on Wikileaks.

This provision allows people to act on their conscience, not on dodgy gag orders, the PM should appologise IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was very surprised to find this on the yahoo page, seems some news outlets are starting to report facts, not just what governments may want portrayed.

As we've seen in multiple cases, closed door trials are unlikely to be fair and are only 'closed' to hide something from the public.

Julian Assange is yet to be charged with a criminal offence but in Sweden, where it's alleged he sexually assaulted two women, he is already labelled a rapist and has little chance of receiving a fair trial, a court has been told.The 39-year-old WikiLeaks founder from Australia said on Monday (Tuesday AEDT) he hoped details released during a two-day extradition hearing will prove the accusations against him are baseless.

"Five-and-a-half months we have been in a condition where a black box has been applied to my life," Assange told reporters outside court.

"On the outside of that black box has been written the word 'rape'. That box is now, thanks to an open court process, being opened and I hope that over the next day that we will see that box is in fact empty and has nothing to do with the words that are on the outside of it."

Prosecutors want Assange in Sweden to answer two women's claims of sexual assault, alleged to have occurred in August 2010.

One woman claims that on August 14 Assange "used violence", held her arms and "forcibly" spread her legs, preventing her escape by putting his body weight on top of her.

"This can only be described as ... violent, unlawful coercion as being action taken without the consent of the (alleged victim) and to the knowledge of the person committing the violence," prosecutor Clare Montgomery told the court on Monday.

In the case involving the second woman, the court was told she and Assange had sex throughout the night and in the morning he had unprotected sex with her, without her consent, as she slept.

Ms Montgomery said the act "improperly exploited the fact that she was asleep and that Assange was aware that it was the express wish of (the woman) ... that a condom be used".

"That unmistakenly speaks of ... penetration without consent to the knowledge of the person committing the act," she said.

Assange denies the allegations.

His lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson QC, called on a Swedish law expert, who told the court that prosecutor Marianne Ny, leading the investigation, had launched a "malicious" pursuit of Assange and the case against him was "extremely peculiar".

Former Swedish appeals court judge-turned-academic Brita Sundberg-Weitman said that in her country, Assange's guilt had already been decided.

"It's rather hostile," she said of the Swedish attitude towards Assange.

"And I think most people take it for granted that he has raped two women."

The former judge, now an associate professor at Stockholm University, criticised Ms Ny, who she admitted she has never met.

"She has her own rather biased view against men in the treatment of sexual offence cases," Ms Sundberg-Weitman said of Ms Ny.

"They seem to take it for granted that everyone under prosecution is guilty. I honestly can't understand her attitude. It looks malicious ... I think maybe she wants to make him suffer."

If Assange is extradited to Sweden, Mr Robertson said he fears his client will be taken into custody and interrogated - about matters relating to his WikiLeaks website as well as the sexual assault claims - before a secret trial.

"It's likely they will be tried in Sweden secretly behind closed doors in flagrant denial of justice," Mr Robertson said.

"The Swedish custom and procedure of throwing the press and public out of the court ... is one that we say is greatly unfair, not only by British standards, but by European standards and international standards."

The hearing before District Judge Howard Riddle continues on Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see some reasonable reporting now that the spotlight isn't so bright on the wikileaks case. It will be interesting to find out what happens in the

'closed door' trial. They can't possibly imagine someone strongly connected with wikileaks is going to leave this information out of the public domain.

I guess that might be the trap they're trying to force him into, first treat him unfairly in a secret trial and then through a court order demand that he not reveal the

nature of how he was screwed and then prosecute him for allowing the public access to the wrong-doings of the legal system.

Most intriguing, however, is how these two women, who met just briefly during the seminar, claim to have established their mutual connection with the man making Hillary Clinton's professional life hell.

When the phone call from the elusive Australian did not come, Miss W is believed to have phoned the party office, looking for him. She did not find Mr Assange. Instead, she discovered she was not the only blonde Swedish girl he had slept with that weekend.

Confiding to a woman whom she barely knew, she explained that she had had unprotected sex, and was worried about the possibility of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Finally, on the evening of Friday, August 20, both women went together to a local police station.

When the first chief prosecutor, Eva Finne, decided there was not enough evidence to pursue the investigation, the women exercised their right in Swedish law to seek a second opinion from a higher-ranking official, Marianne Ny, who reopened the case. The WikiLeaks scandal was no longer just about secrets; it was about sex.

Miss A told the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet that Mr Assange had not been violent. However, she added: "In both cases, what started out as voluntary sex subsequently developed into an assault. [Miss W] wanted to report rape. I gave my story as testimony to her story and to support her."

She repeated denials that their claims had been orchestrated by a higher authority.

"The accusations were not set up by the Pentagon or anybody else. The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with one person," Miss A added. That person, she said, was not just the man who reset whistleblowing for the electronic age. He was "a man with a twisted view of women, who has a problem accepting the word 'no'".

The Times

This last part as so much of the wikileaks/ Assange case seems very choreographed and contrived. Can't wait to see all the details of the closed trial :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bank of America using Private Intel Firms to Attack Wikileaks

2011-02-09 In a document titled "The WikiLeaks Threat" three data intelligence companies, Plantir Technologies, HBGary Federal and Berico Technologies, outline a plan to attack Wikileaks. They are acting upon request from Hunton and Williams, a law firm working for Bank of America. The Department of Justice recommended the law firm to Bank of America according to an article in The Tech Herald. The prosed attacks on WikiLeaks according to the slides include these actions:

  • Feed the fuel between the feuding groups. Disinformation. Create messages around actions of sabotage or discredit the opposing organizations. Submit fake documents and then call out the error.
  • Create concern over the security of the infrastructure. Create exposure stories. If the process is believed not to be secure they are done.
  • Cyber attacks against the infrastructure to get data on document submitters. This would kill the project. Since the servers are now in Sweden and France putting a team together to get access is more straightforward.
  • Media campaign to push the radial and reckless nature of WikiLeaks activities. Sustain pressure. Does nothing for the fanatics, but creates concern and doubt among moderates.
  • Search for leaks. Use social media to profile and identify risky behavior of employees.

As Air America was wholly CIA owned and probably still is so too are many other corporations/ banks etc. Bank of America it seems is also one of these money earning fronts and apparently a staging point for cyber attacks etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×