Print 72 comment(s) - last by ninus3d.. on Dec 4 at 4:08 PM

Leaks include documents which raise serious questions about China's cyber-aggression

On Sunday the U.S. Congress and White House's reasons for backing Google so heartily in its conflict with the Chinese government over cyber-attacks and internet freedoms became much clearer.

A leaked U.S. diplomatic cable states:

A global computer hacking effort: China’s Politburo directed the intrusion into Google’s computer systems in that country, a Chinese contact told the American Embassy in Beijing in January, one cable reported. The Google hacking was part of a coordinated campaign of computer sabotage carried out by government operatives, private security experts and Internet outlaws recruited by the Chinese government. They have broken into American government computers and those of Western allies, the Dalai Lama and American businesses since 2002, cables said.

Silence Under Fire:  Why Didn't the U.S. Publicly Air its Suspicions?

If the information in the cable is to be believed, the central controlling body of China's government perpetrated what was perhaps the most serious online attack on a U.S. corporation in our nation's history.   The Politburo of the Communist Party of China, commonly referred to as the Politburo, is a 24-member council that controls China's most important decisions.

The cyber-attacks in question were dubbed "Operation Aurora" in the security community and occurred from mid-2009 through December 2009.  Their highest profile target was Google, who had its "secret recipe" -- its search engine source code -- stolen.  Other victims of the assault included Adobe Systems, Juniper Networks, Rackspace, Yahoo, Symantec, Northrop Grumman and Dow Chemical.

But if the U.S. government had strong evidence to believe that the Politburo masterminded the attack, why not just come out and say it, or take action?  

The answer is likely a combination of a complex set of factors.  First, China owns much of the U.S. government's debt obligations and is one of the largest trading partners of the U.S. commercial sector.  Economic action against the nation would be virtually infeasible.  Also, the U.S. is desperately seeking China's cooperation on a number of geopolitical issues including Korean stability, terrorism in the Middle East, and global warming.

The leaked cable is somewhat embarrassing to the U.S. government, regardless, given its relative inaction.  It will doubtless increase the East-West tension that exists between the two global superpowers.

And perhaps that's precisely what the perpetrators of this leak were hoping for.

Leaks: Preventing Wrongdoing, or Espionage?

It's little secret that 
Wikileaks, masterminded by convicted cyber-criminal Julian Assange, is no fan of the U.S. government.  Mr. Assange has accused the U.S. military of "murdering" innocent Afghani and Iraqi citizens.

Over 90 percent the documents aired since 2006 by 
Wikileaks targeted the U.S. or its Middle Eastern allies.  That percentage ballooned further on Sunday with the release of 251,287 leaked U.S. documents, of which the Google-related cables were part of.

A key topic of debate is whether this new leak was truly geared at preventing wrongdoing or represented an cyber-espionage attack against the U.S. 

The newly leaked documents indeed largely deal with the Middle East, which could lend some support to 
Wikileaks' claims.  On the other hand, documents like this one, while certainly fascinating for the light they cast on the inside of U.S. foreign policy, seem to have little effect on preventing military wrongdoing and are more likely to hurt the U.S. financially and diplomatically.

Mr. Assange in his early days in the hacking community was a vocal proponent of anarchy -- the philosophy that the world would be better off if its largest governments -- including the U.S. government -- collapsed.  The recent leaks, while damaging to the U.S. gov't and its diplomatic relationships, aren't likely damaging enough to achieve such a goal.  However, they are arguably Mr. Assange's most successful attack on the stability U.S. government yet.  And unlike past damage he inflicted on the U.S. government's credibility, this one seems to have a great deal of meat that has little to do with the war on terrorism.

Adrian Lamo -- the convicted ex-hacker who turned in Bradley Manning, the young soldier who leaked these documents -- condemned 
Wikileaks actions and called for the U.S. government to be more vigorous in pursuing charges against the leaks' masterminds, including Mr. Assange.

He writes in a press release:

Known co-conspirators reside in districts competent to arrest, prosecute, and punish these people for their involvement in one of the greatest breaches of trust in the history of our intelligence community.  [I]t would be irresponsible in the extreme for us to not use all the tools available to us in bringing them to justice.

Mr. Assange resides in Iceland, which has offered him protection from foreign charges.  He is currently wanted on an outstanding arrest warrant for unrelated sex crimes charges in Sweden.  

Wikileaks Taken Down

Wikleaks was coincidentally the target of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack over the weekend.  While it's tempting to suspect that China or the U.S. governments were responsible for this effort, that ultimately seems less likely.  As 
Wikileaks aptly pointed out, it had already passed the cables to news efforts, so attempts to take down the site would not prevent their release.

As of 10 a.m. EST on Monday the site appeared to be up and responding normally to requests. 
Wikileaks is hosted by a worldwide collection of servers and is blocked in some nations, including China.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Much ado about nothing
By bug77 on 11/29/2010 11:05:41 AM , Rating: 4
Again, the documents don't seem to disclose anything we didn't already know.

All I've read today seems to talk more about wikileaks and its founder, than actual damaging leaked info.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By tastyratz on 11/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Much ado about nothing
By MrBlastman on 11/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Much ado about nothing
By sviola on 11/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Much ado about nothing
By adiposity on 11/29/2010 1:19:39 PM , Rating: 3
Well, they might have been a setup, but then, wouldn't he need to participate in order to become a rape?

What do you mean by participate? Have sex, or commit rape? I believe he admitted having sex, but can you blame the guy?

As far as actually raping them, I'm not sure it's very easy to "set up" someone to rape someone else. So I assume the "set up" here means they had some hookers sleep with him and then paid them to claim the were raped.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By MrBlastman on 11/29/2010 1:24:27 PM , Rating: 2
As far as actually raping them, I'm not sure it's very easy to "set up" someone to rape someone else. So I assume the "set up" here means they had some hookers sleep with him and then paid them to claim the were raped.

Correct. This is what I meant. Now, I realize I'm going way out on a limb here but I've seen even more ridiculous things happen when Governments want to take care of someone.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By RedemptionAD on 11/29/2010 9:29:51 PM , Rating: 1
I was framed as the flint serial killer in Michigan, that everyone heard so much about on the news, look at what was published vs what was found. I fit the published info (the bs info) and actually had to help find the real guy. PITA.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By sviola on 11/29/2010 2:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
What do you mean by participate? Have sex, or commit rape? I believe he admitted having sex, but can you blame the guy?

Well, I never said he committed rape. When I said he had to participate, I meant he had to have sex with the women in case. But then, he is a well know person and knows he could be a target for these kind of situations. He should be wiser and know better before putting himself in these situations.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By tim851 on 11/29/2010 1:50:19 PM , Rating: 5
Julian is a terrorist and as such, should be dealt with like a terrorist.

He is NOT a terrorist. He MIGHT be a criminal.

This is exactly the kind of bullsh*t people with brains are afraid of. That sooner or later everybody unpopular with the powers that be is just labeled a terrorist, so he can be dealt with according to these brave new rules of the war on terror, thereby bypassing the pesky little code of law, that has made subjugating people so difficult.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By MrBlastman on 11/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Much ado about nothing
By sviola on 11/29/2010 2:30:10 PM , Rating: 5
I think calling him a terrorist is a stretch. If he is a terrorist for publicizing these documents, so are all the journalists and newspapers around the world that have printed excerpts of them as well.

About the war on terror, I think the government and us media makes it bigger than it really is. The number of terrorist attacks today happens less than it did in the 70s and 80s.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By rcc on 11/29/2010 3:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
That begs the question of: perhaps anti-terrorist efforts are working?

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Samus on 11/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Much ado about nothing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/29/2010 6:06:48 PM , Rating: 2
The number of terrorist attacks today happens less than it did in the 70s and 80s.

Well yeah in the 70's and 80's we weren't killing them by the thousands either lol.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By SunTzu on 11/29/2010 6:59:35 PM , Rating: 5
No, you just paid them alot of money to go kill someone else.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By ninus3d on 12/4/2010 4:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
I love you, SunTzu <3

RE: Much ado about nothing
By 91TTZ on 11/29/2010 2:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
We can't call him a criminal. We can though, being a foreign citizen who is threatening us and then actually releasing private information from US agencies with the only apparent intent to harm our country--surmise him to be a terrorist.

That's some really wacky logic there. Releasing information is not terrorism. We're the ones that made this information, it's not like he concocted it about us.

He is not a terrorist. Let's not stretch that term to fit anyone you don't like.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By YashBudini on 11/29/2010 6:29:04 PM , Rating: 2
He is not a terrorist. Let's not stretch that term to fit anyone you don't like.

The term is now the 21st century branding tool of choice. One of the first in the US was to call someone a witch, and in the 50's they were called card carrying communists. Just watch, anybody that causes government any kind of embarrassment or harassment is labeled this way. This technique is widely used but such greats as Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and the rest of the fair and balanced crowd.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By KingofFah on 11/29/2010 3:23:41 PM , Rating: 4
Your viewpoint is exactly the reason why I doubt there's much hope for the US: because I believe there is a significant amount who agree with your view and are typically more likely to vote. While there may very well be individuals or small groups of people who would indeed want to kill all US citizens (psychopaths perhaps), it is more accurate to say there are terrorist groups that want to take down the US government or at least stop them from interfering in other people's matters.

What did the average Russian citizen have against the average US citizen during the cold war, and vice versa, that wasn't borne out of government propaganda? There is a war on terror simply because the US was putting its nose where it didn't belong, yet again, and the violent groups in those areas retaliated. How dare they!? And they had the gall to attack US citizens with planes instead of the civilised, long-range-missile way!

You may say that there were terrorist attacks before, but the US was doing things before then which instigated those actions. Besides, there will always be people who try to take down what is perceived as morally wrong; they will be labeled as terrorists by one side, and righteous by the other.

It would kill most people to look at things from different perspectives. Under today's definition of terrorists, the founding fathers of the US could have been labeled as terrorists against Britain. To the victors go the spin of historical data. I'll add that, and this is purely my opinion, the founding fathers of the US would be appalled and shamed at the state of the US today: run by an oppressive, border-line totalitarian government, creating a surveillance state and eating away civil liberties on almost a daily basis. It exists to serve itself and its interests, not its citizens.

I have respect for the honour and courage it does take to be a soldier, don't get me wrong. However, the higher up in rank you go, the more corruption you find -- it's one of the universal laws of power when in the hands of any human.

Anyway, I'm not going into the concepts of human morality, power, greed, governments, idealism, etc. I rarely posted here in the past, and the rarity becomes greater as time goes on.

Pigheadedness, complacency, and ignorance will most likely be the harbingers of the end of the US as it is today, not intelligence, leadership, fortitude, or valour -- the latter list of things usually happens after the former has brought an irreconcilable state.

One final note: I used to believe that people who say "if you don't like it, then leave" were wrong simply because that's against the original American ideal. However, I've thought more and realised that perhaps they are right. Maybe people who don't share that patriotic, "the federal government is good and just", and "question everyone else before questioning our government" view should indeed leave as they truly are no longer American since what it is to be American has changed so much since its beginning.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Dr of crap on 11/30/2010 8:34:59 AM , Rating: 2
A fine writen point!
If only more had this view.
Thanks, and post more when the points given on here are crap, like they can be.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Skywalker123 on 12/1/2010 1:01:09 AM , Rating: 1
"Our Government is not subjugating us by calling him a terrorist, they are only speaking the truth (if only they would do such a thing).

Also, wake up! There IS a war on terror. There ARE people out there trying to kill us all".

bet you can't say that with a straight face!

RE: Much ado about nothing
By ekv on 11/29/2010 1:54:27 PM , Rating: 3
XM-25 Rifle
XM-25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System. Nice. I personally would've went for the AA-12 -- none of this 32-rd. drum business, give me a belt. However, the XM-25's ability to 'shoot' behind cover would probably be required in this case. Julian apparently hides behind dresses.

Seriously though, this does raise a moral quandry for BHO. Even Hillary's presidential run may be effected by continued leaks.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Skywalker123 on 12/1/2010 8:31:18 PM , Rating: 2
"I suggest perhaps a field test of the new XM-25 Rifle... Such a wonderful tool if you read about it"

and you're a wonderful tool of the American Empire!

RE: Much ado about nothing
By sviola on 11/29/2010 1:16:41 PM , Rating: 2
Again, the documents don't seem to disclose anything we didn't already know.

Actually, the thing on Bahrein asking for US bigger interference in Iran nuclear program was news, as it was a player in the Middle-East that was neutral and somewhat sympathetic to the Iranian right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By VitalyTheUnknown on 11/29/2010 1:54:42 PM , Rating: 4
[A European's Perspective]
I would like to say that I fully support all the newspapers that published these documents, Wikileaks included. It will further help in educating all the citizens around the globe about the current problems in all regions, it will guideline us in making informed decisions and facilitate to defend our true interests. These new leaks are not anti American nor are they pro American, the information is a fact, reality that we irrevocably have to learn to boldly face and deal with without questioning each other's allegiances and patriotism. Your refusal to regularly inform public on the basis of its lack of comprehension of the complex situations is not a good foundation for any democratic society. Clandestinity, continually hiding information from the general public and unworthy professes that it's all for our own good and safety is nothing more than act of retaining your own power, being unaccountable for blunders and corruption at best and crimes against humanity at worst.

One of the more interesting bits of information that was published that I think is worth a discussion is the Iran's nuclear plans. Nobody wants to see a nuclear Iran, that's what is the most important evident conclusion we can make judging on the basis of a given information to us in these new leaks and historical context of intra Arabic relationship and should be evident to any knowing person. Maybe at last it would help people to realize it, it's time for a new wave of self hating Americans who constantly post here on DT and on other boards about how bad and morally despicable they are for some commonly ridiculously unimportant and trivial actions that they have done in the past and certain measures that needs to be taken today to secure future and for to a certain extent understandably proud for their country yet continuously abused in every societal matters Iranians to finally recognize this, there's no concord and peace in future with nuclear Iran baggage, neither for North America nor for Europe and Iran's neighboring Arab countries. Take a side and make a decision. I only hope that my home EU and Russia will eventually man up, work and act together, because we all face the same danger in spite of our troubled history, minor economic and social differences.

[Embassy cables]


"King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear programme."

"Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear programme to be stopped by any means, including military."

"Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".

"Abu Dhabi crown prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed favoured action against Iran, sooner rather than later. "I believe this guy is going to take us to war ... It's a matter of time. Personally, I cannot risk it with a guy like [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad. He is young and aggressive."

"King Abdullah had warned the Americans that if Iran developed nuclear weapons "everyone in the region would do the same, including Saudi Arabia".

RE: Much ado about nothing
By sviola on 11/29/2010 2:22:24 PM , Rating: 2
With the exception of Egypt, there is one common factor among these middle-easter countries: they are all Monarchies. A change in the powers would jeopardize their status quo and even move them towards other type of governments, that may or may not be better for the people, that will take their actual rulers from power.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By foolsgambit11 on 11/29/2010 3:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
With the exception of Egypt
And Syria, and Iraq, and Lebanon, and Yemen, and Palestine/Israel (both sides), and Iran. And if you want to include more North African Arab countries like Egypt, then Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, too. Of course, in many of these countries (including Egypt), Democracy is fairly limited, and the President has overwhelming power with very little real accountability, and he frequently hand-picks his own successor. And Iran is a theocracy. Several are also dealing with armed militant groups operating outside the scope of the law within their countries - Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, and of course Iraq come to mind as the most troubled by this, though most every Middle Eastern country has to deal with this issue to some degree. Also, some of the monarchies have ceded a large amount of control to democratically elected parliaments, similar to how the UK does things (though the crown retains more power in Arab states).

Of course, those in power never want to give it up, even in democratic societies like ours. On the issue of whether a change of government would be beneficial in the greater Middle East, it's difficult to say. Greater public involvement might lead to greater Islamification, like we see in Turkey - as the military has lessened its grip on power, the more conservative Muslims have been slowly rolling back Ataturk's reforms, or in Palestine, where Hamas won elections in the Gaza Strip. It probably won't improve stability or security - look to Lebanon and Yemen for examples - though perhaps in the long term things would normalize and end up for the best. The one thing that is certain is that any reforms must be undertaken carefully and methodically if they are to succeed. And they must come from within, since any attempts from outside to force change will lead to resistance and backlash.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/29/2010 4:16:16 PM , Rating: 3
With the exception of Egypt, there is one common factor among these middle-easter countries

They all live near Iran and have to face the very real possibility that insane mad-men could have their finger on the nuclear button?

I would be screaming for someone to take action against them as well.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:37:43 AM , Rating: 2
Why? You're not screaming about the insane madmen in America that have their finger on the nuclear button

RE: Much ado about nothing
By Shatbot on 11/29/2010 3:10:54 PM , Rating: 5
Again, the documents don't seem to disclose anything we didn't already know.

You already knew that Saudi Arabia wanted the US to strike Iran's nuclear facilities?

The US caught the Vice President of Afghanistan with $52 million dollars in the Arab Emirates, that he was allowed to keep without explaining why he was carrying it, or where he was going? (how do you carry 52 million dollars? It's like a plane full of money)

North Korea has given Iran better missiles than previously thought?

Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has leukemia?

There was nearly a massive environmental disaster with a uranium shipment?

The US government got encryption keys for cell phones of the UN Secretary General and top UN staff?

American officials warned Germany not to arrest CIA officers involved in a bungled operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was mistakenly kidnapped and held for months in Afghanistan?

If you already knew all this you have your finger on the pulse.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By bug77 on 11/29/2010 5:16:12 PM , Rating: 2
Iran not getting much love from the arab countries is not news.

Didn't know about the afghan VP, but I still fail to see how that's important (could be, but need more details).

North Korea selling missiles to Iran? Common knowledge.

And so on...

But What I was trying to say is, nobody talks about the actual leaked info. The present article is one of the better ones I've come across, but it still talks only about one fact - chinese cyberattacks - and only till the middle. After that it again turns into a Wikileaks PR post.

RE: Much ado about nothing
By SunTzu on 11/29/2010 7:04:25 PM , Rating: 3 dont think its important that one of the most powerful men in afghanistan, thats supported by the US, is openly considered to be corrupt and a drugsmuggler, to be important? You dont think its important that the US illegaly kidnapped and held an innocent man for several months in an afghani secret prison (Where he claims he was tortured), and then dumped alongside the road in a foreign country, to be important? And that the US (When Germany moved to arrest the perpetrators of this incredible crime) they threatened them? Come on, these are all BIG news, and stuff that will re-shape the political climate for years to come. Yes, there's too much talk of the private lives of Wikileak employees, but theres some really big stuff in that batch.

Give it a rest, Assange
By morphologia on 11/29/2010 3:17:54 PM , Rating: 1
Really, at this point does anyone still respect Wikileaks for what they're doing? Sure, it may have been fun to see them do their initial eff-you offering to the US govt, especially if you're one of those tinfoil-hat types that just can't get enough anti-gov stuff. It was kinda like watching someone kick that mean neighbor that always yells at everyone right square in the nyuts. But at this point, Wikileaks just keeps kicking that mean neighbor while he's down, they kick and kick, and they pat themselves on the back the whole time. It's getting sad, especially since they still seem to think that they're some sort of bad-boy heroes. Pff...moving on...

RE: Give it a rest, Assange
By SunTzu on 11/29/2010 11:47:19 PM , Rating: 1
Except for the fact that any shit they take from this, is because its all stuff they did? Its called just desserts, and its been a long time coming.

RE: Give it a rest, Assange
By morphologia on 12/1/2010 3:41:43 PM , Rating: 2
This latest breach of diplomatic secrecy affected more than just the U.S. All our allies and many other countries were compromised in some way as well. Also, there was coverage indicating that Wikileaks demanded payment for participation in this diplomatic travesty, denying those who refused to pay the extortion fee.

And now Assange is threatening to "bring down" a large US bank? How are he and his organization anything more than terrorists?

RE: Give it a rest, Assange
By SunTzu on 12/2/2010 11:31:10 AM , Rating: 2
If he manages to "bring down" anything its because he shows actions they would rather not have out in the open. If they did those things (and afaik, Wikileaks havent released any false documents so far) then yes, they deserve to be "brung down", just like they should already have been by the authorities. People are sick and tired of governments and big business getting away with anything just because they have alot of power. Wikileaks evens out the playing field, and makes people responsible for their actions.

I don't see much wrong with the leaks...
By Amiga500 on 11/29/2010 11:10:54 AM , Rating: 1
If the politicans were actually honest (y'know, like they continually claim to be), then there would never have been anything of substance to leak.

As for the intellectually feeble that maintain this will cause deaths; that is unlikely - none of these cables should information that should compromise field officers - unless there has been failure to follow procedure by the paper pushers in CIA. There are leaks that can incite crowds; as has been the case in the past. None of these leaks are (yet) of that nature.

The lemmings that will cry "national security" about this never seem to consider how it may save lives. How do you think Iran will now act knowing that it is not just the USA that thinks they are unstable and are a threat to other? It should give them something to think about. Same with Pakistan and nuclear waste.

I expect this post to be downrated by the retards, but I don't give a fuck... As long as they click that button in the full knowledge they are a clown.

RE: I don't see much wrong with the leaks...
By weskurtz0081 on 11/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: I don't see much wrong with the leaks...
By Amiga500 on 11/29/10, Rating: 0
By weskurtz0081 on 11/29/2010 4:44:14 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you have never missed anything in something you have read!

RE: I don't see much wrong with the leaks...
By Reclaimer77 on 11/29/2010 4:21:48 PM , Rating: 2
How do you think Iran will now act knowing that it is not just the USA that thinks they are unstable and are a threat to other?


Wait, you honestly don't think they already KNEW that? Like they are sitting there going "I don't understand! We threaten their sovereignty constantly. Make threats. Harass them all the time with our military. And now we're trying to build nukes! I'm just SHOCKED they feel this way!! Shouldn't they love us??"

By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:42:59 AM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer, put down the crack pipe and step away!
How does Iran threaten our sovereignty? The opposite is true, we threaten them constantly, having overthrown their government and killing almost 300 civilians when we shot down their airliner. We're not trying to build nukes we have thousands and are the only nation to use them.

more importantly...
By kattanna on 11/29/2010 10:42:58 AM , Rating: 2
but more importantly.. who won dancing with the stars??

since most here in the US dont care for news, just headlines, this will pass and soon it will only be all about the royal wedding in the US news

RE: more importantly...
By spread on 11/29/2010 10:54:44 AM , Rating: 2
wiki leaking what??

OMFGZ sarah pilin is on the tube!!!


By corduroygt on 11/29/2010 12:21:52 PM , Rating: 1
Let's get them while we still have a strong and advanced military and they haven't caught up yet with us technologically. Taking out their government should be sufficient.

RE: China
By FoundationII on 11/29/2010 2:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
Because attacking a nuclear power is the smartest thing to do.

so much hate
By Randomblame on 11/29/2010 2:38:53 PM , Rating: 2
I don't understand why so many people on here are trashing the US. Every country has secrets and informants to protect in order to encourage stability. Some people say we're war mongers and arrogant, even evil. What wikileaks has done is despicable, they are the ones likely to start wars with this information. They are putting thousands of informants at risk (causing their deaths in some cases) and they are damaging economic and political stability throughout the world.

If the U.S should be faulted for anything, it should be for not securing our electronic infrastructure from attack. We've had years to put better security in place. If we cant keep secrets on hard drives we need to start doing it only on paper.

By 91TTZ on 11/29/2010 3:53:29 PM , Rating: 2
Instead of these politicians condemning the release of this information, perhaps they should look inwardly and figure out what about the information raised so many eyebrows. Were they acting in a manner that the public finds acceptable? Is it really wrong to allow people to make informed decisions? Is it acceptable to lie to your own people in order to manufacture consent?

Sure, ugly truths were revealed in these disclosures. But they are truths, and they're more useful than the carefully crafted press releases (lies) usually given to the people.

One thing...
By sleepeeg3 on 11/29/2010 4:01:10 PM , Rating: 1
Did they find Obama's birth certificate among those 250k documents?

RE: One thing...
By YashBudini on 11/29/2010 6:23:44 PM , Rating: 1
I love people like you, essentially saying W and the entire US government blew it by not checking. And all the republican candidates blew it. And the RNC missed it as well. Apparently there is no limit to how stupid the pubs are, isn't that what you're implying?

And they still haven't fixed the situation, how dumb is that?

Yeah, you certainly have a logical and well thought out theory here. I suggested you contact Geraldo, maybe the birth certificate is in Al Capone's vault.

Any emails to/from Cheney?
By YashBudini on 11/29/2010 6:31:00 PM , Rating: 2
It's never too late to re-examined HR 333.

My View
By eddieroolz on 11/30/2010 6:19:33 AM , Rating: 2
As a Japanese living overseas, this leak actually brought something of interest from my viewpoint.

The leaked documents have been making news over at with regards to a specific set of leaked documents concerning China, North Korea and Japan.

Firstly, reading that China intends to support a South-Korean led unification of the Korean Peninsula brings me some relief, since this more or less signifies that even China has given up on its "ally", the North.

Secondly, China's messages to the United States regarding Japan's bid for a Security Council seat really irked me. China secretly pressured the US not to support Japan's bid for the seat, obviously driven by the anti-Japanese hate propaganda that they teach into their children.

So in the end, why Japan, the 2nd largest financier of the UN is denied a seat has always and probably will continue to stump me. Sure, we were on the wrong side 65 years ago - but that was 3-4 generations.

Back to Wikileaks though. I thank them for bringing these documents of my interest to my view. I just hope they aren't breaking their own ethical standards.

My 2 cents.

Why ?
By Dr of crap on 11/30/2010 8:39:00 AM , Rating: 2
The question no one has asked - how was it possible for this info, if you will, to get out?
Is our govt computer system not protected, or did someone give it to Wikileaks.
If either of these is the case then that needs to be fixed before we do anything else!!!

By andrinoaa on 12/1/2010 1:57:37 AM , Rating: 2
Man, are some people on this blog on drugs? "People have died because of..." Show us the money dumb f@#$! Honestly, some of these bloggers must be 12-14yrs old, the anger, the neanderthal urges are pulpable! I have read nothing that NOBODY already knew! So the first reaction is to shoot, call him a terrorist make him out to be a villan and quote the dumbest f@#$ you have -palin, guys you need to smell the roses. If Palin ever gets to be president, which on current form is possible, I hope some one points out that Australia is NOT Austria!!! haha

I'm certain many will die...
By Beenthere on 11/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm certain many will die...
By bbomb on 11/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: I'm certain many will die...
By SunTzu on 11/29/2010 7:05:50 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah, good logic. The guy shows the world that the US has done a bunch of illegal (in every way) and immoral stuff, and the proper response to that is to kill him and handle the fallout later. Have you ever considered moving to Russia? I think you and Putin would play well together.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 11/30/2010 1:26:54 AM , Rating: 2
the US has done a bunch of illegal (in every way) and immoral stuff
I'm just curious ... is the glass half-empty or half-full? The US has also done a lot of good. Raising funds for disaster struck regions of the world. Etc.

If Assange was truly trying to accomplish reform, then the approach taken would be far different. E.g. there would be dialog, Julian would sit down with Barry for tea [beer is too expensive; what, a couple thousand per?].

Assange is an Anarchist. He is also very likely involved with espionage, since he has received illegally obtained documents (knowingly). The proper response to that is to extradite him and process him to fullest extent of the law in US courts.

If you ask me how I'd feel about Assange if something untoward happened to him, honestly, I wouldn't shed a tear. If you catch my drift. But that is neither here nor there.

Btw, how much has been leaked about Putin's Russia? or perhaps China? surely North Korea? Iran? Why not, because they are morally superior to US? or perhaps Assange is merely a glory-hog anarchist who's simply afraid those others would not hesitate to take him out. [Do you know how well Po-210 works? It'd be nice if Alexander Litvinenko could tell you.]

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By Paj on 11/30/2010 9:22:53 AM , Rating: 2
did you actually read this article, or one of the many others? How the leaks mention China, North Korea, the Saudis, Germany, Prince Andrew?

Of course you did. My bad.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 11/30/2010 3:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
did you actually read this article
I might have expected such a response from you. At least you don't have your Grammar Nazi propeller-cap on today.

The leaks mention many countries and people. But I suppose it is too much to ask where the leaked documents come from. Especially since you can't even figure it out. Let me help; the documents do not come from any of the countries or people you mentioned. They come from a country that starts with "United" and ends with "States".

Do we have the least glimmer of comprehension yet? No? If Assange wanted to accomplish reform, or he was on a noble mission to encourage open democratic communication, blah blah blah, then he would be approaching this in an entirely different manner. But no, he's an Anarchist. As it is, I bet Hillary goes after this guy -- "nails his ass" -- and charges him with espionage.

It's political now. Innocent people have died as a result of the leaks.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By Skywalker123 on 12/1/2010 1:05:34 AM , Rating: 2
How would Assange reform in the United States? Ask them to?

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 12/1/2010 3:36:58 AM , Rating: 2
reform in the United States
Interesting that the same theme continues ... the U.S. as the Great Satan.

Assange's version of reform, being the anarchist he is, would be to topple the US gov't, or at least Hillary. Hillary, not being one to sit back and get her butt kicked, decides to nail his ass instead. Interpol is already working on it for her, in case you don't believe me.

My idea of reform is along the lines of Nelson Mandela, or William Wilberforce! or Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Upton Sinclair, Ghandi, etc.

I don't necessarily agree (entirely) with these individuals but I think you can see the difference tween their approach and Assange's. Btw, since you think Assange is trying to bring about reform, I'm very curious what you think that reform would be?

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By Skywalker123 on 12/1/2010 3:15:51 PM , Rating: 2
No, the U.S. isn't great, just an ordinary Satan. :) Topple the government? You mean topple Obama? then i'm all for him! Hillary is going after someone for revenge in a dirty and illegal way? I ABSOLUTELY REFUSE TO BELIEVE IT, YOU LIAR!

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 12/2/2010 1:55:59 AM , Rating: 2
For starters
I suppose the rest of your statement was sarcasm.

Mark my words, I am no fan of Hillary. I'm simply stating the obvious move ... getting Interpol on the case was logical.

I reiterate, it is political now. Assange has no reform in mind. And if even a fraction of what Lisa Myers (NBC) reported about him is true, he's an incomparably arrogant low-life scum. His leaks have also directly brought about murder of innocent lives. Perhaps Assange ought to be exposed, no? Hung by his own veritable petards.

Btw, simply toppling Obama does no good. He has proven to be aloof, cold, distant and even ineffectual (when he can't blame Bush; which, surprise surprise, is increasingly the case). So, no, if Obama is toppled then it will be seen as due simply to his mere humanity. No real change will result. No reform ... and hence more "all the world is a stage and we are merely players" type of attitude.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By Skywalker123 on 12/2/2010 9:59:38 PM , Rating: 1
You misunderstand, I know that many Iranians call the U.S. the Great Satan, but I can't understand why, all we did was overthrow their goverment,install an American puppet, sic Saddam on them, resulting in hundreds of thousand of Iranian deaths and shooting down flight 655 killing 290 civilians. Crazy Iranians sure hold a grudge over nothing don't they? You say Assange's leaks have caused innocent lives to be lost? LOL they are only a tiny percentage of what American policy has caused.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 12/3/2010 12:52:57 AM , Rating: 3
Let's start here.
LOL they are only a tiny percentage of what American policy has caused.
Suppose somebody takes issue w/ your post. They contact a 3rd party and both mutually agree w/o coericion on a contract. The 3rd party has his g/f drive you off the road ... and what's that he's wielding in his hand?! You unfortunately were the target of the contract and are a statistic, "a tiny percentage". American policy can be defined quite broadly. [I do not endorse in any way such a hypothetical situation, in disputes foreign or domestic.] However, in reality, I would like to see policy tightened; no more splurging on foreign affairs, trying to buy or influence "votes" and opinions, less meddling, etc. My point is that life doesn't matter as much till it's your butt that's on the line.
Crazy Iranians sure hold a grudge over nothing don't they?
Your sense of history is grotesquely cynical ... and skewed. Each of your allegations are inflammatory and highly disputed, unless you are a Shiite.

You say Assange's leaks
Wasn't me that said it. Here,
and here

If Obama had tasked the CIA to find a way to help the pro-democracy movement in Iran, what would you say? After all, since you say you want to topple Obama, is it then NOT ok to topple crazy-Ahmadinejad?

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 2:01:20 AM , Rating: 1
Where to start? Ok here

"My point is that life doesn't matter as much till it's your butt that's on the line."

My point is that foreigners innocent lives don't matter, they're just "collateral damage".

There's nothing wrong with my sense of history,and it is skewed from the traditional American line. The "allegations" are inflammatory, yet true, and not disputed by anyone but American apologists. You deny we overthrew Mossadegh and installed the Shah? You deny we encouraged Saddam to attack Iran? You deny we shot down an Iranian airliner?
The U.S is actively trying to destabilize the Iranian govt and has since the Ayatollah came to power, and they don't give a crap about any democratic government, we already overthrew an elected Iranian govt in '56.
Crazy Ahmadinejad has never invaded another country, and he is not the power in Iran, he is more or less a figurehead, the Mullahs are the power in Iran.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 12/3/2010 3:17:40 PM , Rating: 3
Look, even if you are Shiite, I still probably wouldn't believe you. I can see you'd be afraid of admitting something. Maybe it's personal. I don't know. No, I wouldn't believe you because the Koran says it's ok to lie to infidels. The Bible is the antithesis of such.

My point is that your cynicism is just grotesque. In your mind foreign lives don't matter to US.

Your focus is on "the glass is half empty", and by this I mean that you see the US as the Great Satan. The US is the source of all evil in your eyes, but especially, "it is BUSH's fault". You can't get your little mind off the US long enough to realize Iran is spending over a hundred million on terrorist activities in the region. Do you think other Middle Eastern countries are not aware of this? Do you think sponsoring terror makes Iran popular?
Crazy Ahmadinejad has never invaded another country, and he is not the power in Iran, he is more or less a figurehead, the Mullahs are the power in Iran.
Pfft. You've said nothing. I can say the same thing about Obama. But you can't even stand up for democracy in Iran. There is a fine line tween being afraid and outright cowardice.

And we've strayed very, very far from the OP. I'll give you the last word.

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By SunTzu on 12/2/2010 11:35:19 AM , Rating: 2
The leaks come from wherever they can find someone willing to leak it. Assange doesnt go out and recruit people, they come to him. Most (not nearly all) of the documents they have released have been from the US, but alot havent. Maybe you should ask yourself why so many americans feel the need to go outside their media and government with their complaints, more then any other nation?

If you read the email conversations that Assange has had with the state department, you would know that he's given them the chance. They gave them the documents in advance, and asked them to provide a redacted version for them to analyze, and remove anything "dangerous". The US refused. How do you think they should have acted? If there was no publication, nothing would change, and the CIA would keep kidnapping foreign nationals on foreign (and friendly) soil, just bc they share a name with an alleged terrorist...

RE: I'm certain many will die...
By ekv on 12/3/2010 1:53:13 AM , Rating: 2
Most (not nearly all) of the documents they have released have been from the US
No I'm referring to the recent focus. Wikileaks is having trouble paying their bills. So how can they raise money? They failed at getting media grants. So maybe they stir up a big controversy, David (i.e. WikiLeaks) vs. Goliath (U.S.), which drives people to their web-site to help generate ad-revenue.
quote: would know that he's given them the chance.
Blackmailing the State Department is further proof that Assange The Anarchist is out for nothing other than notoriety and money. You have to think about the cost of all the security precautions for Assange. Must make him feel important, feeding his ego.

Publishing these documents does nothing, other than make Obama and Hillary look bad, which they are already doing quite nicely at w/o Wikileaks assistance. What change do you think could possibly come from publishing these State Dept doc's? especially in the manner this was done?

Your implication is that Wikileaks, by publishing illegally obtained information, that is either at or crosses the line into national security -- i.e. espionage -- that the CIA will be put in its place. Kind of like Tiananmen Square (TS) where the small guy stops the tank as the world breathlessly watches. I don't think so, but even if that were true, what has happened since TS? Yes, there are many reporters and dissidents tracking the Politburo's every move. But the Great Firewall of China does seem to put a damper on the flow of information. Operation Aurora was a smashing success (for the PLA). Dissidents in Tibet have their email accounts broken in to. [Hell, even Wikileaks publishes private emails]. China is an order of magnitude (or two) stronger since TS. And more daring than ever. By analogy, this is your plan for the CIA?

How is Wikileaks going to change things? Oh, I can see State Dept. security measures tightening. To the point of Draconian. But change for the good, a moral change??? I just don't see it. Assange is a scam-artist, playing on negative advertising.

"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki