Print 105 comment(s) - last by iiiears.. on Dec 12 at 3:08 PM

Wikileaks has lost its domain name and is now only reachable by direct IP. It has lost virtually all its primary sources of funding.

An hacker activist has helped make Wikileaks difficult to reach, even before the recent domain name takedown.  (Source: Vimeo)

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in England on supposedly unrelated charges.  (Source: AP Photo)
Site's options continue to shrink

Wikileaks aired hundreds of thousands of classified documents on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that were stolen from the U.S Military, and shared 250,000 stolen classified U.S. State Department cables with The New York Times and other news organizations worldwide. The website certainly irritated the governments of U.S., China, Britain and many other organizations worldwide.  They moved to cut off the site's funding, first convincing Amazon to throw it off its hosting platform, then working with Paypal to sever its primary source of funding.  

But when 
Wikileaks yesterday published a list of top targets to hurt U.S. national security, the site seemingly sealed its own fate.  Its Swiss bank account was closed, and Wikileaks reportedly lost the money in it (the bank contended that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange lied in the paperwork, saying he resided in Switzerland, which he does not).

Now the DNS Company, the web listing organization which provided 
Wikileaks with the right to use the domain name "", has terminated its affiliation with the site.  That means that attempts to reach the site by domain name no longer succeed.

The site also lost another hosting service -- -- and has jumped to a mix of Swiss and French hosting at the present.  But France's government is already moving to ban the site from its nations servers.

Meanwhile the site is under a distributed denial of service attack from a "hacktivist" who goes by the moniker The Jester – or "th3 j35t3r".  On his Twitter feed, The Jester writes, "TANGO DOWN - for attempting to endanger the lives of our troops, 'other assets' & foreign relations."

An earlier attack exceeded a modest 2-4 Gbps, but a Tuesday attack was even more potent, reaching a mean 10 Gbps.

About the only way to get to Wikileaks these days is via a Google search, which comes up with its direct IP address, which is occasionally reachable, depending on the current volume of fake service requests.

Facing the possibility of his masterwork being taken offline and complete loss of funding,
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange surrendered to authorities in Britain on Swedish rape charges unrelated to the recent leaks.  He has warned his followers that if anything happens to him while he is imprisoned, that a secret key will be released which will unlock a distributed archived file containing all the site's unreleased secrets.

One of Mr. Assange's accusers in the Swedish sex crimes trial coincidentally has ties to the CIA.  Mr. Assange was denied bail, as he is to be extradited to Sweden for questioning on outstanding allegations of rape, molestation and unlawful coercion.  When asked if he understood the ruling, he commented, "I understand that and I do not consent."

Apparently the matter was not left up to his determination.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: I'm conflicted...
By MrBlastman on 12/7/2010 11:27:31 AM , Rating: 4
As a side note, I realize Julian is not a US Citizen nor is Wikileaks US property. Our rights bestowed upon our citizens do not apply to him. However, the concepts of our rights are what potentially is at stake based on the mentality of our populace on this issue. It is simply grounds for deeper reflection on the full gravity of what may or may not happen.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/7/2010 11:34:11 AM , Rating: 5
It's basically what James Madison said in circa 1811.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By xkrakenx on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By MrBlastman on 12/7/2010 11:53:09 AM , Rating: 5
I'm not showing him love at all; Please re-read what I wrote.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By xkrakenx on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By ClownPuncher on 12/7/2010 2:08:32 PM , Rating: 5
Face it, a rational response doesn't pander to the mob mentality of either side. Being a moderate fucks you.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By MrBlastman on 12/7/2010 2:25:26 PM , Rating: 2
That is so true. :) Well said.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By dsumanik on 12/11/2010 5:25:13 AM , Rating: 3
Our nation needs drastic change, and mr assange is ushering the public to think beyond what is fed to them on the television by corrupt politicians and biased media.

All of you would be singing a completely different tune if these leaks pertained to chinese military/diplomatic secrets. Youd be loving this guy.

Well guess what, this dirty laundry is all American this time around.....and it all happened because the citizens of this country fell asleep at the wheel eating mcdonalds and paying for it with maxed out credit cards.

Wake up folks, our great country the USA is not a darling angel anymore and in the last 2 decades we have caused more harm than any other country on the planet from both a military and economic standpoint....why do you think out of all the places that could have been targeted in the world, it was new york on sept 11 2001? Just bad luck?

We pissed alot of people off, they is that simple.

Leaking these "sensitive targets" is nothing that terrorists dont already know.




RE: I'm conflicted...
By iiiears on 12/12/2010 2:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
"Remember the Maine!"

RE: I'm conflicted...
By Suntan on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/7/2010 12:54:06 PM , Rating: 4
I totally disagree, I think the Wikileaks cables reveal the crux of our problems and struggles. It's absolutely necessary for Public to know this; clandestine actions and obscured policies that endanger everyone. This one for example:

WikiLeaked Cable Confirms U.S.’ Secret Somalia Op

"Three years later, it’s clear the Ethiopian invasion was a bad idea. The attack rallied Somalis of all stripes and politics against the invaders, ultimately boosting support for fringe Islamic groups that now had a clear enemy in the Ethiopians and their suspected American puppet-masters. Violence mounted as the Ethiopians settled in for a bloody, two-year occupation.

When the Ethiopians withdrew in 2009, the Islamists rushed to fill the vacuum. A year later, the Al Shabab Islamic group, successor to the Islamic Courts, conducted its first international terror attack. Last month, a Somali-born American teen plotted to explode a bomb in Portland. Today, U.S. Special Forces continue to target terrorists in Somalia. There are arguably more of them than ever, thanks in part to the botched Ethiopian invasion. “We’ve made a lot of mistakes and Ethiopia’s entry in 2006 was not a really good idea,” U.S. diplomat Donald Yamamoto said in March."

RE: I'm conflicted...
By ValorMorghulis on 12/7/2010 1:44:32 PM , Rating: 3
Vitaly, I agree with you on that specific example. There are things that we as the public need to see. However, once it becomes clear that actions you are making are hurting SPECIFIC individuals, you have an obligation to stop. When terrorist organizations are thanking you for what you've done you've crossed the line.

Even though we as a country believe in free speech, there still are types of speech that are prohibited. You can't yell fire in a crowded room. Why? Because it leads to imminent physical harm to other people. Thats exactly Assaunge is doing. His actions are putting people in IMMEDIATE physical danger. This isn't an abstract situation of "oh he's hurting our credibility". There are immediate direct and often fatal consequences of his actions. That is not acceptable and shouldn't be.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/7/2010 3:31:36 PM , Rating: 5
I was going to write a more extensive reply, but my friends just informed me that Julian Assange has published his new article,
"Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths", this article essentially reflects my position om this controversy in more coherent style.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By xkrakenx on 12/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: I'm conflicted...
By Suntan on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By Samus on 12/7/2010 4:13:52 PM , Rating: 3
Of all the things leaked, the cables are of the least concern. Those don't neccessarily endanger lives. Releasing classified mainland terrorist The nail in the coffin, if you will.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By Luticus on 12/7/2010 11:48:31 AM , Rating: 2
There is a difference between free speech/press and releasing information that could hurt a lot of people. They aren't giving their opinion on something, they aren't calling the president a jerk, they are releasing ideas on how to best hurt an entire group (country) of people. I don't think our rights are at stake on this one. I think this goes far above and beyond any right someone has. This is akin to someone going into your house and grabbing all your financial records and releasing them online, then trying to hide behind free speech. We wouldn't stand for that would we?

I'm ok with them exposing wrong doing, war crimes, and other dumb stuff like that, but what they are doing now is just hurtful and doesn't help anyone but those who would do wrong. This is a great example of "good concept, bad execution". The idea of a site where you can go to report wrong doing and blow whistles and such is great but when it become a medium to hurt people then it becomes something that i feel needs to be shut down.

Now as for Julian not being a citizen of the USA, I believe that everyone regardless of what nation they belong to or what part of this rock they were born on, deserves all the rights we enjoy here. People are no less human because they were born in a different hemisphere. It's not so much that i believe that our (America's) way is perfect or somehow better than that of other countries, i just simply believe that as someone who values and holds the right of free speech i should impart onto other people of the world the same respect and courtesy that i am given as a citizen of the US. The declaration of independence reads that "all men are created equal", not "all citizens of the United States". But that's just my take on it.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By MozeeToby on 12/7/2010 12:39:27 PM , Rating: 2
No one has ever been successfully prosecuted in the US for publishing leaked documents. Lots and lots of people have been convicted for performing the actual leak, but there has never been a case in which a journalist was convicted for publishing material he received from a source. The handful of cases where it went to trial, the case was quickly thrown out of court. Throwing journalists in jail for publishing information that they receive is a very slippery slope to start down. The courts have always realized this in the past, and it's quite likely that they would do the same in this case.

As for the 'rape' accusations, it is not any definition of rape that you would be familiar with, the sexual assault laws in Sweden are, shall we say, rather liberal in their interpretations; and even then there are conflicting reports even of what the women said. For one thing, one of them has openly stated to the media that she was not raped, that Assange is not violent, and that she never wanted to press charges. The other woman cooked him breakfast the next morning and left him alone in her apartment. Both women had friendly, public contact with him after the alleged rape occurred. Neither women reported anything until they found out about each other. That makes the man an asshole, no doubt, but it hardly makes him a rapist.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By BZDTemp on 12/8/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By foolsgambit11 on 12/7/2010 4:29:06 PM , Rating: 2
He may not be a US Citizen, but the principles on which the United States was founded are inherently the rights of all, not just Americans. This is best stated in Jefferson's immortal words from the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
So while the US Government may not have an obligation to ensure these rights for non-Americans, it would be against its founding principles to actively infringe on anyone's fundamental human rights.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By jonmcc33 on 12/7/2010 6:53:11 PM , Rating: 2
He may not be a US Citizen, but the principles on which the United States was founded are inherently the rights of all, not just Americans.

Wrong. If you want American rights then you become American. They clearly do not apply to any other country in the world.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By Starcub on 12/8/2010 11:10:15 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong. If you want American rights then you become American.


RE: I'm conflicted...
By Reclaimer77 on 12/7/2010 8:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
He may not be a US Citizen, but the principles on which the United States was founded are inherently the rights of all, not just Americans.

Be careful, some would say that smacks of Imperialism. Forcing our Constitution and way of life on everyone regardless of weather they agree or want it.

A fair bit of the Constitution and Amendments deals with citizenship. So you aren't even close, no offense.

Our rights are indeed for all. All who wish to come here and become a citizen.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By Targon on 12/8/2010 3:42:42 AM , Rating: 2
There is a key concept that many people just don't seem to grasp. Just because the IDEALS should promote these concepts does not mean that the entire world is PROTECTED by these concepts. This means that a non-citizen is NOT protected by our laws, but US citizens are still required to follow them.

In short, those from other countries do not have the rights of citizens, but they can report illegal activities and expect illegal activities(under US law) by US citizens to be punished. This means that in theory, non-citizens do not have the right to start lawsuits under US law for a "crime", but they can expect any wrongdoing to be punished.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By Lugaidster on 12/8/2010 9:52:15 AM , Rating: 1
According to your logic then if a tourist kills another tourist while being in the United States, it won't matter?

"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

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